Struggling with D7100

Started 8 months ago | Questions
rwingsfan
Forum MemberPosts: 83
Like?
Re: D7100 impresses me....
In reply to Rockwallaby, 8 months ago

Wow reading this thread has been fun One thing I really don't understand from the opposing point of view though. All one has to do is zero the adjustment back out if one gets lost. How could this possibly be viewed as "dangerous" or "over-hyped" ? If you have the time and even a small amount of ability you could easily experiment with every lens and if you find a setting that suits you better....great, if not put it back to zero and go on. Jeeez what a bunch of drivel about nothing except opinionated posturing.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nfpotter
Senior MemberPosts: 4,072
Like?
Re: internet discussions is like paralympic
In reply to chary zp, 8 months ago

chary zp wrote:

nfpotter wrote:

chary zp wrote:

nfpotter wrote:

chary zp wrote:

nfpotter wrote:

chary zp wrote:

nfpotter wrote:

chary zp wrote:

nfpotter wrote:

chary zp wrote:

nfpotter wrote:

chary zp wrote:

nfpotter wrote:

chary zp wrote:

nfpotter wrote:

chary zp wrote:

nfpotter wrote:

chary zp wrote:

nfpotter wrote:

Westmill wrote:

nfpotter wrote:

Westmill wrote:

JK5700 wrote:

I recently bought a D7100 as a backup to my D3s. I have been using the D7100 with my 500VR and AF-S 80-400VR. I am however not getting enough sharp photos with the combinations. I was doing much better with the D300s and of course the D3s.

I understand that the extra megapixels makes long lens technique more critical, but not to the extent that I am experiencing. Are there any tricks to using the D7100 that I am missing?

-- hide signature --

http://kennekam.blogspot.com/
www.pbase.com/kennekam

Yes... you need to fine adjust the lens to the camera. Ive had the same problem with 3 out of 4 lenses. You are in effect dealing with 58 million pixel density. That is what it is if you were to carry it across to FF. its a pain in the butt You need top glass to see any of it. My Sigma 50-150 I bought... eeek ... keeper rate was perhaps 1 in 20 lol. Now it is superb and never misses. Check it out in the Nikon SLR lens talk on here where I have given it a bit of a review. Before I fine tuned it, it was simply awful

No evidence that the OP needs to fine tune. A VERY, VERY over-used "feature", and quite dangerous.

Eh ? what nonsense. Certainly not even going to start going down that road with you.

as for evidence... his pictures are not sharp from lenses that are sharp on all others. That is more than enough evidence to me lol.

I know you need a little knowledge to fine tune well, but its hardly rocket science. Not to mention it can be turned off or reset and altered at any time. I have to be honest and say that is one of the strangest things I have ever read. I would have three lenses that were hardly usable without tuning. Sorry but I am just a bit gobsmacked by that comment lol

Let's help you out a bit here:

First, whether you're tuning a prime or zoom lens, results can vary MASSIVELY depending on what target and distance you're using. Second, if you're tuning a zoom lens, you WILL get different results (if tested correctly) at different zoom lengths. Third, you may get very different results under different lighting conditions, and/or with different focus targets.

These things that most people don't take into account, and then they wonder why they're still struggling.

I own 3 Nikon bodies (2 of which have fine tune), and about 14 lenses (mostly Nikon but some 3rd party). They all work great with ZERO fine tune adjustments (even my "infamous" D7000).

As well, MANY, MANY people use bodies with no fine tune option, and produce brilliant, sharp photos.

Fine-tune is a VERY, VERY over-rated and misused "feature". Period.

Out of sheer curiosity I did finetune when I got my D7100. The results?

Nik 85/1,8G -8

Nik 35/2D -15

Nik 50/1,8D -11

Nik 18-105vr -9 (weighed average)

Nik 18-70 -6 (weighed average)

Sig 10-20/4-5,6 +20 (weighed average, stress on widest)

Tam 200-500 +8 (across the span)

Tam 70-200/2,8 -8 (across the span)

I daresay that fine tune helped me A LOT to get the best possible from my lenses.

Like MOST people that "report" this, you are only stating what you THINK you know. There is absolutely NO evidence that your results are "correct", especially with no before and after shots, no description or pics of your test method. You have to understand that MANY, MANY people have done the same as you - no proof.

Strap all of those lenses on, say a D5100, or any body that doesn't have fine tune.

I would bet a fairly large sum of money that you never needed any of it.

Having shot a series of photos with different settings and having picked the sharpest ones is enough proof for me. What proof would you like, and why? In my language there is a saying which goes something like "you do not need to persuade your friends and your enemies cannot be persuaded". Your offensive method of argumentation discourages me from any over-the-limit effort.

