How many people think that their 5D Mark IV images are soft?

[DootsHK]

Interesting. If you haven't done anything differently then you made have had a defective body in some way.

I've got my video up on the dynamic range from the camera. See it here if you are interested: http://bit.ly/2dB2W6f

Hi Dustin,

You are right, the body was probably defective, the first one had too big softness issues for it just to be firmware related.

Thank you for sharing the link, i watched your video, I found the comparison with the 80D and 6D very instructive. I am looking forward to see the next episodes , especially about high ISO capabilities / noise.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Another "eye roll" post....is this another one of those "all the gear and no idea" threads?

 

[turtle]

It's amazing how respondents ask 'have you done AF Micro Adjustment (AFMA)' again and again and there is no confirmation from those with soft images. I remember a big rant ages ago from people saying the same with the 7D II and most had *not* done AFMA.

Very small amounts of AFMA (+ or -) can make an epic difference to pixel level sharpness. If you are, say, 6 points out on a 24mm lens, your focus point will be a country mile out. You will definitely see 2 points as a clear change in 'bite' at 24mm.

AFMA is required on every single lens you own on every body you own. Many will require zero alteration, but some will require quite a lot. Now, there may of course be some issues with 'bad' 5D IV bodies out there, but with nobody confirming or denying that they have done AFMA, or at least used live view focus (which takes focus directly off the sensor of course), one can only suspect AFMA as the culprit in most cases.

My first 24-70 f2.8 L II had a heavily damaged package as if the courier people had dropped it out of a plane. The result was left side softness with the image and focus problems using any left side AF points (presumably because the image did not generate the contrast for effective AF). On centre it was bitingly sharp wide open with zero AFMA. Out of the box, the replacement lens was fair, but clearly lacked the same bite on centre. Two points of AFMA and it was in razor blade territory at 24mm.

I think Dustin Abbott's example shows precisely what the sensor is capable of and its clearly a very significant advantage in resolution over the 6D.

FWIW, I also own both A7 and A7R. With the best lenses, at the best apertures the A7R has fractionally better pixel level sharpness (as well as having more of them), but you really do have to be at the right apertures on top lenses to see this. Most of the time, once carefully sharpened, the A7 images look roughly the same as the A7R files at the pixel level, despite the presence of a (not mild) AA filter. Unless Canon has gone mad with the AA filter (why would they, especially as the higher MP count will allow the filter to be less aggressive than on the 5d III), the only likely explanations are:

1. AFMA
2. Software
3. 'bad' bodies floating about.

 

[Jack Douglas]

turtle, good comments. Of course as you get too higher and higher pixel levels many factors are involved that make getting a sharp photo challenging and AFMA does become critically important. However, if it's an AFMA problem then there still should be a plane of sharp focus, albeit not where you want it and at least in some cases, i.e. a bird, one should see feathers rather than an eye in sharp focus. FWIW.

Jack

 

[turtle]

Absolutely. However, if people test against a planar subject then they may not see sharpness anywhere. This would be true for shooting a wall or distant landscape. Sometimes people miss that area of sharpness, because it is nowhere near where they might expect it to be.

Hopefully AFMA some of those reporting softness can check AFMA, or at least use a tripod, live view and a lens they know is a good'un. This will hopefully shrink down the area of concern. It may turn out that there are multiple factors at play, but it would be nice to rule out AFMA.

If you're one of the ones who has noted softness, it would be hugely appreciated by everyone (I think) if you could rule out AFMA. Not everyone know about micro adjustment of the AF system so I have no interest in humiliating anyone who is unaware. I do have an interest in getting to the bottom of what is going on. A 5D IV may be in my future, if I can get one at a sensible price!

turtle, good comments. Of course as you get too higher and higher pixel levels many factors are involved that make getting a sharp photo challenging and AFMA does become critically important. However, if it's an AFMA problem then there still should be a plane of sharp focus, albeit not where you want it and at least in some cases, i.e. a bird, one should see feathers rather than an eye in sharp focus. FWIW.

