AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving this copy.

[Loswr]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

Should I keep going in endless loops of T +W tests? I know the W setting affects the T setting so when should I call it quits?

W and T are independent, one does not affect the other.

Dylan... I might need to re-test. I had the 5d3 placed on a table on a rubber mat... I don't think it moved, but with 10+ menu changes per test, I cannot be sure.

Will need to reset the test system to a tripod next...

Might? The two keys to consistency are stability and lighting.

'On a table on a rubber mat' isn't what I'd call stable (with most tables - we do have analytical balances on rubber mats on tables in the lab, but those 'tables' are solid blocks of marble weighing hundreds of pounds). Personally, I noticed some inconsistencies when testing on a stable tripod on the main floor of my house (hardwood flooring) - someone walking around, even in the next room, produces vibration. Setting up the test in the basement (concrete slab) took care of that.

Lighting should be constant and very bright. Look over your test results - what are the Ev's you see? Notice Mt. Spokane's are close to 12 Ev; mine are always in the 11-13 Ev range. If you're at 10 Ev or less, you need more light. Personally, I use three 150 W gooseneck lamps at a distance of ~14" from the target. More light means a faster shutter speed, which further minimizes the impact of vibration. I just tested my 600 II, outdoors in sunlight with the gooseneck lamps added, Ev's were around 15.

 

[K-amps]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

Should I keep going in endless loops of T +W tests? I know the W setting affects the T setting so when should I call it quits?

W and T are independent, one does not affect the other.

Dylan... I might need to re-test. I had the 5d3 placed on a table on a rubber mat... I don't think it moved, but with 10+ menu changes per test, I cannot be sure.

Will need to reset the test system to a tripod next...

Might? The two keys to consistency are stability and lighting.

'On a table on a rubber mat' isn't what I'd call stable (with most tables - we do have analytical balances on rubber mats on tables in the lab, but those 'tables' are solid blocks of marble weighing hundreds of pounds). Personally, I noticed some inconsistencies when testing on a stable tripod on the main floor of my house (hardwood flooring) - someone walking around, even in the next room, produces vibration. Setting up the test in the basement (concrete slab) took care of that.

Lighting should be constant and very bright. Look over your test results - what are the Ev's you see? Notice Mt. Spokane's are close to 12 Ev; mine are always in the 11-13 Ev range. If you're at 10 Ev or less, you need more light. Personally, I use three 150 W gooseneck lamps at a distance of ~14" from the target. More light means a faster shutter speed, which further minimizes the impact of vibration. I just tested my 600 II, outdoors in sunlight with the gooseneck lamps added, Ev's were around 15.

EV's were definitely falling as the test progressed. 5.6 to 6.3EV's. So this is another variable that requires attention. I can take the set up to the basement, but that would mean installing the software on my laptop... IS there any limitation on number of machines this can be set up with?

I am still a bit concerned since even with MF, I am not getting mind blowing sharpness... I guess i will run some more tests and then form an opinion.

 

[Loswr]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

EV's were definitely falling as the test progressed. 5.6 to 6.3EV's. So this is another variable that requires attention. I can take the set up to the basement, but that would mean installing the software on my laptop... IS there any limitation on number of machines this can be set up with?

Yep - stability and lighting. One can compensate for the other to some extent (more stable means a slower shutter can work, more light means a faster shutter which mitigates vibration). Looks like you may have issues with both. I'd move it to the basement and add a lot of light.

The FoCal manual recommends at least EV 8 (IIRC, the earliest version of the manual recommend EV 10). One reason I used the extra light even outdoors was that I was using a long, slow lens (f/4, f/5.6 with 1.4xIII), and I wanted shutter speeds as high as possible. At 15 EV, I was at 1/2500 s with the bare lens and 1/1250 s with the TC.

I don't know that there's a limit. I can tell you that I've got it installed on one Windows machine (a virtual machine) and two Macs, and I've run it from all of them. Since you have to connect a camera with a serial number listed in the License Manager, I suspect that's their control mechanism.

I am still a bit concerned since even with MF, I am not getting mind blowing sharpness... I guess i will run some more tests and then form an opinion.

If you're not getting sharp images with contrast detect AF and a well-lit, high-contrast subject, you may want to exchange the lens...

 

[rpt]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

While you retest on a stable tripod, don't raise the center column! I learnt the hard way about this no-no...

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

While you retest on a stable tripod, don't raise the center column! I learnt the hard way about this no-no...

=1. You can't be too stable for critical tests like this. I get much better results in bright light and on concrete with my very heavy tripod and never extend the center column. I could have added weight to the under hook, but my results were fine.
I'd not worry about a difference of 1 or 2 points unless the shape of the curve is very peaked.
Check the camera in good light tripod, and live AF. If its not sharp, no amount of AFMA will fix that, the lens needs to be exchanged.

 

[K-amps]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

While you retest on a stable tripod, don't raise the center column! I learnt the hard way about this no-no...