I had my D90 + 18-105 combo fine tuned in Nikon service (backfocus) in the old days and now I can do it myself. Advantage: fine tune.

If if in-camera fine-tune was so useless, why would they have put it in there in the first place? Why are there so many issues of front focus / back focus and why do I buy lenses with a laptop and check them in the shop to see which of them is the sharpest and best centered? Or do you really think that front focus and back focus are virtual, non-existent issues? You made my day, sir

You are welcome to your opinion. I have mine. I should also mention that I DID, at one point, have to send my D7000 to Nikon service (I had a BAD case of lubricant on the sensor, early D7000 production run). At the same time, I had them look at focus with the 18-105 VR, because I could not get sharp shots with it on that body (although it worked fine on my other bodies). I didn't even send the lens, but when I got the camera back, it worked great with the 18-105. None of my 12-13 other lenses needed help. Go figure.

There is, as another example, another case, that I should bring up. It is quite widely known that the D7000, paired with the AFS 35mm f/1.8, has some major problems with correct focus under incandescent light. It's all over the place, and I have it. At one point, I "fine-tuned" that lens as best I could (-20 wasn't even quite enough, but was close), but as soon as I'd get it ANY other light temperature, then my focus was off. A zero fine tune, it still works fantastically in all but pure incandescent light.

Point in case: take AF Fine Tune with a VERY large grain of salt.

It seems you're missing my point. Here's what happens:
A "newbie" buys a camera, then reads about AF Fine Tune, and whether the camera REALLY needs adjustment or not, said "newbie" decides to play with it, almost always using improper analysis technique. This is massively exaggerated by that "newbie" reading sites like dpreview and others, and reading about "focus issues" with this or that body, and any number of other supposed "issues".

You should know that I'm correct, if you've spent more than a few minutes on the internet.

I'm not saying that AF Fine Tune is a bad feature, or doesn't serve a purpose. I'm stating, with some fair amount of real-world knowledge, that a VERY, VERY large percentage of people that THINK they need fine tune simply do not. Maybe you did, but a company as big as Nikon is NOT NOT NOT going to ship a large percentage of any give model with calibration issues. Period. It is FAR too competitive a marketplace for them to do that.

The OP has a problem with a lens. He doesn't have the same problem with other bodies. Only with this D7100.

Now, please, explain this.

I have a lens, in this case Sigma 10-20/4-5,6 at 10mm F4 focussed some 35 cm from the chip.

I have three bodies, D200, D90 and D7100.

With the first two bodies the lens works quite nicely, though I must say that D90 gives sharper images even resampled to D200 file size.

Now, I took the same picture with those three bodies, resample to the size of the smallest (10mpx D200) and D7100's finetune set to 0. Well well. Isn't it interesting that I am getting surprisingly simillar results as the OP? After finetune (here -12) suddenly the image is the sharpest of the bunch. Please explain why finetune is overrated in this case with proof given. Thank you.

from left to right D200, D90, D7100@0, D7100@12, all of them 1:1 crops

So your "proof" is a single test session, with what COULD be very different light, a noisy D90 shot, and no idea if your focus points were grabbing the exact same point of contrast?

Not to mention that that is only from one distance, and one focal length.

You've missed my point, again. It's okay, quite common on these sites full of so called "experts".

I expected this so I made another one. This time 18-105 @ 70 mm F5,3 wide open, focussed on a flat yet detailed surface. All three cameras focussed on the centre of the feather. Again D200 - D90 - D7100@0 - D7100@-10.

Actually I start to see a pattern in my D200's behaviour - it is slightly off. D90 catches quite nicely (yeah, it's been finetuned to this particular lens by Nikon themselves) and finetuned D7100 as well. I could go on but it is 1AM here and I have to get up at some time tomorrow

But a second test and the same behaviour? Isn't it strange?

Actually, my second proof "says nothing" while you are right with no proof in your hands so far whatsoever. Curiouser and curiouser.

My "proof" is having been around the block more than a few times. Dig around, you'll see.

AND, once again, you've missed my point. I'll spell it out:

Like I said, YOU may have had a legit "issue". That DOES NOT MEAN that the larger percentage of Nikon bodies come from the factory with bad calibration.

Have a good night (morning)....

OK, I'll rephrase it. If I MAY have an issue with my D7100 which can be easily solved by finetune... and the OP is kinda having a very similar issue (what he says, a lens being sharp on two other bodies while unsharp on a D7100), would not fine tune seem a solution for him as well? Would not the fine tune seem to be in the camera for the very *few* unlucky ones like me or the OP (or the whole bunch of lads who claim have improved the sharpness by using fine tune) for JUST this type of issues? Why would you be so mean and discourage the OP from even trying to use fine tune when it could easily be a nice solution to his problems as it is an apparent OVERRATED solution to my OF COURSE NONEXISTENT problem?