Jack

 

[Deleted member 7828]

On the subject of AFMA, and all this talk of softness...I know for a fact the 5D4 body I was using last weekend was front-focusing slightly with the 70-200 and I figured it needed + adjustment - but even with the 24-70, I still wasn't blown away by the images - I knew the 5D4 images need more sharpening out of the gate, but I was finding I had to apply a LOT more to get them to match with the 5D3...

So...after going back, setting MA to +1 on 5D4/24-70 combo made a noticeable improvement with indoor test shots over 0 (no MA). NOW it's sharp (relatively speaking), although there remains the issue of more aggressive NR stripping extra detail relative to the 5D3 - but that's fixed with a few tweaks. Will need to work the 70-200 in at a later date... I hope it's simply an MA issue. And hopefully the rain clears up so I can test outside again...

 

[AlanF]

I've just posted a couple of shots in the Bird Portrait thread. The 5D IV plus 400mm DO II are giving me a level of sharpness I have never been able to achieve previously. (I am fastidious about AFMA).

 

[Mancubus]

My honest opinion: I think there are a lot of lemons in this first 5d4 batch, and some unfortunate buyers actually have cameras that will give soft images.

The exact same thing happened on the release of the 7d2. I was one of the unfortunate ones, mine was SOFT no matter what I did (my previous t3i/600D was WAY sharper). I blamed myself, the lens, the AF adjustment...I tried every possibility to avoid the sad truth: my 7d2 was a lemon.

Canon didn't do anything about it when I sent it in for repairs, they said it was working just fine. After a while I gave up, picked a 5d3 and was immediately blown away with the sharpness and image quality. The same shop took the 7d2 as part of the payment for a 70-200 and I've never looked back.

This is precisely why I'm not buying the 5d4 until I'm sure they have (secretly) updated the version. The chance of getting a sh***y one is quite high at the moment in my opinion.

 

[tron]

My honest opinion: I think there are a lot of lemons in this first 5d4 batch, and some unfortunate buyers actually have cameras that will give soft images.

The exact same thing happened on the release of the 7d2. I was one of the unfortunate ones, mine was SOFT no matter what I did (my previous t3i/600D was WAY sharper). I blamed myself, the lens, the AF adjustment...I tried every possibility to avoid the sad truth: my 7d2 was a lemon.

Canon didn't do anything about it when I sent it in for repairs, they said it was working just fine. After a while I gave up, picked a 5d3 and was immediately blown away with the sharpness and image quality. The same shop took the 7d2 as part of the payment for a 70-200 and I've never looked back.

This is precisely why I'm not buying the 5d4 until I'm sure they have (secretly) updated the version. The chance of getting a sh***y one is quite high at the moment in my opinion.

I am skeptic too. I cannot tell if it's the camera settings, the firmware (Dustin's pics come sharp now) or the hardware. So I set some milestones in a non-scientific but practical (for me) way:

1. To wait some time to make sure that cameras are shipped with 1.02 firmware.
2. To wait a little more time waiting for the kit with 24-105 II (I have the version 1 that I could sell to prepare for the kit).
3. To wait for Christmas.
4. To wait for my birthday (February)

These milestones mean nothing scientifically but they allow time to pass just in case there is a hardware problem. But they may mean literally nothing in the sense that the hardware may be 100% OK (the most probable case) and I am just losing time. The later has a positive side effect that price may decrease and I have no immediate (hobby) photo task to do.
The negative side effect is growing G.A.S ;D

I was lucky to get 7DII by the mid of 2015 where the issues were solved. But I didn't delay on purpose. Only recently I started shooting birds in a vacation that I had used a 5D3 with 100-400 II.

