Reikan Focal D800 Multi Point Focus results --- Post them here

Jakeblade45

Member
Messages
15
Reaction score
3
Location
US
It would be nice to see other peoples focus results using the FoCal software and targets to get an idea of the differeing results.

After getting the lighting and distance all sorted out I was able to get a fairly consistent result.

Here is the result for my D800.
 
2efe5a03e26744b0987c75ad980fe543.jpg
 
You need to post the lens used.
 
Why?

I do not see any logic in comparing results which, according to page 100 of the D800 instruction book, can cause focus error.
 
Jakeblade45 wrote:

It would be nice to see other peoples focus results using the FoCal software and targets to get an idea of the differeing results.

After getting the lighting and distance all sorted out I was able to get a fairly consistent result.

Here is the result for my D800.
when did you purchase the camera



are you sending it back to get fixed ?





--
www.haroldmiller.me
 
Ok here is the additional information.

Lens is Nikon 24-70mm Zoom 2.8

Test was at ~4ft distance to target and ~27mm using the multi focus point target.
 
Aperture was set to 2.8
 
Sorry.... Should have listed everything in the first place.

24-70mm 2.8 Nikon Lens

ISO 100

Aperture 2.8

Target Distance ~4ft

500 Watt Halogen Lamp Indoors.

5200k on Focal software setting

1.6.0.141 Focal Software Version

Used the Multi Sensor Target provided by FoCal
 
My results seem to vary version to version.

Version 1.4 or 1.5 produced this which wasn't bad:








Then I got this thing which must be the worst D800E out there with version 1.6.0:



A third run with version 1.6 produced this one:



Puzzling.




All with the same Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 lens too. Same lighting. Way different results between versions even though they use the same target too. A "Green check-mark" should be "Good to go," but something is screwy and I haven't gotten them to respond to as "Why?" (Twice sent.)


I need to try version 1.7.0 beta sometime and see where it leads. Can't get any worse ... I hope! Maybe this week, unless they produce a final version out of beta sometime soon.


My real world "Focus on the Eye" by moving the AF spot around seems good, especially with the 70-200mm f/2.8 which is sort of stubborn with FoCal at times due to shake or movement so I surmise. On that lens I just crank in a -16 (my average between ends of focal length between 70mm and 200mm) and leave it. When I can see hairs coming out of skin pores I know I'm not far off, even a bit of fabric moire indicates I'm close to being dead on.


I dunno, but the version algorithms seem to waver a bit. For now, I use my fold-out target and shoot a shot of it at my shooting distance and zoom in and see where it zeros out too and apply some BF or FF corrections if needed (and even they seem to change too for whatever reasons.). Might need to try it a few times before I get a good average too (which FoCal seems to do itself as well.).


Mack
 
GMack wrote:

My results seem to vary version to version.

Version 1.4 or 1.5 produced this which wasn't bad:



Then I got this thing which must be the worst D800E out there with version 1.6.0:



A third run with version 1.6 produced this one:



Puzzling.


All with the same Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8 lens too. Same lighting. Way different results between versions even though they use the same target too. A "Green check-mark" should be "Good to go," but something is screwy and I haven't gotten them to respond to as "Why?" (Twice sent.)


I need to try version 1.7.0 beta sometime and see where it leads. Can't get any worse ... I hope! Maybe this week, unless they produce a final version out of beta sometime soon.


My real world "Focus on the Eye" by moving the AF spot around seems good, especially with the 70-200mm f/2.8 which is sort of stubborn with FoCal at times due to shake or movement so I surmise. On that lens I just crank in a -16 (my average between ends of focal length between 70mm and 200mm) and leave it. When I can see hairs coming out of skin pores I know I'm not far off, even a bit of fabric moire indicates I'm close to being dead on.


I dunno, but the version algorithms seem to waver a bit. For now, I use my fold-out target and shoot a shot of it at my shooting distance and zoom in and see where it zeros out too and apply some BF or FF corrections if needed (and even they seem to change too for whatever reasons.). Might need to try it a few times before I get a good average too (which FoCal seems to do itself as well.).


