Reading mode: Light Dark

Why we don't have AF tuning in 40d. I want to have AF tuning...

Go to last post
Kiddpeat said:
of most of the camera's target market would be foolish. It would
generate excessive support costs, and tarnish Canon's reputation. We
can see right in this forum the negative comments generated by those
who simply lack the knowledge and skill to use the camera.

More sophisticated functions would simply generate higher levels of
complaints and returned cameras. That would be a lose-lose for Canon.
Click to expand...
I disagree and am also getting sick of how dumbed down tech has become over the last 15 years. Even look at review magazine that used to give tons of detailed tested specs and now just give like one single combined rating number. If someone doesn't knwo hwo to use something they should at least be smart enough to know not to use it or at the least be able to hit "RESET ALL TO DEFAULT" button. If someone can't hit a reset all to default, they can't operate anything on teh camera to begin with imo.

And so waht if we get "I messed around with my calibration setting and it's STILL not sharp" vs. "my lens is not sharp"? same difference.

do you see droves of complaints about this on the D300? not that i know of.
 
but what if you ahve not time for calibration before a big trip or are shooting lots of events with no window of time long enough to get it sent in?
at least you might be able to adjust for some issues.

it would also be useful diagnostic tool to see whether or not something more major than just FF or BF is going on.

all i know is both situations have hit me and i wish it had it.
Glenn W. said:
Even so, I think the feature could be a useful tool for a
photographer to have... It could be used to shift the DOF slightly
forward or backward as desired for creative purposes...

I just don't see AF micro adjust as a fix for badly working lenses or
cameras.
rrcphoto said:
Blackx said:
I don't have any personal experience with this feature, but there was
a thread on this topic few months ago and somebody pointed out that
wrongly focusing lens usually need different adjustment for different
focusing distances. You might need to fine tune AF +3 for 2 meters a
-2 for infinity focus. Unfortunately, you can only set one value.
Therefore this AF tuning is meant only for emergency use... you still
need to sent your lens for calibration :(

--
Gallery: http://www.pastel.cz/v/Photography/
Click to expand...
that is correct. it's only for one focus distance and in the case of
a zoom, one focal. it has limited use in the current and present
form.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
The 40D is priced low enough to draw many wannabees and newbees who know how to complain, but don't know how to use the camera properly. To offer sophisticated features, that require knowledge, to this audience would be a massive mistake. This thread alone is abundant evidence of that.

As for the D300, I don't follow the discussion of that camera. However, I would not be at all surprised to see many of the same complaints starting there. Just allow enough time for the camera to move beyond the early adopters to the wannabees and newbees. You will soon see the same complaints. The bottom line is that there is nothing wrong with the technology Canon has provided. That fact, however, has not prevented the uninformed and unskilled from complaining. It also will not prevent this same phenomemenon in the Nikon camp.
 
Hi Voyager,

It's a fact that younger generation is a lot more impatient than
their predecessors. Many would just blame the tool and move on.
If the camera doesn't give them great photos, buy another and
hope that it does.

Perhaps it's something to do with too much watching TVs, games,
or electronic toys.

--
Thien
Voyager13b said:
It is funny to me that I have used Canon gear for over 40 years, and
even after the dawn of AF, I have had no complaints with any of the
many Canon products I bought.

I have no doubt that it can be a difficult concept to grasp, but I
prefer shooting pictures, rather than test shots. Micro managing my
focus points has never been a dream, so long as my lenses perform to
my satisfaction. If it was a real deal breaker fo me, I would have
bought the dead end 1D Mk III for several thousand Dollars more than
the 40 ended up costing.

Pixel peepers, and focus police enjoy a fine pastime, but they really
shouldn't let it get in the way of their photographic efforts.