Please, enough. You're STILL are missing my point, and I'm quite sure you're not going to get it. We'll leave it to each their own.

You may win, but you'll still be a cripple.

Your point is that there is no need for OP to fine tune his D7100 when he gets good results from two other bodies while his D7100 is unsharp.

I have seen some of his photos on his blog and to me it seems that he kinda knows what he is doing. Therefore I'd expect that he'd be comparing things that can be compared. I haven't seen the problematic photos, neither have you. But you have straightforward ruled the fine tune out without giving it even a chance. Even though he might have the same issue as I do. You just keep saying that fine tune is overrated because YOU don't need it.

You win

You're right, if it WAS a contest, I DID win, because you clearly can't read, or haven't put the time in to, based upon ALL of your replies. I'd call THAT being a "cripple".

If the OP "knows what he's doing", he'd not be asking. And, for the last time, what I'm ACTUALLY saying, since you can't seem to wrap your head around it, is that fine tune needs to be both done with VERY, VERY precise analysis technique over MANY different scenarios, and then compared substantially in real-world use, to be ANYWHERE close to useful or appropriate.

A few "test shots" like you've posted are NOT conclusive, but you can't seem to understand that.

Do as you wish, but try to give better advice.

Obviously you don't understand. I have seen his photos. Animals, planes, long distances, short shutter to catch the action or quite long shutter (for the FL) but sharp images, apparently good holding technique and a bit of luck with stationary animals. Therefore I do not think that he has problems with... I don't know what's the proper English term, in my language we call it something like "jerking". The shutter is not short enough and the hands are shaky. But somehow I think that this may not be his problem.

On the other hand, there have been a number of issues like mine, with actually un-fine tuned lenses. There are people who report their lenses fine tuned. If the lenses had been pin sharp un-tuned, then fine tuning would have to make them more unsharp, wouldn't it? But they seem to be happier with fine tuned. Yes, I know, I know, you have gazzilion of lenses and bodies and none need fine tune. And you have dozens of friends who don't need it likewise. Yet, fine tune is there for some reason and it may actually help. It may vary in outcome, but I have presented two examples with approximately two out of two success rate where fine tune helped. I have never really been great at mathematics, so two out of two give approximately... I don't know, I'll shoot... a hundred per cent?

Of course if the lens really needs fine tune, the values may vary according to focal length (zooms) and focus distance. BUT if it really needs fine tune, what better solution is there than fine tune? Or do you think that faster shutter speed or VR-on will miraculously heal the possibly un-fine tuned lens?

Um, yeah. 2 examples, each comparing at the same exact focal length and distance.

ONCE AGAIN, you've missed one of several of my points.

Go run around in the real world, take a lot of pics, and there's a VERY, VERY strong chance that your "one thing fixes all" solution may not look so pretty. As well, try it at many different focal lengths, distances, and lighting conditions.
DO YOU GET IT YET?

Isn't it past your bedtime?

Since when are you worried about other people's bedtimes? Just FYI I have been preparing for my work tomorrow which starts at 3 PM. Not everybody works six to three.

Then, since when are Sigma 10-20 @ 10mm at say 35 cm and Nikkor 18-105 @ 70mm at say 80 cm the same exact focal lengths and distances? You made my day again sir

I made your day because you can't read, or don't know the language. I did NOT suggest that both examples were made with the same focal length and distance. I suggested that EACH of the 2 were, as they WERE. In other words, each of your 2 examples use the same focal length and distance when comparing the 4 examples.

But maybe there is just a language issue. Can you define "the same exact focal length" and "the same exact distance" and use the numbers above?

I just did.

Just to make it clear, by

" Um, yeah. 2 examples, each comparing at the same exact focal length and distance."

you mean that the exact focal lenght and distance of the scenario was wrong or good way to find out if D7100's untuned PDAF was ok or not, compared to the other bodies?

This "um yeah" makes me feel you think it was wrong.

And how would you solve the wrong fine tune of the lenses differently than by fine tune?

I would use a lot more scientific approach to testing and evaluating than you are, and I'd VERY, VERY likely find that no fine tune was needed.

You mean in that those two examples where

D7100 fine tuned to 0 gave visibly poor results of PDAF compared to other bodies and fine-tuned D7100

was in your opinion actually right

and

the fine tuned sharper one

was actually wrong?

Because you'd come to conclusion that in fact "no fine tune was needed"? Really?