=1. You can't be too stable for critical tests like this. I get much better results in bright light and on concrete with my very heavy tripod and never extend the center column. I could have added weight to the under hook, but my results were fine.
I'd not worry about a difference of 1 or 2 points unless the shape of the curve is very peaked.
Check the camera in good light tripod, and live AF. If its not sharp, no amount of AFMA will fix that, the lens needs to be exchanged.

When you say Live AF ... do you mean Liveview/ contrast AF?

 

[Invertalon]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

I am on my second copy of the 24-70 II... First had a decentered element (softness on right side of frame at 24mm).

Both copies were excellent at 24mm (minus right side on first one) and about even at 70mm... No real variation I see between the two. I would shoot a subject in good light outside on a tripod using live-view, then compare that image with the same image allowing the camera to AF. If they don't look identical, your MA is off.

My current copy is at -2 wide and +1 tele with my 5D3 (with some help from Focal). That -2 on the wide end made a BIG difference. I did not think with all the DOF it would matter so much, but it really is required for maximum sharpness. I see a huge difference if I shoot at 0 versus -2... The telephoto end, surprisingly is more forgiving. Strange, but just what I have noticed.

Shoot with live view though and see if the sharpness looks good to you then... If soft still, exchange it. Live view should draw maximum sharpness out of the lens for the most part, not relying on the camera AF system.

 

[rpt]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

While you retest on a stable tripod, don't raise the center column! I learnt the hard way about this no-no...

=1. You can't be too stable for critical tests like this. I get much better results in bright light and on concrete with my very heavy tripod and never extend the center column. I could have added weight to the under hook, but my results were fine.
I'd not worry about a difference of 1 or 2 points unless the shape of the curve is very peaked.
Check the camera in good light tripod, and live AF. If its not sharp, no amount of AFMA will fix that, the lens needs to be exchanged.

When you say Live AF ... do you mean Liveview/ contrast AF?

Yes, that is what he means.

 

[K-amps]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

When you say Live AF ... do you mean Liveview/ contrast AF?

Yes, that is what he means.
[/quote]

So contrast AF is more accurate than phase AF ?

 

[Loswr]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

So contrast AF is more accurate than phase AF ?

Yes, but slower. Phase detect uses a separate sensor, and if that sensor or the optics in front of it are misaligned relative to the image sensor, focus will be off (and that why there's AFMA - to correct that misalignment). Contrast detect uses the image sensor itself to determine focus - nothing to misalign.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

So contrast AF is more accurate than phase AF ?

Yes, but slower. Phase detect uses a separate sensor, and if that sensor or the optics in front of it are misaligned relative to the image sensor, focus will be off (and that why there's AFMA - to correct that misalignment). Contrast detect uses the image sensor itself to determine focus - nothing to misalign.

+1
Contrast detect is not perfect, but so close that it doesn't matter. Its just slow. You can also chose the area you want to focus on by moving the white rectangle with your joystick (if there is one).
It is a good way to check your phase detect AF, if live AF is sharp and phase detect is not, you need a adjustment. If neither are sharp, the issue might be more serious than a simple adjustment.

 

[K-amps]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

Thanks John and Mt and everyone else. Conducting tests now.... will report back.

 

[K-amps]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

First the good news... I get about the same values for last focal test 0 and 5 (W and T).

Attached are 3 shots labelled as Phase/Contrast/MF respectively. Shows Phase/ contrast very close (all 100% crops) and the MF a bit sharper.

 

[K-amps]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

I think I am fine with center sharpness... however the corners are a bit worrisome... especially at 24 mm... this is supposedly the best 24mm canon has at corners... should I be concerned? I know I shot the "wall" but it is straight and plane ;D

I am attaching resized (to fit CR) non cropped frames of both 70mm and 24mm... let me know your thoughts.

(I know there is vignetting and noise in the corners... but it is lack of resolution that concerns me)

 

[wickidwombat]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

it looks to me that you have significantly more vignetting in the left side of the frame from that on the right
could be your lens is decentered, I would take it back to the store and try another copy take those images with too to show them.

strange thing is this new version was supposed to fix decentering issues with the 24-70 that were common with the mk1

 

[K-amps]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

it looks to me that you have significantly more vignetting in the left side of the frame from that on the right
could be your lens is decentered, I would take it back to the store and try another copy take those images with too to show them.

strange thing is this new version was supposed to fix decentering issues with the 24-70 that were common with the mk1

That could be my lighting set up... Let me try another shot with diffused daylight....

 

[K-amps]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

2 more shots wide open at 24mm taken outdoors. Lighting should be even. One of the wall, the other of the concrete floor.

thoughts?

 

[wickidwombat]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

left side vignetting still looks heavier to me, darker and intrudes into the image more than on the right side

 

[Dylan777]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

left side vignetting still looks heavier to me, darker and intrudes into the image more than on the right side

+1....left side does seem to be heavier.

 

[K-amps]

Re: AFMA'ed the 24-70 mk.ii ... not sure I am loving it.

Ok so we established that the left side is heavier.... what now, should we consider the resolution at the corners as well or is this a return/ exchange contender? :-\