October 20, 2014, 07:57:03 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - PhotoCat

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7
31
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Quick and Dirty AFMA
« on: August 10, 2014, 09:27:42 AM »

ps. i used this method to adjust a 70d and 50L combo yesterday. i was able to get it adjusted and focusing with a +13 afma value in a matter of 2 minutes or less without any computer.

2 minutes is really impressive for a value of +13 candc! How many iterations did u go thru during the 2 minutes?

32
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Quick and Dirty AFMA
« on: August 10, 2014, 09:14:21 AM »
I have a feeling AFMA is a kludge at best, as I found it is somewhat distance and light-level dependent.
e.g. With dot-tune AFMA, my experience is that focus is spot on most of the time with the same distance and light-level as the calibration condition.   When I take it outdoor with much brighter light-level, AFMA still helps but not as much as the darker calibration condition.

For many people who took their canon bodies and lenses into Canon for calibration don't seem to have this
kind of problems.

My guess is that AFMA is a one dimensional adjustment (ie 1 variable to adjust)
while Canon's real in house calibration is probably more than 1 dimension to cover all the distances and perhaps the focal lengths (if a zoom) at the vy least.

Anyone has real experience to share about the quality of in house Canon calibration?

Sigma's lens dock route sounds like a disappointment then...  How can one calibrates a lens efficiently without mounting it onto the body? U just don't get instant feedbk from the body and no wonder it is so time consuming.

33
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Quick and Dirty AFMA
« on: August 09, 2014, 10:23:45 PM »
or use Magic Lantern Dot-Tune AFMA  8). I have had excellent & repeatable results

You've had better success than me, I found dot tune to be somewhat unreliable.

I also thought dot-tune had reliability issues for some lenses I have, as it kept hunting left and right (increasing)
for the AFMA value.  I finally discovered that one must enter an initial value of AFMA for the lens in question.
Just give it a value like +2. After that, dot-tune behaved itself very well and always converged on a repeatable value +/- 1.  Body was 5D2.

I found it critical that the initial live view manual focusing be as precise as possible using 10x digital magnification. Otherwise dot-tune may not converge.

34
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Quick and Dirty AFMA
« on: August 09, 2014, 07:02:59 PM »
the end result is the same as u would do it all by hand.
The advantage is that dot-tune will give u the AFMA number much much faster and repeatable in an almost
automated way. Credit goes to Horshack for his algorithm and A1ex's of Magic Lantern for the implementation.

35
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Quick and Dirty AFMA
« on: August 09, 2014, 06:43:03 PM »
or use Magic Lantern Dot-Tune AFMA  8). I have had excellent & repeatable results.
In all fairness, Dot-Tune also relies on how accurately the focus is set during live view.
Just google it.

36
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: D810 vs. 3D
« on: August 02, 2014, 03:00:25 PM »


If you want to address Canon, it is better you contact Canon directly instead of using this forum.

Well, I think the OP just wanted to rant and pls just let him. It will be therapeutic for him whether or not
Canon is listening. In the end, there is no sure way to influence Canon's product roadmap anyway.

37
Lenses / Re: New Canon L Primes, but Not Until 2015 [CR2)
« on: July 29, 2014, 12:38:05 PM »

I hope the non-L 85/2.0 IS is still coming this year!  ::)

I'll take one of those too!

An 85 IS sounds great, but I really hope it's faster than f/2!

A 135 IS would be interesting too.

An 85 f2.0 IS in hand is worth two 85 f1.4 IS in 2015 LOL!


38
Lenses / Re: New Canon L Primes, but Not Until 2015 [CR2)
« on: July 28, 2014, 09:51:28 PM »
I hope the non-L 85/2.0 IS is still coming this year!  ::)

39
Lenses / Re: What Lenses are missing from Canon's range
« on: July 19, 2014, 08:58:20 AM »
85 f1.4, 85 f2.0 IS, 135 f2.0 IS,  EF 50- 135 f2.8 portrait zoom.

40
Software & Accessories / Re: To filter or not to filter
« on: July 14, 2014, 06:52:02 PM »
I use UV or 1A or 1B filters all the time when I am shooting casually.
But when I am really serious about image quality under backlit situation, e.g. a wedding, I would
take all filters off b4 I shoot. Same for studio shoots with hair lights on or brightly lit background.
Really cut down on flare. Whenever filters are off my lens, I use a lens hood to protect it.

41
if the OP wants to complain that he can wants MORE mp, let him.
nikon has better DR and more MP.
you can't argue with that.


U r right! I praised the Canon for jpg skin tone but I failed to point out that my friend's
D800E model pics are consistently sharper than mine  :(   He could turn a full length shot
into a head and shoulder shot without any problems when blown up to 100% view on a 25 inch monitor!
Well, I just have to walk closer and do a real head and shoulder shot!

42
Not only did u leave your loyal wife but u have also chosen to depart from your kind mom-in-law who
cooks for your every morning, washes & irons your clothes everyday and does all kinds of
house chores for u, without making any complaints.

Magic Lantern I mean! 

I am sorry, from now on, u will have to do all kinds of house chores yourself, as your new love D800E
is an orphan and she doesn't know how to do even basic house chores like boiling water LOL!

43
Excellent reply unfocused!! It would be hard to believe u r not a woman LOL!
Truth be told, as far as skin tone (out of in-camera jpg) is concerned,
I have not seen a Nikon to be able to match my old 5D2 :)

When my friend with a D800E shoots models side by side with me, the models have
always preferred the 5D2 jpg on the back of the camera!

I think Canon definitely has a successful secret formula on in-camera jpg rendering.
To me, it is even more obvious in high ISO skin tone rendering.

However, I must admit that with proper RAW processing & skill, Nikon's skin tone can match
Canon but that is a lot of extra work. I would rather get it right in camera.

44
I have one of these lenses.
The focusing ring is very smooth and there is no backlash.  I think you would feel backlash when twisting the focus ring back and forth.
It is true that there is variability with the position of the distance scale in relation to the actual focus.  My first lens was about 1cm off along the distance scale.  The focus ring seized and I got a new one under warranty - this one is spot on.


Tks Frodo for the info. Good to know there r good copies out of the box...

45
if it is plain backlash, you should be able to get repeatablility by always coming at it from the same way. the focus scale may line up better one way than the other, if so, use that direction. does that make sense?

Yes, it makes perfect sense. Good point. Thanks again Logan for the tips! I will try that. As I had mentioned b4, the distance readout is much more
consistent if I first "reset" the lens to infinity and then turn it clockwise only. So I have to try again by resetting the lens for the other end (short end) of the scale and then turn it counter-clockwise only. 
Compare the 2 and see which one gives me a better reading and consistency.

if you focus from 9' then 10', and it is actually 10', then always focus short first before using the focus scale.

I found that I can't just go from 9' to 10' to obtain more consistency. I had to go all the way to 0.28m first (the min focus distance)  and then turn it anticlockwise only, in order to obtain better focusing consistency.  It is more work starting from 0.28m then from infinity because of the large rotation distance of the ring at short distances.

Well, this workaround works for now but I am not so sure if it will work in a year's time because some screws
might get more lose.  Just don't know...    Same question again: should I exchange it or should I live with it??

Thanks again for everyone who has contributed!

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7