After I returned from it I ordered a 7DII . So initially I didn't care about 7DII. But I am interested in 5DIV so waiting is a little difficult :-[

 

[Jack Douglas]

Waiting is always difficult but it's a character builder and a no lose proposition. I know, I'm repeating this to myself daily.

Jack

 

[DootsHK]

It's amazing how respondents ask 'have you done AF Micro Adjustment (AFMA)' again and again and there is no confirmation from those with soft images. I remember a big rant ages ago from people saying the same with the 7D II and most had *not* done AFMA.

Very small amounts of AFMA (+ or -) can make an epic difference to pixel level sharpness. If you are, say, 6 points out on a 24mm lens, your focus point will be a country mile out. You will definitely see 2 points as a clear change in 'bite' at 24mm.

AFMA is required on every single lens you own on every body you own. Many will require zero alteration, but some will require quite a lot. Now, there may of course be some issues with 'bad' 5D IV bodies out there, but with nobody confirming or denying that they have done AFMA, or at least used live view focus (which takes focus directly off the sensor of course), one can only suspect AFMA as the culprit in most cases.

My first 24-70 f2.8 L II had a heavily damaged package as if the courier people had dropped it out of a plane. The result was left side softness with the image and focus problems using any left side AF points (presumably because the image did not generate the contrast for effective AF). On centre it was bitingly sharp wide open with zero AFMA. Out of the box, the replacement lens was fair, but clearly lacked the same bite on centre. Two points of AFMA and it was in razor blade territory at 24mm.

I think Dustin Abbott's example shows precisely what the sensor is capable of and its clearly a very significant advantage in resolution over the 6D.

FWIW, I also own both A7 and A7R. With the best lenses, at the best apertures the A7R has fractionally better pixel level sharpness (as well as having more of them), but you really do have to be at the right apertures on top lenses to see this. Most of the time, once carefully sharpened, the A7 images look roughly the same as the A7R files at the pixel level, despite the presence of a (not mild) AA filter. Unless Canon has gone mad with the AA filter (why would they, especially as the higher MP count will allow the filter to be less aggressive than on the 5d III), the only likely explanations are:

1. AFMA
2. Software
3. 'bad' bodies floating about.

Hi,

I didn't get the question was for me but for the previous poster. But to reply on that specific matter, no i didn't do any micro-adjustment. I just tested the camera with various lenses, hand-handled and on a tripod. In my case most of the images were very soft (more than this, some were almost blur).

Being new to FF and 5D cameras i was wondering if it was just me not handling the AF settings correctly. So i went back to the store for them to test it. The camera was tested with 2 additional lenses but same result. So I received a new body as replacement one week later.

With the new body, pictures are very sharp and in focus. It doesn't mean it won't require any micro adjustment, but so far I didn't have enough time to use the camera. As said earlier the first body i got was probably defective.

 

[sanj]

Another "eye roll" post....is this another one of those "all the gear and no idea" threads?

hahahahaha. TRUE

 

[DavidTam]

My 5DIV is quite soft at ISO 6400+ especially around the red zipper (see photos). And when compare with my 6D, I can't say high ISO is better in the shadows. Anyone why?

- mirror lockup
- 1/125
- 50mm

- ISO 6400
- RAW
- tripod
- 10 second timer

 

[Alex_M]

can you provide the RAW files? The shots are quite horrible technically. I am sorry to say that.. unless this is some kind of joke...

 

[turtle]

Hi, it sounds like the camera was either at one extreme of tolerances (and would probably have required a significant AFMA correction on almost all lenses, or was completely out of tolerance (and therefore not correctable using the AFMA system). In simple terms, this would mean the sensor and AF system were not working to anywhere near the same point of focus.

Did you focus any shots using live view and see what they were like? Live View means you focus off the sensor and therefore bypass the main AF system. If live view focused shots were truly blurry, something catastrophic would be wrong with the sensor itself (though I cannot imagine what).

