Canon EOS 7D Mark II AF Issues

[East Wind Photography]

Well I can say if I had waited 6 months I would have missed out on a great eagle and soccer season and would have had to make due with 5 or 6 fps. Despite having to send it back for repair, I am glad I made the pre-order purchase. I knew what I was potentially getting into by doing that. Canon was quick to resolve the problem and get it back to me at their expense.

There a lot of reasons why images could be soft and there is no doubt that many of them have some kind of factory assembly and/or calibration issue. Did you check the AFMA setting to make sure the camera is matched to the lens? After that if the images are soft, then there could be some problem and a good idea to send it in.

My 7D2 works all as good now as my 5d3 and have actually been using my 5d3 as a backup since I'm well into sports season now.

Definitely yes, I can say I'm a master at AFMA. Spent so much time trying to calibrate an 85mm to my old 70D that I know everything about it by heart (turned out that the 85mm had an inconsistent AF that would front/back focus randomly).

Spent also many hours trying to calibrate all my 6 lenses on the 7d2. Every lens needed some adjustment to be focusing properly, but it would only work well in a controlled environment (well lit room, with fluorescent light, distinctive focusing target) and once I took it to the real world the focus would miss quite often. But even on the micro adjustment sessions the image was still soft compared to my previous cameras.

I've read somewhere that only about 1 in every 20 lenses should need some AFMA, at first I thought I was extremely unlucky that all my lenses needed some correction on my 7d2. But with the 5d3 it was just plug and play, my lens are fine with no adjustments just like it should be.

Well I can tell you that the one in twenty rule is hog wash. The reality is that most people would not notice if afma was off 5 clicks. Just stop down the lens to make it sharper, right?

All of my Canon lenses required afma on all of my bodies except 1 lens. My sigma 35 f1.4. Out of the box afma was perfect at 0 on my 5d3. I have 10 canon lenses and bodies. All required afma. So the requirement for afma is generally subjective unless you have a way of measuring it using a tool like a spyder lenscal.

Anyway, regardless, you have experience in that process and went through that so I would then say you should have canon check it out. I got to the point where I could afma my 600mm lens and the next day it would be off again by like 5 clicks. There were other issues too such as unable to lock on subjects and losing lock once acquired. Other things were unable to focus on the foreground object in zone AF mode, inconsistent front and back focusing, unable to determine what it focused on. Ai servo was mainly useless. One shot gave better results but until I could settle on an afma setting that was questionable.

I would get about 10% success rate and I felt that was more of a random luck thing as the ai servo would jump around jittery as hell.

Now, it locks on, stays locked and in The rare instance I get an out of focus image it's usually my bad tracking. I never shoot out of ai servo unless I have low light. No AF jumping around on even still subjects.

It is fixable and it should work as expected. If it's not then something needs repaired or recalibrated.

 

[Mancubus]

Well I can tell you that the one in twenty rule is hog wash. The reality is that most people would not notice if afma was off 5 clicks. Just stop down the lens to make it sharper, right?

All of my Canon lenses required afma on all of my bodies except 1 lens. My sigma 35 f1.4. Out of the box afma was perfect at 0 on my 5d3. I have 10 canon lenses and bodies. All required afma. So the requirement for afma is generally subjective unless you have a way of measuring it using a tool like a spyder lenscal.

Anyway, regardless, you have experience in that process and went through that so I would then say you should have canon check it out. I got to the point where I could afma my 600mm lens and the next day it would be off again by like 5 clicks. There were other issues too such as unable to lock on subjects and losing lock once acquired. Other things were unable to focus on the foreground object in zone AF mode, inconsistent front and back focusing, unable to determine what it focused on. Ai servo was mainly useless. One shot gave better results but until I could settle on an afma setting that was questionable.

I would get about 10% success rate and I felt that was more of a random luck thing as the ai servo would jump around jittery as hell.

Now, it locks on, stays locked and in The rare instance I get an out of focus image it's usually my bad tracking. I never shoot out of ai servo unless I have low light. No AF jumping around on even still subjects.

It is fixable and it should work as expected. If it's not then something needs repaired or recalibrated.

