December 20, 2014, 09:53:22 PM

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 - Viggo

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 143
1
Thanks for the tips!

I will hand it in for repair within the week, and I'll be sure to do a serious write up on how it behaves.

2
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIII AF Point Issue
« on: Today at 04:23:17 PM »
Had a coffee and thought about it. And I'm choosing to ignore this, as it seems it's too small a shift to really make the focus shift and miss. But if I hit something above where I aim, I can tilt the camera a tad or activate the spot AF. It's either that or a padded cell  ;D

3
The thing I'm thinking is did you follow the earlier thread about 1DX not working properly in AF Servo and 12 fps in darker areas? I thought that there could be a remote possibility that since you are from Norway that within 6 months, the average luminosity of the scenery has changed drastically. This would be specifically compounded by using 50/1.4 which would naturally be taken to more darker areas than the other lenses.

I actually didn't ask for the 24-70 results. It's a F/2.8 case, thus the usage profile is likely different from 50/1.4, while 200/2 could encounter a bit more similar stuff. Nevertheless, since 200/2 doesn't show similar problems in similar illumination, then the problem is most likely the lens.

What I meant by variance is that people are saying that autofocus is not consistent regardless of the focus distance. The meaning of this, however, is not very clear to me. Does it mean you get front and back focus both within certain limits regardless of the distance, or that the amount of the front and back focus is random regardless of the original focusing distance?

For example, focus it to 5 metres, and the realized plane of best focus has a variance of +/-1 metres from it. Do the same to 10 metres, and you get +/- 1 metres or something like that from it too randomly. OR, is it so that you focus it to 5 metres, and the resulting plane of best focus is from MIN to INF, and when you go to 10 metres, the same happens?

But it does start to sound like mechanical wear of some focusing parts, or like a decoder wheel reader skipping some pulses randomly. However, it could also be the firmware, but it's a bit hard to believe since it works in the beginning. Warm and cold cycles could off-set something inside the lens too.

I haven't opened the lens yet so I don't know much about the inner mechanical construction. Perhaps Roger Cicala from Lensrentals would know something about this?

I shoot wide open with all lenses in any light ;)

Regarding distances and misses, it doesn't matter, if it's at MFD or Infinity or anything in between at any afma it will miss front or back, at random. And if I choose an afma value for one or more of the 4 distance I can calibrate with the docking, it doesn't really have any effect. I think that is because when it misses it can easily miss with much more than the afma scale can correct.

4
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIII AF Point Issue
« on: Today at 02:49:43 PM »
Man, I can't catch a break... I use my 1dx very carefully, yet I have had so many issues and problems that I'm at the point where I want to throw it to the wall and be effin done with it.... I thought the idea with 1-series is to always be able to trust them. It's not like it's old and o should expect it... God d@mn it...

Thanks for the info Neuro, at least I know about this.

5
Well, there's two other things that come to mind: first, what autofocus mode are you using? Servo or One Shot? Do you take burst shots or single shots? The second thing, have you used 200/2 with a similar profile?

The logic behind the second question is the following:
The 200/2 should show depth of field being inconsistent even more easily than 50A if this is a camera body issue (like the distance to the AF sensor changing for a reason or the other).

The third thing is that does the lens show the same behavior with a camera body other than 1DX?

When the lens misses, what is the variance of the misses?

Simply put; I have tried every possible mode with all my lenses just to make sure that each of my lenses are in the right mode.

The 200 tracks so good I use slightly different settings to keep stable tracking because I know it doesn't miss that first focus. There is no AF option I haven't beaten to death to make sure it's not me.

And please read the part where I wrote that the 50 has worked perfect for 5 months and doesn't anymore. My 2470 and 200 simply work as they did when I first got them. No change in anything other than the Sigma.

The variation of the misses are complete random. Take a hundred shots and get 95 different grades of sharpness, and front and back all over.

6
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIII AF Point Issue
« on: Today at 02:14:41 PM »
I'm only on my phone now so forgive the picture, but hopefully is good enough to see. I placed the center point Dead center on the OK-button. But it is a tad over. Is it to concerned about? Thanks :)


7
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIII AF Point Issue
« on: Today at 01:40:21 PM »
Hmm, that's concerning news. Could it also be 1dx issue?

*edit* I just tried aiming at something I could easily see a shift and activated the show AF point and it's a little above where I aimed.. Can this explain why I always hit the eyebrow no matter how much I use the spot AF center in the eyes..?

8
I had some initial difficulties with 50A, but after service and calibration with the USB dock it has worked fine. Granted, the weather has not been photographic for two months here, but still.

The 50A is far more reliable than EF 50/1.4 with the center focus point, and I trust my 5D outer focus points only on bright and sunny days anyways and when my object is not too close with about any objective I have.

What I recall is that the non-central focus points did not work well with 50A, but they don't either with EF50/1.4.

It does make me wonder whether varying lighting conditions can throw the 50A focus calibration off. I do recall seeing that the results were slightly different when adjusted under room lighting and under sun light. The other thing I can think of could be repeated thermal expansion and contraction.