Then, if no fine tune was needed, how come that untuned D7100 was so poor and so much better after being fine tuned?

How many times would you like me to explain that RESULTS MAY VARY DEPENDING ON 3 THINGS: FOCAL LENGTH IN USE, DISTANCE TO SUBJECT, AND LIGHT TEMPERATURE? That said AND that every lens will be different.

I am not giving you (or the OP) advice based upon no experience, or what I've read. I'm giving it BECAUSE I HAVE ALREADY TRIED IT.

You have a great skill of not answering any questions directly and simply. I know a few people like you and they are pleasure to talk to.

I have tried to answer EVERYTHING directly and simply.  It is not my fault if your comprehension is lacking.

The lens was the same, the distance was the same, the light was the same and the results were different. Surprisingly, D90 works perfectly with two different lenses at two different FL's and two different distances, (and D200 almost perfectly being a notch off) while D7100 failed both scenarios. I could have fine tuned it to get sharp images, but it would be wrong. The back-/front focused ones were actually better, weren't they?

Again, you're not understanding.

Example: dial your 18-105 in at -12 (or whatever, irrelevant) at 50mm, and a distance to subject of 3 feet, under incandescent light.

Now, change ANY ONE of the factors, and it may not be at its best at -12.

Now, change ALL 3 factors, and you've got a nice dilemma, don't you, IF the results change (and they will, 99% of the time).

"... and every lens will be different."

Fortunately the camera has save slots for different lenses, so this is not a problem.

Duh.  Not what I'm talking about.

"I have already tried it". Interesting. Me to. But for me it worked. Well, didn't work, of course, wink wink, because I got sharper images after fine tuning, which was obviously wrong and because I do not use scientific methods but..., again, language barrier. In my language we say "I look and I see". I look and I see what is sharper.

See above.

FYI, I'm trying to help you, and the OP.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nfpotter
Senior MemberPosts: 4,072
Like?
Re: Possible
In reply to chary zp, 8 months ago

chary zp wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

chary zp wrote:

Just to make it clear, by

" Um, yeah. 2 examples, each comparing at the same exact focal length and distance."

you mean that the exact focal lenght and distance of the scenario was wrong or good way to find out if D7100's untuned PDAF was ok or not, compared to the other bodies?

Comparing Liveview with PDAF at one focus distance (especially a close one) may not necessarily mean AF fine tune is called for but a good indication to check further. Comparing it to other bodies (especially in artificial light) can often lead to faulty conclusions.. but a fair way to "see if further investigation is called for.

It means that in artificial light the camera is faulty, because it doesn't PDAF properly, while "my friend's D90" works well...

Um, HUH?

This "um yeah" makes me feel you think it was wrong.

And how would you solve the wrong fine tune of the lenses differently than by fine tune?

I would use a lot more scientific approach to testing and evaluating than you are, and I'd VERY, VERY likely find that no fine tune was needed.

You mean in that those two examples where

D7100 fine tuned to 0 gave visibly poor results of PDAF compared to other bodies and fine-tuned D7100

was in your opinion actually right

and

the fine tuned sharper one

was actually wrong?

No, the fine tuned image was indeed sharper...but that does not necessarily mean the lens needs fine tuning or that that specific setting is the right one.

Because you'd come to conclusion that in fact "no fine tune was needed"? Really?

That can actually be the case. You may simply need a AF-Sub mirror adjustment.

How do I do that?

And what will happen to my 85/1,8G which works fine with fine tune 0?

If I have my D7100 serviced to work with 18-105 perfectly, won't it scatter the other lenses which work fine now?

What you're not getting is that with the set-up and examples you're using, you HAVE NOT covered all your bases, to ensure that you're always getting the most accurate focus.  Mako did not suggest it IS a mirror adjustment needed, he simply pointed out yet another factor (thanks, Mako) that COULD come into play.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,646
Like?
not always
In reply to chary zp, 8 months ago

chary zp wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

chary zp wrote:

Just to make it clear, by

" Um, yeah. 2 examples, each comparing at the same exact focal length and distance."

you mean that the exact focal lenght and distance of the scenario was wrong or good way to find out if D7100's untuned PDAF was ok or not, compared to the other bodies?

Comparing Liveview with PDAF at one focus distance (especially a close one) may not necessarily mean AF fine tune is called for but a good indication to check further. Comparing it to other bodies (especially in artificial light) can often lead to faulty conclusions.. but a fair way to "see if further investigation is called for.

It means that in artificial light the camera is faulty, because it doesn't PDAF properly, while "my friend's D90" works well...