You're probably right about the proportion of lenses needing calibration. But for me, at least three lenses I have (24-70 f4, macro 100 2.8 and 75-300 III) look like to be focusing perfectly on my 5dm3. Even the macro mode on the 24-70 which has a hair thin DoF is doing great. Perhaps if I do extensive testing there might be a point or two of AFMA but I shot the whole day yesterday and didn't miss a single one on my 24-70.

Next week I'm taking the 7d2 and that 85mm to Canon. I'll post the results here later. If they fix it I can at least use it for sports or when I need some extra crop sensor range.

Thanks for sharing your experience.

 

[rshachar]

My test shot is shooting a person walking towards the camera. Conditions are bright daylight, iso 100, 1/1000 shutter speed in Tv mode and I'm using a 17-55mm f2.8 Canon. I'm set on case 2 with tracking sensitivity set to -2. I'm using AF point expansion with 8 expansion points, AI servo AF and continuous high.
I'm getting most of the images in focus but in some I just can't find anything in focus at all.
I've set the 1st and 2nd AI servo AF image priorities to focus, but are they just a recommendation? I'm telling the camera not to take a shot if it is not in focus and still I get these out-of-focus images.
I'm not sure if this is a problem with the camera or whether this is to be expected?

Same issue I was having. I sent it to Canon and they replaced the mirror box and AF assembly plus recalibration. It's fine now. Call them and send it back. They may even pay for shipping both ways.

Thanks! I will probably hold off with sending it back to Canon to see if there's information now that this rumor is out http://www.canonrumors.com/2015/05/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-af-issues/

(Quoting from another topic http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=26245.msg518352#msg518352)
Tried the same test with a 70-200 F4 IS twice. Out of 97 shots I can find just a few which are out of focus, although it was harder to tell.
Not sure why though with my 17-55 2.8 I get a few shots which are totally out of focus and some that are very sharp.
Any idea, other than a firmware issue?
I emphasize the firmware since it seems odd to me that the camera has a focus priority mode and yet it permits shooting unfocused images.

Thanks!

 

[Scooter]

Here's a shot from last night. It's from a sequence of three shots, and this is the middle one. This is with firmware 1.0.2, using the 70-200 2.8 Mk II. I don't seem to be experiencing the same issues as others with the 7DMkII. Maybe my eye isn't discerning enough?

Large 2048 download from flickr (original here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/sinakul/17472141960/in/dateposted-public/)

 

[rshachar]

In reading some of the responses in this thread I think it's very clear those of us having the AF issue are experiencing the problem in almost the exact same circumstances. There is certainly something buggy about the camera.

The "I'll shoot 10 frames and frame 4 and 6 will randomly be OOF" is pretty much spot on. I will shoot a series of shots of a vehicle coming toward me at the track and 2 or 3 in a quick burst will be OOF for no reason at all. The shots in between are just fine. I've used almost every setting imaginable to adjust this camera's AF as well...nothing seems to prevent it from just getting all confused here and there. However, this thing can stay GLUED on almost anything, but then it will randomly show a shot in a sequence where it commanded the lenses to change focus incorrectly then corrects for it immediately after.

+1

 

[Lee Jay]

I have a 7DII that seems to work properly, but I've found what I think is an algorithmic defect. The camera seems to have trouble tracking acceleration properly with the side points in some situations. In some cases, it's when my camera is in portrait, though this could just be because of which of the AF sensors (horizontal or vertical) are being used on this subject. It seems to have trouble when the subject is moving slowly in a somewhat erratic manner, such as with a person walking. If the walking is smooth, it does okay. If it is jumpy, it jumps around, sometimes front focusing by a lot, as though it decides the subject has stopped, then rapidly accelerates and so the camera slightly undershoots and then drastically overshoots. It doesn't do this at all on faster subjects, that I can tell.

 

[Davebo]

In reading some of the responses in this thread I think it's very clear those of us having the AF issue are experiencing the problem in almost the exact same circumstances. There is certainly something buggy about the camera.