For testing I only use the center point. And, again, mine worked for 6 months before it shows the same issues the THREE other Art lenses had.

Different temp light has something to do with it now, but didn't before, and it's actually just as good in the dark as it is with bright sunlight, it's slower in the dark, of course, but it was as accurate. And for at least 5 months it just didn't miss at 1.4 (the only aperture I use with it.) now the AF seems to just guess wildly and you cannot get two shots in a row or even 2 out of 10 that are anywhere near equally sharp, and once a week a shot is tack sharp.

9
The BIG concern for me is if they fix it so it actually works again, how long before it fails again? I'm SO hoping for Canon to make the same exact lens but with the newest USM motor and algorithm's. I will take the 35 L II as an option  ::)

10
Infrared: I fully understand how to calibrate. I have had FOUR art lenses and they all have the same issue, my second 50 art has been fantastic since April or May when I bought it. It was easy to calibrate and I just yesterday went through some picture from this summer when it was bolted to my camera and it is epic sharp and worked perfect.

It has now started with the same issue as the others. Dial in whatever afma values you want it doesn't matter. So it is something wrong with it.

11
viggo do you have access to a 5D3 you can test it on?

mine is still amazing easily the most consistant and accurate AF 50mm i've ever used
its blazingly good in servo too (but i only use the 5 center column points using servo)

I have only the 1dx, but even with only center point with or without expansion points in any Servo or One shot mode it's the same results. I'm seriously considering a 35 L or 50 L AGAIN... At least the 50 L is pretty consistent and can be calibrated without wearing out the shutter with testing.
cant try it on another body in the shop?

its wierd mine was so far off out of the box but after calibration its been fine, sure it misses now and then but definitely not anything as bad as the canon 50 f1.4. I wonder if your new body firmware messed it up? can you try roll back the 1Dx firmware to the old version when it was working ok to trouble shoot it?

I can absolutely guarantee it's not the body. The 2.0.3 firmware, as I wrote earlier, was a long time before the Sigma, so with the 50 art both the firmware of the lens and body has been the same. And it has worked great, but started to drift now. I did a test where I resat the lens to 0 and took some shots at +15 and -15 and a few values in between and it makes NO difference to sharpness of my shots. They miss and hit the same shots and are equally sharp.

12
Lenses / Re: FF Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 IS lens pricing announced
« on: December 19, 2014, 01:57:44 PM »
I can certainly see the appeal of it, but as you mentioned already, from an Events PoV... Also, UWA videography has possibly just gotten a fricktonne more exciting for lots of folk!

But this lens is DOA for most landscape work -- no front filters plus an integral hood were terrible decisions.  Though, in fairness, those decisions may have been compulsory to get 15mm.  It seems 16-35s have the flatter front element figured out (and thus are loved by landscape folks), but 14- and 15- FF lenses have to be bulbous to work effectively.

I'm not aware of any 14- or 15- FF lenses that take front filters -- are there any?

- A

Yup, the Zeiss 15mm accepts 95mm filter.

13
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Have you repaired your 50 Art?
« on: December 19, 2014, 03:41:06 AM »
BTW, I am considering getting the 7D2, and would like to be able to efficiently do microfocus adjustment for my lenses. Could you recommend a good product? Is the Reikan FoCal straightforward? Or is it a bunch of fancy programming that is more trouble than just manually AFMA-ing a few lenses on one camera?

 Lenses used are the EF 400 f/5.6L (+/- 1.4 x TC),  EF 70-200 f/4 IS, and EF 180 f/3.5 macro (+/- 1.4x TC; don't laugh, I use this combo for 1:2 to 1:5 magnification shots of snakes, including venomous snakes). Also I imagine that I would work up the 35 Art, which sometimes serves as the "longish normal" lens on my current 60D when it isn't being the "wide-ish normal" on my 6D, and the EF-S 15-85, which is the casual walk-about lens.

Unfortunately I can't use MF for my photography.

Reikan Focal is very very easy to use. The "tricky" part is setting up properly.

Use enough light, preferably a non-flickering light like the sun. Have absolutely even light and NO shine or reflection.

Buy the hard target from Reikan.

Have your camera bolted down as sturdy as humanly possible.

Use the right distance.

It takes a bit of effort, but then you will get a value that works straight away. Just not the Sigma's. They run through the test without issues at all, it all looks great, start ahooting and you will spend thousands of shots trying to figure out the value while the lens misses back and front at complete random.

14
Lenses / Re: Canon 100-400 ii Image Quality Review Posted at TDP
« on: December 18, 2014, 03:16:33 PM »
Two letters will describe where the 100-400 II leave the competition behind, I guarantee it; A F. And for a tele zoom like this I would say that is what matters most. Well, for me anyway.

15
Lenses / Re: What would you choose to compliment a 50mm prime?
« on: December 17, 2014, 10:02:07 AM »
I just love the 24-70 mk2, it and a 200mm goes nicely alongside a 50mm. Just don't buy the 50 Art lol ::)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 143