For some reason...certain lens combinations and artificial light (usually lower than 5000K) can focus poor on the newer bodies and have no effect on older bodies. Don't know the physics or the whys of it.

This "um yeah" makes me feel you think it was wrong.

And how would you solve the wrong fine tune of the lenses differently than by fine tune?

I would use a lot more scientific approach to testing and evaluating than you are, and I'd VERY, VERY likely find that no fine tune was needed.

You mean in that those two examples where

D7100 fine tuned to 0 gave visibly poor results of PDAF compared to other bodies and fine-tuned D7100

was in your opinion actually right

and

the fine tuned sharper one

was actually wrong?

No, the fine tuned image was indeed sharper...but that does not necessarily mean the lens needs fine tuning or that that specific setting is the right one.

Because you'd come to conclusion that in fact "no fine tune was needed"? Really?

That can actually be the case. You may simply need a AF-Sub mirror adjustment.

How do I do that?

If you get different results in sunlight vs tungsten light with a particular lens (often affects one lens and not another)...often a AF-sub mirror adjustment by Nikon (only they can do that) will solve it. Getting them to do (or check for it) it is another matter

And what will happen to my 85/1,8G which works fine with fine tune 0?

Should still be fine

If I have my D7100 serviced to work with 18-105 perfectly, won't it scatter the other lenses which work fine now?

Not necessarily. Might just be a 18-105 issue and not a body issue. Also, seems to be a bit more sample variation with some of the less expensive models.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,646
Like?
True
In reply to rwingsfan, 8 months ago

rwingsfan wrote:

Wow reading this thread has been fun One thing I really don't understand from the opposing point of view though. All one has to do is zero the adjustment back out if one gets lost. How could this possibly be viewed as "dangerous" or "over-hyped" ? If you have the time and even a small amount of ability you could easily experiment with every lens and if you find a setting that suits you better....great, if not put it back to zero and go on. Jeeez what a bunch of drivel about nothing except opinionated posturing.

Yes likely not dangerous (no lives lost)...sometimes over-hyped a tiny bit. Remember Nikon's warning: "AF tuning is not recommended in most situations and may interfere with normal focus: only use when required" If you do it less than optimal (really good tutorials out there on doing it accurately) ...you may find you missed that once in a lifetime shot at the wedding because you hadn't considered what it might do in tungsten AF-Fine tune can have a negative affect in some cases so something to consider. Remembering to turn it off for non-calibrated lenses often gets forgotten.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,646
Like?
good call
In reply to JK5700, 8 months ago

JK5700 wrote:

Thanks for the input.

I usually shoot from the car using either a Badger bean bag or Badger window mount with Wimberley II. Bit dangerous to use tripods with lions about. When shooting from bird hides, I usually use a bean bag on the counter.

I will definitely push my speed up. I am used to making 1/800 a minimum, but will now push it more. I also bought Focal a while ago and now that the D7100 version is available, I will try to fine tune. Can also reset if it does not help.

http://kennekam.blogspot.com/
www.pbase.com/kennekam

Using the Focal system can be really accurate. Good luck!!

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Horshack
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,199
Like?
Re: Struggling with D7100
In reply to nfpotter, 8 months ago

nfpotter wrote:

First, whether you're tuning a prime or zoom lens, results can vary MASSIVELY depending on what target and distance you're using. Second, if you're tuning a zoom lens, you WILL get different results (if tested correctly) at different zoom lengths. Third, you may get very different results under different lighting conditions, and/or with different focus targets.

The reason one can get different tuning results for different targets, focus distances, focal lengths, and lighting is that the AF system produces different results for those conditions. In other words, situational variance in tuning values is reflecting the variance of the phase detect mechanism itself.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Horshack
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,199
Like?
Re: Struggling with D7100
In reply to JK5700, 8 months ago

The first step I usually recommend is static shooting on a tripod using Live View to focus. That will at least give you sanity that a particular body+lens combo can produce sharp photos. The next step is to use that same tripod setup on the same subject but this time use regular AF - take multiple images, racking focus in between, and see if those images are producing the same acuity with the same consistency as your LV image. If they don't then there's a good chance the body could benefit from the AF tuning feature.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
chary zp
Regular MemberPosts: 434Gear list
Like?
Re: Possible
In reply to nfpotter, 8 months ago

nfpotter wrote:

chary zp wrote:

It means that in artificial light the camera is faulty, because it doesn't PDAF properly, while "my friend's D90" works well...

Um, HUH?

Yeah, you were more tired that I was, weren't you? In the same situation D90 worked twice OK and D7100 failed twice. That's what I'd call a faulty PDAF. Now imagine I took my D7100 and gave my D90 to a friend and went shooting the same scene. Who'd get better pictures?