The "I'll shoot 10 frames and frame 4 and 6 will randomly be OOF" is pretty much spot on. I will shoot a series of shots of a vehicle coming toward me at the track and 2 or 3 in a quick burst will be OOF for no reason at all. The shots in between are just fine. I've used almost every setting imaginable to adjust this camera's AF as well...nothing seems to prevent it from just getting all confused here and there. However, this thing can stay GLUED on almost anything, but then it will randomly show a shot in a sequence where it commanded the lenses to change focus incorrectly then corrects for it immediately after.

+1

+10..... This happens with mine too. I have AI Servo 1st and 2nd priority set to 'focus only' (+Zone AF). If you RTFM and/ or the supplemental AF Guide...the camera CANNOT take a picture if focus is 'not' achieved. In a burst of 8-10..the first 2 or 3 may be in focus,then the next couple are way off,then focus is achieved again. This is not user error!
I believe Canon is well aware they have a problem....but they may not know just how many units are affected. Doesn't it seem odd that repair centres appear to have a supply of mirror boxes,AF sensors,etc at the ready for such a new camera?

 

[neuroanatomist]

Doesn't it seem odd that repair centres appear to have a supply of mirror boxes,AF sensors,etc at the ready for such a new camera?

Really odd. Just like it was really odd that my Honda dealer had replacement parts for my new Pilot just after I bought it. It's not like having parts inventory at service centers is planned as part of a product launch. Who'd think new products would break, or that buyers of those products would be upset if they had to wait for an international shipment of replacement parts for warranty service on a new purchase.

Must be a conspiracy. I heard it was a lone gunman, and did you know the moon landing took place on a Hollywood back lot?

 

[Don Haines]

Must be a conspiracy. I heard it was a lone gunman, and did you know the moon landing took place on a Hollywood back lot?

It was a conspiracy and all filmed on a sound stage..... if you look closely at the famous "flag" picture of Neil Armstrong, you can see a housecat in the corner....

 

[Valvebounce]

Like it Don. Very good.

Must be a conspiracy. I heard it was a lone gunman, and did you know the moon landing took place on a Hollywood back lot?

It was a conspiracy and all filmed on a sound stage..... if you look closely at the famous "flag" picture of Neil Armstrong, you can see a housecat in the corner....

 

[Davebo]

Doesn't it seem odd that repair centres appear to have a supply of mirror boxes,AF sensors,etc at the ready for such a new camera?

Really odd. Just like it was really odd that my Honda dealer had replacement parts for my new Pilot just after I bought it. It's not like having parts inventory at service centers is planned as part of a product launch. Who'd think new products would break, or that buyers of those products would be upset if they had to wait for an international shipment of replacement parts for warranty service on a new purchase.

Must be a conspiracy. I heard it was a lone gunman, and did you know the moon landing took place on a Hollywood back lot?

The question was meant to be rhetorical (read the speculation preceding the question…that was the set up). The expected answer was ‘no’, because of course it’s not ‘odd’.
Prior to a new product launch, having a healthy supply of parts available is axiomatic. It, however, is impossible for any manufacturer to cover all possible defect/repair scenarios. Reactive deliveries of ‘problem part’ replacements allow them to quickly turn around repairs, thus protecting brand and company image, while maintaining customer confidence. This apparent damage control (no manufacturer is immune) seems to be supported by owners reporting such speedy repairs and return. …..and further backed up by CR’s reports that Canon is aware they have an AF issue.
For those who continue to believe it is all user error (because their own camera (N=1) is perfect), I have to ask…why Canon would orchestrate repairs,replacing real parts to fix an imaginary problem?

 

[neuroanatomist]

Doesn't it seem odd that repair centres appear to have a supply of mirror boxes,AF sensors,etc at the ready for such a new camera?

Really odd. Just like it was really odd that my Honda dealer had replacement parts for my new Pilot just after I bought it. It's not like having parts inventory at service centers is planned as part of a product launch. Who'd think new products would break, or that buyers of those products would be upset if they had to wait for an international shipment of replacement parts for warranty service on a new purchase.

Must be a conspiracy. I heard it was a lone gunman, and did you know the moon landing took place on a Hollywood back lot?