--
Voyager
Click to expand...
--

 
Kiddpeat said:
The 40D is priced low enough to draw many wannabees and newbees who
know how to complain, but don't know how to use the camera properly.
Click to expand...
perhaps the price tier is different enough.
Kiddpeat said:
To offer sophisticated features, that require knowledge, to this
audience would be a massive mistake. This thread alone is abundant
evidence of that.
Click to expand...
i still don't see how this is anymore sophisticated than half the other stuff. And unlike half the other stuff, this one could have a simple "reset" button attached to it and also be easily avoided to begin with.
Kiddpeat said:
soon see the same complaints. The bottom line is that there is
nothing wrong with the technology Canon has provided. That fact,
however, has not prevented the uninformed and unskilled from
complaining. It also will not prevent this same phenomemenon in the
Nikon camp.
Click to expand...
1. personally, I don't think it would cause many such problems at all

2. personally, I think we are seeing more gripes that it has been left out than we would've seen such problems as you fear getting mentioned here

3. why should those who do know how to use something have to suffer because someone else is incapable of using it? Seriously, they can avoid it if they don't know how to use it yet. If you get a hold of something new and complex, start with what you know. That's what I do. Again they can also put in a simple reset all calibration to zero button. If we are that afraid that people will forget and leave some weird setting on, you better remove a whole lot more of the 40D features then.
 
" Because Canon is in a position to be stingy with features"

True - perhaps because the majority of its users put IQ and real performance-related features before gimmicks..?
 
...AF fine tuning is well a double edged sword at best. It has to be re-calibrated on a regular basis (from what I understand and I may be wrong!) I have not had any focus issues with my lenses and body, it pretty much does what it is supposed to do. AF is complex to say the least, to understand it you have to pour through pages of physics articles on the subject and truly understand what they mean, specifically the math, not an easy task for most of us and something we are for the most part not willing (or don't have the time to do!) Here is the result of my albeit flawed but objective focus tests with my 40D:



The blue dot represents the focus point:



Both done with an EFs 17-85 IS, not the sharpest tool in the shed but they look pretty accurate to me. I could be wrong but at least I'm happy. If I had to constantly re-calibrate it would be for me a PITA!
 
a la the 300D's hacked firmwares (called Wasia & UnDutchables). this would be possible only if the 40D has inherited the feature from the 1D3, but is waiting for the hacked firmware to activate what Canon has crippled.
lepski said:
After having focus issue with 20d 40d and lenses or lenses and
bodies. I want to have this feature. I would even pay few $ more.
Probably canon 1d markIII has that or not? but is little more that
40D plus some more. Is to much. But like you can see on the bottom
Nikon d300 for 1700$ has that feature. I wish to have canon
calibration software.





--
lepski
Click to expand...
 
about how the camera's meter works, and what that means in the various auto modes! How would such people cope with a feature that allows them to adjust the AF precision? After thoroughly fouling up AF with bogus tests, they would flood the forums, and retailers, with complaints and returned cameras. What company would volunteer for that outcome?

"We" get nailed because we, for whatever reason, are also using the inexpensive part of Canon's SLR line up. We have to take the bad with the good and work through the problems. That means getting the camera serviced if it really needs servicing. IMHO, that's a decent trade off. Canon gives us stuff that we REALLY need while withholding stuff that would cause support nightmares.
 
That's the one missing feature that I really want in the 40D.It is keeping me with the 30D.

Could it be that Canon doesn't want us using 3rd party lenses,some of which don't always focus well on Canons?.........hmmmmmmm.
 
99% lenses on f5.6 will be sharp and DOF is big enough to hide everything, Try the same test with different lens on aperture f1.4 or 1.8 and you will see
--
lepski
 
bronxbombers said:
RedFox88 said:
Pay more, like with ANY product, and you're likely to get more features.
Click to expand...
come on the feature would cost 0 cents per body to have put in and
the next step up in the product line is like +$3000!
Click to expand...
Why does Adobe sell Photoshop Elements for $99 and make it with so limited features? It would cost them $0 to put the CS3 discs in the box instead! See how ridiculous your statement is now? :)

CS3 sells for about $600 and PSE for $100 which is 6 times more so the 1D3 is a better value over the 40D compared to CS3 over PSE.

You're asking for more software and more software features will cost the consumer more money. It's just that simple. Why doesn't microsoft put Office 2007 into Vista instead of the cheap little Microsoft Works or WordPad? :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top