August 27, 2014, 05:04:44 PM

Author Topic: AFMA - Is is really necessary?  (Read 9471 times)


  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 409
    • View Profile
Re: AFMA - Is is really necessary?
« Reply #45 on: June 26, 2013, 03:53:34 PM »
For most lenses it is not necessary.  But my 17-55/2.8 IS would be useless without it.


  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 132
  • Canon 5D mark 3 with various L lenses
    • View Profile
    • SJL Photography
Re: AFMA - Is is really necessary?
« Reply #46 on: June 27, 2013, 07:47:23 AM »
I think a lot of photographers get obsessed by their image sharpness, investing in expensive camera bodies and high end L lenses only to then look at shots at 100%+ and "see" softness.

A lack of sharpness can be down to many other factors other than AFMA - shutter speed, subject movement, ISO noise, out of focus, etc. can all impact on image sharpness.

I would say when I get an unsharp image it's usually down to my fault for not getting everything correct when I am shooting. My focusing is off or my shutter speed hasn't been fast enough to freeze any movement.

I would expect on a expensive body like the 5D3 that you should be able to put virtually any L glass onto it and get sharp results with no AFMA - unless the body or lens is faulty.

It was a worthwhile excercise for me to buy FoCal and calibrate my lenses as it has told me that my lenses are "Okay" quality wise as they only required slight AFMA and I now have an easy method for re-calibrating anc checking in the future.

FoCal does make it easy, especially as I have never done any AFMA before and I managed to calibrate all my lenses in just over an hour at first attempt.