The question was meant to be rhetorical (read the speculation preceding the question…that was the set up). The expected answer was ‘no’, because of course it’s not ‘odd’.
Prior to a new product launch, having a healthy supply of parts available is axiomatic. It, however, is impossible for any manufacturer to cover all possible defect/repair scenarios. Reactive deliveries of ‘problem part’ replacements allow them to quickly turn around repairs, thus protecting brand and company image, while maintaining customer confidence. This apparent damage control (no manufacturer is immune) seems to be supported by owners reporting such speedy repairs and return. …..and further backed up by CR’s reports that Canon is aware they have an AF issue.
For those who continue to believe it is all user error (because their own camera (N=1) is perfect), I have to ask…why Canon would orchestrate repairs,replacing real parts to fix an imaginary problem?

Oh, I see. A few anecdotal reports of fast repairs (side note: Canon repairs are generally quite fast), and a report on a rumor site, and it's a widespread problem of which Canon is aware. Not so widespread that a recall has been issued but widespread enough that they've overstocked their service centers with just the right parts to deal with this widespread problem.

I don't know that anyone is suggesting all these problems are imaginary. Lemons occur in any manufacturing line. But the suggestion that this is a widespread problem isn't backed up by the evidence. Canon issued a firmware update to address an AF problem with one specific focal length of one specific zoom lens...but they're just ignoring (publicly) a massive elephant in the room? They issued a service notice for the T6i/650D for the sensor spots. They issued a service notice for AF issues in their flagship 1D X. But they're just not saying anything about this supposed pervasive issue in the 7DII? Sorry, that doesn't seem logical and there's no real objective evidence to support that contention.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The first thing I do when I buy a new (or used) camera is to check the autofocus using all my lenses and FoCal. Every camera acts a little differently, and some lenses are known for a wide variation in AF accuracy. I have had well over 100 EF lenses, and only about 6 or 8 did not meet the Canon specification of being within 5 AFMA points. Only two were off by more than 8 points, my 100mmL which is off about 10 points, and my 35mm L which was off 17 and adjusted by Canon to be right-on.

As for Canon having the right parts, they only need a few hundred. They replace the mirror boxes because its easier, but they replace them with refurbished ones. They likely send out a batch every week to their refurb company in Mexico or Wisconsin or wherever. There is nothing that says new repair parts will be installed in a used camera.

 

[Valvebounce]

Hi Mt Spokane.
I have no problem with refurbished parts providing they are refurbished properly and the repair is guaranteed. Also I would hope a brand new camera with a few, to a few hundreds of shutter actuations wouldn't get a shutter box installed that has 100,000 (disproportionately high) actuations on it!
By refurbished properly, I'm limited in my knowledge of what would be done to a shutter box, but in the automotive world there were often companies that thought refurbishing a major mechanical unit consisted of a quick clean and repaint! ;D

Cheers, Graham.

As for Canon having the right parts, they only need a few hundred. They replace the mirror boxes because its easier, but they replace them with refurbished ones. They likely send out a batch every week to their refurb company in Mexico or Wisconsin or wherever. There is nothing that says new repair parts will be installed in a used camera.

 

[rshachar]

My test shot is shooting a person walking towards the camera. Conditions are bright daylight, iso 100, 1/1000 shutter speed in Tv mode and I'm using a 17-55mm f2.8 Canon. I'm set on case 2 with tracking sensitivity set to -2. I'm using AF point expansion with 8 expansion points, AI servo AF and continuous high.
I'm getting most of the images in focus but in some I just can't find anything in focus at all.
I've set the 1st and 2nd AI servo AF image priorities to focus, but are they just a recommendation? I'm telling the camera not to take a shot if it is not in focus and still I get these out-of-focus images.
I'm not sure if this is a problem with the camera or whether this is to be expected?

Same issue I was having. I sent it to Canon and they replaced the mirror box and AF assembly plus recalibration. It's fine now. Call them and send it back. They may even pay for shipping both ways.