What you're not getting is that with the set-up and examples you're using, you HAVE NOT covered all your bases, to ensure that you're always getting the most accurate focus. Mako did not suggest it IS a mirror adjustment needed, he simply pointed out yet another factor (thanks, Mako) that COULD come into play.

Right.

Today, outside it is sunny and the room is quite nice lit. The test wall (a door actually) is in the shade though, but we can say that PDAF is NOT working under artificial light deep under 5000°K. The shots were assisted by flash to provide enough light for short enough shutter, but AF was achieved under NATURAL light.

D7100 / D90 + 18-105 @ 18 24 35 50 70 mm shot at 50xFL

Images are always D90 - D7100@0 - D7100@-8, resized to match D90 and cropped 1:1 from OOC JPG.

What a terrible surprise, fine tune at -8 worked for all tested FLs and untuned camera was performing exceptionally poorly. Now imagine this is the same case of the OP's D7100 and his lenses. Would not it be nice if fine tune actually helped him as it helped me?

Yeah, that AFmirror adjustment whatever. But if I can "repair" the lens here at the table and do not have to go all the way to Nikon service shop, thumbs up for fine tune.

And again, image that OP's problem is as simple as mine.

18mm

24mm

35mm

50mm

70mm

 chary zp's gear list:chary zp's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P7700 Nikon D90 Nikon D200 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Westmill
Regular MemberPosts: 472Gear list
Like?
Re: Possible
In reply to chary zp, 8 months ago

It should be noted that you can fine tune more than one lens and that the camera knows which lens is fitted. So it is a simple case of set and forget. I have one D7100 with the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 attached. That is the only lens that was OK and did not need fine tuning.

Then I have my second D7100 body that shares 3 lenses. The 18-140 60mm F2.8 and the Sigma 50-150 F2.8. Both the 18-140 and 60mm only needed small tweaks to obtain optimum performance but the Sigm 50-150 was all but unusable unless the subject had a bit of distance and well covered with DOF. Now it is perhaps the sharpest of them all at any aperture and distance and zoom range and in any light.

Despite the danger of planes falling from the sky I recommend anyone to check to make sure there lens is set to perform at its best with cameras such as the D7100.

Use a big brick wall, like part of your house. Best when you have something like a wire running down it. Shoot wide open and at the long end if using a zoom. Use the center focus point and focus on the wire. Use a good working distance ! It is no good shooting too close because even a slight variation will magnify greatly at over a long distance. Take your shot carefully. Then simply zoom in on the rear screen all the way then back two. You are not checking for sharpness so no need for tripod etc. You are checking to see where it focused. It may be focused just in front or could be just behind, in which case, it needs adjusting accordingly. If its bang on then obviously it is fine. Constantly repeat this process at slightly different angles and distances. Once your happy you can set.

Shoot the wall at an angle ! about 35 -45 degrees will do. No point in shooting a wall flat on. When you have finished, you can check by taking two shots of the wall flat on... First shot using live view and the second shot as normal. If the lens is correct then it will be hard to see any difference.

 Westmill's gear list:Westmill's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon D7100 Sigma 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC APO OS HSM Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kuba Werwicki
New MemberPosts: 1
Like?
Re: Struggling with D7100
In reply to JK5700, 8 months ago

Did You tried mini calibration in body for each lens? Sometimes u need to use different values for certaing zoom values. Ie: backfocus -10 at start and front focus +10 at 500mm.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,646
Like?
Never said
In reply to chary zp, 8 months ago

chary zp wrote:

nfpotter wrote:

chary zp wrote:

It means that in artificial light the camera is faulty, because it doesn't PDAF properly, while "my friend's D90" works well...

Um, HUH?

Yeah, you were more tired that I was, weren't you? In the same situation D90 worked twice OK and D7100 failed twice. That's what I'd call a faulty PDAF. Now imagine I took my D7100 and gave my D90 to a friend and went shooting the same scene. Who'd get better pictures?

What you're not getting is that with the set-up and examples you're using, you HAVE NOT covered all your bases, to ensure that you're always getting the most accurate focus. Mako did not suggest it IS a mirror adjustment needed, he simply pointed out yet another factor (thanks, Mako) that COULD come into play.

Right.

Today, outside it is sunny and the room is quite nice lit. The test wall (a door actually) is in the shade though, but we can say that PDAF is NOT working under artificial light deep under 5000°K. The shots were assisted by flash to provide enough light for short enough shutter, but AF was achieved under NATURAL light.

D7100 / D90 + 18-105 @ 18 24 35 50 70 mm shot at 50xFL

Images are always D90 - D7100@0 - D7100@-8, resized to match D90 and cropped 1:1 from OOC JPG.