What you are describing sounds like a large tolerance error on the body. I had a friend with a large tolerance + or - on one lens (her others only needed small (if any) AFMA tweaks on her 5D III), yet when the right AFMA was dialled in the lens became a mainstay of her wedding photography business. Without AFMA, front focus was so dramatic as to be difficult to find the plane of focus in the photos at all. They just looked a soft mess. It was front focusing to a huge extent, but became nice and sharp after dialling in a fairly large amount of adjustment for the 24mm end and a slightly smaller one for 70mm.

It's amazing how respondents ask 'have you done AF Micro Adjustment (AFMA)' again and again and there is no confirmation from those with soft images. I remember a big rant ages ago from people saying the same with the 7D II and most had *not* done AFMA.

Very small amounts of AFMA (+ or -) can make an epic difference to pixel level sharpness. If you are, say, 6 points out on a 24mm lens, your focus point will be a country mile out. You will definitely see 2 points as a clear change in 'bite' at 24mm.

AFMA is required on every single lens you own on every body you own. Many will require zero alteration, but some will require quite a lot. Now, there may of course be some issues with 'bad' 5D IV bodies out there, but with nobody confirming or denying that they have done AFMA, or at least used live view focus (which takes focus directly off the sensor of course), one can only suspect AFMA as the culprit in most cases.

My first 24-70 f2.8 L II had a heavily damaged package as if the courier people had dropped it out of a plane. The result was left side softness with the image and focus problems using any left side AF points (presumably because the image did not generate the contrast for effective AF). On centre it was bitingly sharp wide open with zero AFMA. Out of the box, the replacement lens was fair, but clearly lacked the same bite on centre. Two points of AFMA and it was in razor blade territory at 24mm.

I think Dustin Abbott's example shows precisely what the sensor is capable of and its clearly a very significant advantage in resolution over the 6D.

FWIW, I also own both A7 and A7R. With the best lenses, at the best apertures the A7R has fractionally better pixel level sharpness (as well as having more of them), but you really do have to be at the right apertures on top lenses to see this. Most of the time, once carefully sharpened, the A7 images look roughly the same as the A7R files at the pixel level, despite the presence of a (not mild) AA filter. Unless Canon has gone mad with the AA filter (why would they, especially as the higher MP count will allow the filter to be less aggressive than on the 5d III), the only likely explanations are:

1. AFMA
2. Software
3. 'bad' bodies floating about.

Hi,

I didn't get the question was for me but for the previous poster. But to reply on that specific matter, no i didn't do any micro-adjustment. I just tested the camera with various lenses, hand-handled and on a tripod. In my case most of the images were very soft (more than this, some were almost blur).

Being new to FF and 5D cameras i was wondering if it was just me not handling the AF settings correctly. So i went back to the store for them to test it. The camera was tested with 2 additional lenses but same result. So I received a new body as replacement one week later.

With the new body, pictures are very sharp and in focus. It doesn't mean it won't require any micro adjustment, but so far I didn't have enough time to use the camera. As said earlier the first body i got was probably defective.

 

[Mikehit]

This is now an old post, but none the less true (and always will be)

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2008/12/this-lens-is-soft-and-other-myths/

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2010/03/this-lens-is-soft-and-other-facts/

Basic message: if the lens is bad send it back. If the lens is in tolerance and is 'slightly out' then micro-adjust. And if you spend hours finding the perfect match of body to lens, then never, ever update your body because if you are that fussy the chances are you will have the same issue because the next body is unlikely to be in the same range of tolerance as the first one and you will end up disappointed again.
Same if you buy a new body and it doesn't match your current lenses.

 

[tron]

It's amazing how respondents ask 'have you done AF Micro Adjustment (AFMA)' again and again and there is no confirmation from those with soft images. I remember a big rant ages ago from people saying the same with the 7D II and most had *not* done AFMA.

Very small amounts of AFMA (+ or -) can make an epic difference to pixel level sharpness. If you are, say, 6 points out on a 24mm lens, your focus point will be a country mile out. You will definitely see 2 points as a clear change in 'bite' at 24mm.