Thanks! I will probably hold off with sending it back to Canon to see if there's information now that this rumor is out http://www.canonrumors.com/2015/05/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-af-issues/

(Quoting from another topic http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=26245.msg518352#msg518352)
Tried the same test with a 70-200 F4 IS twice. Out of 97 shots I can find just a few which are out of focus, although it was harder to tell.
Not sure why though with my 17-55 2.8 I get a few shots which are totally out of focus and some that are very sharp.
Any idea, other than a firmware issue?
I emphasize the firmware since it seems odd to me that the camera has a focus priority mode and yet it permits shooting unfocused images.

Thanks!

I've checked out yesterday a few photos I took with one shot AF and found one where the camera shows it focuses on an eye, but the actual focus is on a plane before the eye.
How can I tell if this is something fixed by AFMA or not? I am not sure since most photos are in-focus and sharp.

 

[GadgetBoy]

My test shot is shooting a person walking towards the camera. Conditions are bright daylight, iso 100, 1/1000 shutter speed in Tv mode and I'm using a 17-55mm f2.8 Canon. I'm set on case 2 with tracking sensitivity set to -2. I'm using AF point expansion with 8 expansion points, AI servo AF and continuous high.
I'm getting most of the images in focus but in some I just can't find anything in focus at all.
I've set the 1st and 2nd AI servo AF image priorities to focus, but are they just a recommendation? I'm telling the camera not to take a shot if it is not in focus and still I get these out-of-focus images.
I'm not sure if this is a problem with the camera or whether this is to be expected?

Same issue I was having. I sent it to Canon and they replaced the mirror box and AF assembly plus recalibration. It's fine now. Call them and send it back. They may even pay for shipping both ways.

Thanks! I will probably hold off with sending it back to Canon to see if there's information now that this rumor is out http://www.canonrumors.com/2015/05/canon-eos-7d-mark-ii-af-issues/

(Quoting from another topic http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=26245.msg518352#msg518352)
Tried the same test with a 70-200 F4 IS twice. Out of 97 shots I can find just a few which are out of focus, although it was harder to tell.
Not sure why though with my 17-55 2.8 I get a few shots which are totally out of focus and some that are very sharp.
Any idea, other than a firmware issue?
I emphasize the firmware since it seems odd to me that the camera has a focus priority mode and yet it permits shooting unfocused images.

Thanks!

I've checked out yesterday a few photos I took with one shot AF and found one where the camera shows it focuses on an eye, but the actual focus is on a plane before the eye.
How can I tell if this is something fixed by AFMA or not? I am not sure since most photos are in-focus and sharp.

If you experience a random focus issue, focus is correct then suddently is not where you want it to be, it cannot be fixed by AFMA which correct recurrent focus issues.

Maybe should we list the lenses that cause troubles and the conditions where the problem appears ?

Which lens were you using ?

For me : random focus issue with a 17-55, single shot. No trouble with it on other bodies

 

[Don Haines]

Doesn't it seem odd that repair centres appear to have a supply of mirror boxes,AF sensors,etc at the ready for such a new camera?

Really odd. Just like it was really odd that my Honda dealer had replacement parts for my new Pilot just after I bought it. It's not like having parts inventory at service centers is planned as part of a product launch. Who'd think new products would break, or that buyers of those products would be upset if they had to wait for an international shipment of replacement parts for warranty service on a new purchase.

Must be a conspiracy. I heard it was a lone gunman, and did you know the moon landing took place on a Hollywood back lot?

The question was meant to be rhetorical (read the speculation preceding the question…that was the set up). The expected answer was ‘no’, because of course it’s not ‘odd’.
Prior to a new product launch, having a healthy supply of parts available is axiomatic. It, however, is impossible for any manufacturer to cover all possible defect/repair scenarios. Reactive deliveries of ‘problem part’ replacements allow them to quickly turn around repairs, thus protecting brand and company image, while maintaining customer confidence. This apparent damage control (no manufacturer is immune) seems to be supported by owners reporting such speedy repairs and return. …..and further backed up by CR’s reports that Canon is aware they have an AF issue.
For those who continue to believe it is all user error (because their own camera (N=1) is perfect), I have to ask…why Canon would orchestrate repairs,replacing real parts to fix an imaginary problem?