What a terrible surprise, fine tune at -8 worked for all tested FLs and untuned camera was performing exceptionally poorly. Now imagine this is the same case of the OP's D7100 and his lenses. Would not it be nice if fine tune actually helped him as it helped me?

nfpotter never said that might not be the case...He said AF tuning will not universally be the fix (paraphrasing, sorry if I got it wrong)

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,646
Like?
Do not forget
In reply to Westmill, 8 months ago

Westmill wrote:

It should be noted that you can fine tune more than one lens and that the camera knows which lens is fitted. So it is a simple case of set and forget. I have one D7100 with the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 attached. That is the only lens that was OK and did not need fine tuning.

Do not forget to actually "turn off" the AF fine tune feature when a lens that does not require tuning is mounted as it being enabled can (rare case) adversely affect focus in some situations.

Shoot the wall at an angle ! about 35 -45 degrees will do. No point in shooting a wall flat on. When you have finished, you can check by taking two shots of the wall flat on... First shot using live view and the second shot as normal. If the lens is correct then it will be hard to see any difference.

Do not check focus or determine focus using an angled subject. The horizontal and vertical nature of the arrays (center of array does not always lock focus) can make using a angled target give false results. CDAF will always lock on to where you pointed it at...not the case with PDAF.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Westmill
Regular MemberPosts: 472Gear list
Like?
Re: Do not forget
In reply to Mako2011, 8 months ago

Mako2011 wrote:

Westmill wrote:

It should be noted that you can fine tune more than one lens and that the camera knows which lens is fitted. So it is a simple case of set and forget. I have one D7100 with the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 attached. That is the only lens that was OK and did not need fine tuning.

Do not forget to actually "turn off" the AF fine tune feature when a lens that does not require tuning is mounted as it being enabled can (rare case) adversely affect focus in some situations.

Shoot the wall at an angle ! about 35 -45 degrees will do. No point in shooting a wall flat on. When you have finished, you can check by taking two shots of the wall flat on... First shot using live view and the second shot as normal. If the lens is correct then it will be hard to see any difference.

Do not check focus or determine focus using an angled subject. The horizontal and vertical nature of the arrays (center of array does not always lock focus) can make using a angled target give false results. CDAF will always lock on to where you pointed it at...not the case with PDAF.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Yes I know.... I said too shoot the wall flat to test for sharpness at the end for using live view and normal ! The wire helps no end for for accurate focus when shooting at an angle. More than anything I always assume that people also have eyes. First rule is to look

Thank you for the tip too   Although the lenses I use on that camera are all tuned.

 Westmill's gear list:Westmill's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon D7100 Sigma 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC APO OS HSM Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Westmill
Regular MemberPosts: 472Gear list
Like?
Re: Do not forget
In reply to Westmill, 8 months ago

This is where I calibrate my own lenses....

This is one of a fair few I did when calibrating ... errrr I the 60mm I think

The crop here shows the final adjustment. Now it is a sharp lens. This particular lens when I started was always soft. The wires were totally out of focus and I could see that the focus was in front of the wire. So I went little by little until it was back focusing and then back until I was happy. Now it is a sharp lens and nails focus every time.

This was the end result and how it should look !

One thing I shall mention..... It is always a good idea to errrrr on the side of slight front focus. This is to counteract focus shift on stopping down, which is now common for most Nikon lenses.

Have fun

 Westmill's gear list:Westmill's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon D7100 Sigma 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC APO OS HSM Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rwingsfan
Forum MemberPosts: 83
Like?
Re: Never said
In reply to Mako2011, 8 months ago

nfpotter never said that might not be the case...He said AF tuning will not universally be the fix (paraphrasing, sorry if I got it wrong)

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Mako, while true he never said it might not be the case or a universal fix, he did quite clearly indicate that it is over-used (his opinion) and dangerous (quite silly). I don't normally like to get into these debates, but when one side is clearly wrong and trying to tell the OP that AF tune is not really a option that made me speak up. While nfpotter thinks AF fine tune is over-used I'll respect that opinion, but to call it dangerous is down right....dangerous.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,646
Like?
angles
In reply to Westmill, 8 months ago

Westmill wrote:

This is where I calibrate my own lenses....

This is one of a fair few I did when calibrating ... errrr I the 60mm I think

Again, because the array's have a horizontal and vertical component (worse in D7000 due to array size)...setting your AF-Fine tune based on angled targets (especial close range) can result in an inherent error. May not show up when you "check" using a flat wall and CDAF vs PDAF comparison due to DoF limitations. Will show up though (if the setting was off) when shooting at different distances at subject occupying a tiny field of focus.

