Reading mode: Light Dark

Now what? (not a happy camper)

Go to last post
D

DavidP #28649

Forum Pro
Messages
29,088
Reaction score
1
Location
Conroe, TX, US
Well, I sent off my 1D to get fixed for front-focusing. I sent it overnight Fedex last Tuesday, and it arrived here on Monday (overnight UPS). Nice fast service.

Unfortunately, it doesn't appear to be much better (if any) from before.

Here's a picture I just took (sorry for the low quality and JPG artifacts, but I think it still shows the front-focusing).

http://www.cox-internet.com/dpennybaker/fixed.jpg

I focused on the center box. The left box is 1" in front, the right box is 2" in front. You tell me which box is properly focused (I don't want to influence anybody).

So (assuming you don't think the center box is the one properly focused), where do I go from here?

--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
 
That stinks. Did they say they did anything? Did you send an example? It's rather obvious to me.

Jason
DavidP said:
Well, I sent off my 1D to get fixed for front-focusing. I sent it
overnight Fedex last Tuesday, and it arrived here on Monday
(overnight UPS). Nice fast service.

Unfortunately, it doesn't appear to be much better (if any) from
before.

Here's a picture I just took (sorry for the low quality and JPG
artifacts, but I think it still shows the front-focusing).

http://www.cox-internet.com/dpennybaker/fixed.jpg

I focused on the center box. The left box is 1" in front, the
right box is 2" in front. You tell me which box is properly
focused (I don't want to influence anybody).

So (assuming you don't think the center box is the one properly
focused), where do I go from here?

--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
Click to expand...
 
They said they adjusted the camera for front-focusing. Yes, I sent an example. (Printed at 8x10, it's a LOT harder to see the front-focusing, though, I'll have to admit).

I don't know what they do to adjust it. Do they look at full-sized results on a laptop screen? Or do they just let the image fill a screen? One thing they did was to set the camera to JPG mode (not TIF). I haven't checked for other setting changes, but they did do that.

If all they did to calibrate was shoot a few shots and look at the image at a size where it just filled a screen, I guess I can see why they might've missed it. But if they viewed at 100%, it seems rather obvious to me that it's still front-focusing.
Jason Hutchinson said:
That stinks. Did they say they did anything? Did you send an
example? It's rather obvious to me.
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
 
Yep, send it back. But anyway to actually TALK to the people who are in charge so I can understand HOW they test, etc?

I know repair people HATE guys like me who think we know something (sometimes I do, sometimes I don't). But if I understand HOW they're testing and adusting, I might just be able to tell them what else they need to do to get it right this time. Primarily, if they are NOT looking at a 100% view on-screen, then they aren't adjusting it right.

In fact, if they aren't doing this during QC, they're screwing up. Perhaps in the film world (esp. if one rarely prints above 8x10), they could get away with that. But not with digital.
Al Goldis said:
Gotta send it back to them again. What else can you do?
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
 
The factory service centers have a phone number with their address. Call them.

If you can't find it, it's (949) 753-4000 for Irvine.

As to talking to them about how they do the adjustment and testing, they may or may not be inclined to tell you. But that shouldn't matter because the bottom line is that they get it right, not how they go about it.
DavidP said:
I know repair people HATE guys like me who think we know something
(sometimes I do, sometimes I don't). But if I understand HOW
they're testing and adusting, I might just be able to tell them
what else they need to do to get it right this time. Primarily, if
they are NOT looking at a 100% view on-screen, then they aren't
adjusting it right.

In fact, if they aren't doing this during QC, they're screwing up.
Perhaps in the film world (esp. if one rarely prints above 8x10),
they could get away with that. But not with digital.
Al Goldis said:
Gotta send it back to them again. What else can you do?
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
Click to expand...
 
DavidP said:
Well, I sent off my 1D to get fixed for front-focusing. I sent it
overnight Fedex last Tuesday, and it arrived here on Monday
(overnight UPS). Nice fast service.

Unfortunately, it doesn't appear to be much better (if any) from
Click to expand...
David Very sorry to hear this...

To me it definately looks like the First Box, (on left) is the the one in focus... Of course I assume you tried different lenses...

What's interesting is, when I performed the indentical test... The Correct box (center), was even exposed more properly... I shot the picture with the 28-135 IS.. Since I remember that a lot of people had complaints about it with the 1D...

http://www.pbase.com/image/2217612/original

I Sincerly hope you get this sorted...

Best, Tony B.
 
Sorry to hear your back-focus problem was not fixed. Maybe it's time to dump that old tech, low res, back-focusing, banding and very overweight piece of junk.

I like out of focus shots so it would work for me and I want to help out a fellow forum member.

It's much better to bring the camera to Canon in person! I live close to the Irvine facility. Think about it David! You would like a D60! Really you would!
 
David

the only thing i would try is to use something non reflecting (as the plastic on those cartridge boxes). Maybe print a sheet of paper with text on it and use that. It should have enough contrast and there is no reflection that might screw with the AF somehow.

--
Michael Salzlechner
StarZen Digital Imaging
http://www.starzen.com/imaging
 
What? No cereal boxes in the house?

I would hope they wouldn't be setting focus by sight. They should have instruments that set the focus using visible light rays, low power lasers, etc. If I send mine in I don't want soemone's great grandmother looking through her two inch tri-focals and trying to decide if the picture in the LCD looks in focus.

I don't know the details, but somewhere there should be a gizmo with a lens and several lasers attached to a frame. Let the camera automatically focus to a set point, and then aim two or more low level lasers through the lens from set positions. They should converge to one point if the camera is working properly. Just adjust the camera until they do. Just my fuzzy laws of physics.
 
I once asked to speak to a technical rep regarding a 1D issue because the middle man who was ignorant kept asking someone and placing me on hold but came back with did you consider x,y or z and every time back on hold etc. I asked to speak directly to the technician he was talking to and I was told I was not allowed. I thought this was out and out crazy. Mark
Al Goldis said:
If you can't find it, it's (949) 753-4000 for Irvine.

As to talking to them about how they do the adjustment and testing,
they may or may not be inclined to tell you. But that shouldn't
matter because the bottom line is that they get it right, not how
they go about it.
DavidP said:
I know repair people HATE guys like me who think we know something
(sometimes I do, sometimes I don't). But if I understand HOW
they're testing and adusting, I might just be able to tell them
what else they need to do to get it right this time. Primarily, if
they are NOT looking at a 100% view on-screen, then they aren't
adjusting it right.

In fact, if they aren't doing this during QC, they're screwing up.
Perhaps in the film world (esp. if one rarely prints above 8x10),
they could get away with that. But not with digital.
Al Goldis said:
Gotta send it back to them again. What else can you do?
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Unfortunately, no direct comparison can be made here. But here's a non-reflective test target. I shot it with the 70-200/2.8 IS at both 135mm and 200mm. They don't look properly focused to me.




Mike Salzlechner said:
the only thing i would try is to use something non reflecting (as
the plastic on those cartridge boxes). Maybe print a sheet of paper
with text on it and use that. It should have enough contrast and
there is no reflection that might screw with the AF somehow.
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
 
Hi David
Try this with your Zip drive targets...

First, pre-set the lens so it is focused to the rear of the target. Then go through the focus/image capture sequense.

Next, pre-set the lens so it is focused in front of the target and capture another.
Are the results the same?

I've worked on developing techniques for establishing accurate focus with quite a few cameras.

With digitals the technique is usually to constantly integrate the power output of the sensor used for AF whille sending out drive signals to the lens motor. When the target is in focus the power output will be at a peak and this is sensed. I small tweaking signal is usually used to fine-tune the action since not all lenses act the same.
Could it be your lens by any chance?
DavidP said:
Unfortunately, no direct comparison can be made here. But here's a
non-reflective test target. I shot it with the 70-200/2.8 IS at
both 135mm and 200mm. They don't look properly focused to me.
Click to expand...
 
Don't think it's the lens. Verfied strange results now with the 85/1.2 and 70-200/2.8 and 135/2 lenses.

Your idea is interesting. Not sure how I'm gonna focus on a left or right box, though. They might just be able to be reached with an outside AF sensor, though.
Allen Pacheco said:
Try this with your Zip drive targets...
First, pre-set the lens so it is focused to the rear of the target.
Then go through the focus/image capture sequense.
Next, pre-set the lens so it is focused in front of the target and
capture another.
Are the results the same?

I've worked on developing techniques for establishing accurate
focus with quite a few cameras.

With digitals the technique is usually to constantly integrate the
power output of the sensor used for AF whille sending out drive
signals to the lens motor. When the target is in focus the power
output will be at a peak and this is sensed. I small tweaking
signal is usually used to fine-tune the action since not all lenses
act the same.
Could it be your lens by any chance?
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
 
Hahaha... nice try fella... ;)

Good luck.

P.S. Thanks for the funny post.
David Hickey said:
Sorry to hear your back-focus problem was not fixed. Maybe it's
time to dump that old tech, low res, back-focusing, banding and
very overweight piece of junk.

I like out of focus shots so it would work for me and I want to
help out a fellow forum member.

It's much better to bring the camera to Canon in person! I live
close to the Irvine facility. Think about it David! You would like
a D60! Really you would!
Click to expand...
--
Rheuter
 
David,

Gee... You appear to be using a Mac... Isn't that kinda "left" leaning anyway???

Just kidding.... I have not run this test with my D60 and lenses (28-70 L; 28-135 IS; and 75-300 IS) because I have a 16-35mm on order (sold my 17-35 on eBay) and plan to replace the 75-300 IS with a 70-200mm L IS and 1.4x. Figured I would wait until I have the whole assembledge before I run the tests... and get it all done at once if anything is needed.

I am also fortunate in that I live in Irvine, Ca. Though the past repair I needed (to a Canon Powershot Pro90IS) was sent to Illinois.

Frank P
DavidP said:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/viewtopic.php?TopicID=6446

Sorry to go to another forum, but I posted a bunch of new photos
(and some new ideas) there.

If you've got any comments regarding them, you can always link to
the specific pictures (and my text) and discuss them here.
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
Click to expand...
 
Hehe. I did own an Apple II+ long ago.

The Jaz media just happen to be for Macintosh . . . they can be reformatted for the PC without any problems. I got a better deal on them that way.

I also use Mac DVD-R media . . . inexpensive and reliable.

But I use a home-grown PC
Frank Patton said:
Gee... You appear to be using a Mac... Isn't that kinda "left"
leaning anyway???
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
 
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