Oh, I see. A few anecdotal reports of fast repairs (side note: Canon repairs are generally quite fast), and a report on a rumor site, and it's a widespread problem of which Canon is aware. Not so widespread that a recall has been issued but widespread enough that they've overstocked their service centers with just the right parts to deal with this widespread problem.

I don't know that anyone is suggesting all these problems are imaginary. Lemons occur in any manufacturing line. But the suggestion that this is a widespread problem isn't backed up by the evidence. Canon issued a firmware update to address an AF problem with one specific focal length of one specific zoom lens...but they're just ignoring (publicly) a massive elephant in the room? They issued a service notice for the T6i/650D for the sensor spots. They issued a service notice for AF issues in their flagship 1D X. But they're just not saying anything about this supposed pervasive issue in the 7DII? Sorry, that doesn't seem logical and there's no real objective evidence to support that contention.

There is also the possibility that there is a problem (or multiple problems) and that Canon is still trying to figure out exactly what is happening. If (as some have suggested) there is a flaw in the AF algorithm, the fix will probably be a firmware update, but when you consider how long it will take to properly characterize the problem, come up with a solution, and then implement and test the solution, I would not expect anything before the fall at the earliest. If the problem is mirrorboxes, it could be batch problem (expect a service advisory) or it could be a random problem, in which case I would expect a service advisory after a longer period of time to figure it out....

Canon does have a good history of admitting mistakes and acting on them.... refreshing in a world when the standard response is deny deny deny.....

 

[neuroanatomist]

There is also the possibility that there is a problem (or multiple problems) and that Canon is still trying to figure out exactly what is happening. If (as some have suggested) there is a flaw in the AF algorithm, the fix will probably be a firmware update...

That is certainly a possibility. But they identified and corrected a problem affecting just the 70-200/2.8L IS II at only ~100mm, but can't pin down a 'huge issue' affecting 'so many users'? As I said, possible – I'm just not sure how likely.

OTOH, these types of issues are difficult to even define as a problem. People who don't pixel peep will likely not ever notice subtle focus errors. Many people reporting supposed AF problems on the Internet are using test methods which are completely flawed. Throw in some mechanically defective bodies and an occasional defective lens, and you have a fairly muddy situation.

OTOOH, there's the supposed 70D center AF point problem, lots of time and seems to boil down to some defective cameras and an Internet forumenon.

 

[Marsu42]

There is also the possibility that there is a problem (or multiple problems) and that Canon is still trying to figure out exactly what is happening.

Imho that's absolutely possible because the 7d2 uses a new and very different af system than the predecessors (crop camera with edge-to-edge af pts), in a world of software bugs it would be surprising if there wouldn't be room for improvement given the various lenses you can use in diverse shooting conditions.

Question is what the threshold is to call sub-par performance in some situations something an "issue".

Canon does have a good history of admitting mistakes and acting on them.... refreshing in a world when the standard response is deny deny deny.....

You're correct, we have to give Canon credit for this. As far as I remember, they even admitted problems long *before* having worked out an actual fw fix for this, but on the other hand these were minor issues.

But how they will act on an actual deal breaker, because reports of a flaw in the af system in a camera you buy for its af system might have a larger backlash as reports are bound to be blown out of proportion?

 

[Don Haines]

There is also the possibility that there is a problem (or multiple problems) and that Canon is still trying to figure out exactly what is happening. If (as some have suggested) there is a flaw in the AF algorithm, the fix will probably be a firmware update...

That is certainly a possibility. But they identified and corrected a problem affecting just the 70-200/2.8L IS II at only ~100mm, but can't pin down a 'huge issue' affecting 'so many users'? As I said, possible – I'm just not sure how likely.

my bet is that there are a number of flaws, and that helps to muddy the waters and make diagnostics tricky.... obviously, one such flaw is the 70-200F2.8 around 100mm and action has been taken to address it. I would not be surprised in the least if there were a series of roll-outs of new firmware as other flaws are identified and solutions are found....

As Marsu said, it is a whole new AF system.... it is extremely unlikely they got everything perfect first try....