Example: This is is a perfectly calibrated 50mm lens (requires zero adjustment). Focused here on the center dark line. Had I used these results to set AF-Fine tune...I would have induced an error and set a - correction when none was actually required.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 15,646
Like?
Opinion
In reply to rwingsfan, 8 months ago

rwingsfan wrote:

nfpotter never said that might not be the case...He said AF tuning will not universally be the fix (paraphrasing, sorry if I got it wrong)

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Mako, while true he never said it might not be the case or a universal fix, he did quite clearly indicate that it is over-used (his opinion) and dangerous (quite silly). I don't normally like to get into these debates, but when one side is clearly wrong and trying to tell the OP that AF tune is not really a option that made me speak up. While nfpotter thinks AF fine tune is over-used I'll respect that opinion, but to call it dangerous is down right....dangerous.

He did not really say "that AF tune is not really a option" though I can see how some might interrupt his wording in that way. I could certainly be wrong though...often am. "Dangerous" is just an overstatement or strong embellishment. Just as you called his use of the word "dangerous" as well Nothing I would get upset about. Never a reason to get uncivil...just a gear forum after all. Good Luck all.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Westmill
Regular MemberPosts: 472Gear list
Like?
Re: angles
In reply to Mako2011, 8 months ago

Mako2011 wrote:

Westmill wrote:

This is where I calibrate my own lenses....

This is one of a fair few I did when calibrating ... errrr I the 60mm I think

Again, because the array's have a horizontal and vertical component (worse in D7000 due to array size)...setting your AF-Fine tune based on angled targets (especial close range) can result in an inherent error. May not show up when you "check" using a flat wall and CDAF vs PDAF comparison due to DoF limitations. Will show up though (if the setting was off) when shooting at different distances at subject occupying a tiny field of focus.

Example: This is is a perfectly calibrated 50mm lens (requires zero adjustment). Focused here on the center dark line. Had I used these results to set AF-Fine tune...I would have induced an error and set a - correction when none was actually required.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Yes i understand that. But !  you are using a very flat and tiny line. The wire protrudes and is big enough to fill almost the whole sensor. Also getting too close is not a good idea either as even a tiny error at short range can swiftly evolve into very large errors at far off subjects. The simple fact is, that it works and works well. Yes of course you can go to any extreme and get even better results but you would be hard pushed to see them. This has worked for years for me with no problem whatsoever. It is hard to argue that a bullet in the head is not deadly when there are loads of corpses at your feet that says otherwise

This is a Problem with the Pentax K5 and why everyone thinks they have back and front focus issues. With the K5 it is caused through the focus sensors are the size of dinner plates. When you look through the viewfinder, the focus squares appear to be of normal size. The actual sensor expands well beyond the squares though. About 6 times the size actually. The sensor is so big that you can say, focus on an eye, which of course is very close to the side of the head, and the sensor is so big there is nothing to stop it focusing on perhaps the nose or ear, or even miss altogether and focus on the background. So of course, very few users know or understand this... hence most think they have front or back focus issues. The trick of course is not to be so selective. You do not focus on the eye, but just use the face

Very much the same thing here. As in most things you need to apply a degree of common sense. The important thing here to me is... if it works your far far better off and if it does not you have lost a couple of hours trying. I posted lots of info so anyone has a fighting chance. My money is on the vast majority would see a notable improvement.

 Westmill's gear list:Westmill's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon D7100 Sigma 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC APO OS HSM Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rwingsfan
Forum MemberPosts: 83
Like?
Re: Opinion
In reply to Mako2011, 8 months ago

Mako2011 wrote:

rwingsfan wrote:

nfpotter never said that might not be the case...He said AF tuning will not universally be the fix (paraphrasing, sorry if I got it wrong)

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Mako, while true he never said it might not be the case or a universal fix, he did quite clearly indicate that it is over-used (his opinion) and dangerous (quite silly). I don't normally like to get into these debates, but when one side is clearly wrong and trying to tell the OP that AF tune is not really a option that made me speak up. While nfpotter thinks AF fine tune is over-used I'll respect that opinion, but to call it dangerous is down right....dangerous.

He did not really say "that AF tune is not really a option" though I can see how some might interrupt his wording in that way. I could certainly be wrong though...often am. "Dangerous" is just an overstatement or strong embellishment. Just as you called his use of the word "dangerous" as well Nothing I would get upset about. Never a reason to get uncivil...just a gear forum after all. Good Luck all.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Quite correct, nothing to lose sleep over, however it is hard to let know-it-all opinions go by unchallenged, my bad.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads