wer224 Loc: Bergen county NewJersey

hi all about four years ago i bought the canon 7d with the 24-70 2.8 and i had the 100-400 version 1 lens from years ago when i bought it with my rebel xti. last year i traded the 7d for the new 7d mark2 and bought the 16-35 2.8 with it. when i started taking pics with the m2 and the 16-35 i noticed the focus was always not sharp so i did a micro adjustment and then i was happy with it,a few months later canon came out with a firmware update and one of the updates was to fix focus issues with the 16-35, since i was happy with the micro adjustment i did not do the firmware update. now with the 100-400 i was always un happy with focus on all three camera bodies so now i did a micro adjustment and all is good now. with the 7d m2 you can do a adj at both ends of the zoom range. i guess my question will be, is this commom with all canon bodies and there lens. is this really acceptable? the 100-400 i had to go +16 and +20 to get satisfactory results. Is Canon really happy with this or is this the nature of the beast with all manufactures nikon sony etc. i know posts in the past say you can send body and lens back to canon for adjustments but do we really need to do that? thanks for any comments or insight why this is. bill

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Bill, there are a lot of reasons to send a lens/camera to Canon, like you do head shots with your zoom not just the ends.
As to your original question, I'm not even sure what it was?! LoL
Canon actually recommends that if you are 20 clicks out that you send the combo in as nothing should be that far off from the factory.
Are you saying that the companies now send stuff out way off expecting the consumer to do the job?
If you're now getting good results, then you're good. If not, then send it in. L lenses should be extremely precision, but a lens at one extreme of the factory spec and a camera off in the same direction can make for a bigger than normal deviation. But not really sure what you were asking. Good luck
SS

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

I can't comment on other manufacturers, but I can tell you that of the 7 Canon lenses I own (5 of which are "L" series), all except one (24-105 f4L) required substantial MAF correction, but none more than + or -10 (the 24-105 required only 0 and -2 at the long and short end respectively). Every mechanical fabrication, whether it is cast or machined has a manufacturing tolerance. Add to that the assembly tolerance (such as the attachment of the phase detection AF sensors) and you can have a tolerance "stack-up" that can require correction for correct AF. Sometimes a tolerance on the negative end of the allowable range (say on a camera body) is paired with one on the opposite end of the range on the lens, and they cancel out. Other times, the opposite occurs - both are in the same direction and they add, increasing the overall diversion from the nominal dimension. I cal all my lenses using the FoCal system, and +16 and +20 is more than I have experienced with any of my lenses. My question would be does +20 correctly and fully calibrate the AF at that FL, or have you run out of adjustment range without reaching an optimum value? I'll be interested to see what other Canon owners have experienced as well as owners of other manufacturer's bodies/lenses. BTW, my 100-400L required -4(w) & -2(t) on a 5D3.

wer224 Loc: Bergen county NewJersey

hi ss thanks for the reply no i"m not saying companies are sending equipement out this way purposely its just that i have three l lens and two needed micro adj especially my 100-400 needing such a larg adj. buy the way if i ever do send everything out does canon adj the lens or the body. ps sorry for the convoluted post

wer224 Loc: Bergen county NewJersey

hi trix i can say that it was a toss up between +19 &+20 so i squeaked out just enough adj on the + side

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Are the rest of your lenses all on the high end of the "+" side, or are they in both + and - directions?

wer224 Loc: Bergen county NewJersey

No the 16-35 is + 2 at w and +5 tele and the 24-70 is just +4 at tele and wide is ok at 0

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Then sounds like the 100-400 is at the extreme of acceptable tolerance (while the body is OK). You could choose to send it in or rely on the MAF correction as long as it doesn't go any farther out with use.

Bill Emmett Loc: Bow, New Hampshire

First, I'm a firm believer of making micro lens adjustments on all 4 of my Canon bodies. To be sure I get the most accurate micro adjustment I use the program "FoCal" from Reikan Technology LTD. Since it actually is a very comprehensive program, I'm sure of consistent results, and repeat ability. I also use the Pro version, that will make the adjustments in the camera automatically. I also keep records of the lens adjustments on each lens, and the body it was mounted to. When I see a lens adjustment that is out of line of the previous adjustment I take a closer look at that lens, and how it has been used since the last adjustment. I've noticed my Tamron SP 150-600mm has changed on both the 6D, and 7D Mark II, but my 70-200mm did not change. So, I sent the Tamron in. (After all it has a 6 year warranty) When it returned, it was noted being cleaned, calibrated, and adjusted for micro adjustments. The lens was always high in + side of the scale on both ends, but now it is almost 0+ at the low end, and +2.5 on the high end. This lens also gets a lot of use and bump a good bit when I'm going to a pond. As far as your Canon 100-400, I would look for previous lens cal data and make a judgement based on the changes in the lens micro adjustments, but look at how you test the calibration to see how accurate, and repeat able the results are. If your micro adjustments are way off in just a month, I'd send in the lens. If the micro adjustment is +2 on the wide end a month ago, and -20 today, something is wrong.

B

wer224 Loc: Bergen county NewJersey

Hey there b emmett thanks for the post. I will look into the "focal" to at least check my micro adj. I like you're idear to recheck, just to check if things are moving around .thanks again

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

wer224 Loc: Bergen county NewJersey

Thank-you for the link 😉

PeterDragon Loc: Harlan, KY - Kona, HI - Phoenix, AZ

B&H sells focal now.
Jim

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Since I posted on this thread previously, I caled a Canon 50mm f2.5 macro (using FoCal) that I had just purchased which required -16. I considered returning it, but after the MAF correction, it was tack-sharp. Without calibration, it would not have been usable with AF. The experience re-emphasized to me how important MAF correction is for AF lenses.

Islandgal Loc: Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Canada

Watching and learning.....Trish Is this a good link to follow? Or is there better...
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/af-microadjustment-tips.aspx