AFMA is required on every single lens you own on every body you own. Many will require zero alteration, but some will require quite a lot. Now, there may of course be some issues with 'bad' 5D IV bodies out there, but with nobody confirming or denying that they have done AFMA, or at least used live view focus (which takes focus directly off the sensor of course), one can only suspect AFMA as the culprit in most cases.

My first 24-70 f2.8 L II had a heavily damaged package as if the courier people had dropped it out of a plane. The result was left side softness with the image and focus problems using any left side AF points (presumably because the image did not generate the contrast for effective AF). On centre it was bitingly sharp wide open with zero AFMA. Out of the box, the replacement lens was fair, but clearly lacked the same bite on centre. Two points of AFMA and it was in razor blade territory at 24mm.

I think Dustin Abbott's example shows precisely what the sensor is capable of and its clearly a very significant advantage in resolution over the 6D.

FWIW, I also own both A7 and A7R. With the best lenses, at the best apertures the A7R has fractionally better pixel level sharpness (as well as having more of them), but you really do have to be at the right apertures on top lenses to see this. Most of the time, once carefully sharpened, the A7 images look roughly the same as the A7R files at the pixel level, despite the presence of a (not mild) AA filter. Unless Canon has gone mad with the AA filter (why would they, especially as the higher MP count will allow the filter to be less aggressive than on the 5d III), the only likely explanations are:

1. AFMA
2. Software
3. 'bad' bodies floating about.

Hi,

I didn't get the question was for me but for the previous poster. But to reply on that specific matter, no i didn't do any micro-adjustment. I just tested the camera with various lenses, hand-handled and on a tripod. In my case most of the images were very soft (more than this, some were almost blur).

Being new to FF and 5D cameras i was wondering if it was just me not handling the AF settings correctly. So i went back to the store for them to test it. The camera was tested with 2 additional lenses but same result. So I received a new body as replacement one week later.

With the new body, pictures are very sharp and in focus. It doesn't mean it won't require any micro adjustment, but so far I didn't have enough time to use the camera. As said earlier the first body i got was probably defective.

I believe that is helpful information. Could you tell us the first half of the serial number of the two cameras? Other members with similar problems could contibute that and we could see if this leads to anywhere. Also, had you upgraded the firmware in the first camera?

 

[DavidTam]

I should clarify a bit more. The attached photos are crops of the right bottom corner of a larger test shot. The lens have been micro-adjusted and has the latest firmware. My concern is not so about whether the red spot is focused as I did not focus on it. My concern is how red color bleeds.

My bad photography skills should yield equally poor result, but obviously, the 5D is much worth.

My 5DIV is quite soft at ISO 6400+ especially around the red zipper (see photos). And when compare with my 6D, I can't say high ISO is better in the shadows. Anyone why?

- mirror lockup
- 1/125
- 50mm

- ISO 6400
- RAW
- tripod
- 10 second timer

 

[applecider]

Chose to eat breakfast at Fat City Caffe, a mild portland landmark for the last 30+ years. Since they are very well decorated it seemed to be a chance to take some 5d4 test shots.


So here are two examples of images coming out of one 5d4 body with a 40mm f2.8 lens. The First at f 5.6, the second to bring out softness at 3.5. The first began life as a cr was "processed"only to adjust exposure and to convert to medium quality jpg. The second shot at 5.6 also began as a cr but did have a bit of P P done to sharpen adjust exposure and then it was converted to jpeg, both at iso 1600 due to dimmer indoor venue I don't see any softness for sure here, either in the unsharpened jpeg, or in the second raw which was sharpened before conversion to jpeg.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I always bolt a new camera down to my light table and capture some very controlled images that are taken with manual focus using high magnification. This will show if there is a camera issue.

If I am not getting sharp images following that, I can look at other variables like lenses vibration, autofocus errors, etc.