Mack
Hi



I have the same problem with FoCal. Every time the same lens was tested it gave a differing result.



the latest version will not run now after the upgrade to 1.6 on my machine.

Opened a support ticket with Reikan and had the ticket cancelled twice without any response offered.



Seems it is not all it is cracked up to be.

--
 
John Harrison wrote:

Hi

I have the same problem with FoCal. Every time the same lens was tested it gave a differing result.

the latest version will not run now after the upgrade to 1.6 on my machine.

Opened a support ticket with Reikan and had the ticket cancelled twice without any response offered.

Seems it is not all it is cracked up to be.
 
Robin Casady wrote:
John Harrison wrote:

Hi

I have the same problem with FoCal. Every time the same lens was tested it gave a differing result.

the latest version will not run now after the upgrade to 1.6 on my machine.

Opened a support ticket with Reikan and had the ticket cancelled twice without any response offered.

Seems it is not all it is cracked up to be.
 
e0752e2b4c4d4461ab65721013d40e1d.jpg



f36b2dc233cc48c681fe30b71b7ae20d.jpg



Hi

Wish to have your results... Here are mine with my 24-70 2.8G at 50mm with Focal 1.6. Note that my D800 went 3 times to Nikon (last time they said they did a full calibration of the 51 AF points) and my brand new 24-70 went twice to Nikon. Not too sure on what they are doing but it is an improvement compare to what it was so I let you imagine on how bad brand new Nikon stuff was put on the market!

Phil
 
Phil

Do you have captured data after Nikon made the adjustments?

Why did you send back the lens ?
 
Last edited:
Results like this just make me crazy, and are the reason I'm not going to try FoCal again until 1.7 final comes out. I think the program shows much promise, but my results have been wildly inconsistent and completely different that what is achieved with LensAlign. I wonder whether the problem is with the camera/lens or the calibration techniques. Note: this is not to minimize the dreaded 'left focus' issue, which I actually had on my D800.
 
So what is a good method to determine left focus issue then?

Do I shoot manually and compare the results visually from the best sensor to the worse to make a real determination?

Here are two more examples from the FoCal test showing the best result and worse result from the same run.

5d7d20afc74349a1b5a049b6b2f750b6.jpg

af4bbd932bfa434aa8843fcae4978188.jpg
 
Last edited:
Those results are after they made the adjustments!!! Each time they have touch the body, they had to redo all of the lenses since some were over the +/-20 in AF tune. That is also another concern with all those issues with the/my D800, since it looks like hey had to adjust the lenses to the body, I am scared that Nikon will probably charge me to readjust them to any future body that I will buy. This is wrong!!! To me, the lenses once adjusted, should be able to be sharp on any body using the AF Tune feature since you always have some light differences, but not by that much...

Wait and see, but I am really not impressed by the quality of Nikon services so far... even if I should recognize that they have been very keen to help and were each time quick turning back the gears! Thanks to them for that. May be I simply got a bad body that simply cannot be fixed to a good value so they are doing their best... Sad ;-(
 
My results are also too inconsistent to post, but since I am using the Mac Beta I think it fair to wait until a final release before drawing strong conclusions. In the meantime I have ditched my slightly Heath Robinson Multi Point chart and made a new one by A3 printing the chart on thick matte paper multiple times and trimming it, then carefully mounting it dead flat, several abutting sheets, with double-sided tape onto a 1.6 x 0.8 metre sheet of very thick, flat board - so I know I will not be able to blame my target!

I found that with the single point target, as long as I got the settings and setup correct, I got almost identical results as to those achieved by using a Spyder, with all my lenses. The multi point test results are less consistent but if I use High Focus Consistency and many shots of data point, they are somewhat better. I even got a few that were all green, but always with AFFT values for the centre point that differed from those achieved using the single target and were not useful in real-world shooting. When I ran the test again, it would differ. This is a bummer because running the multipoint test with, say ten AFFT values and a high consistency requirement is very time-consuming and uses a LOT of actuations.

But as I say, it is beta, so I won't hang them yet.

One thing I must mention is that you are using the wrong lighting and this makes your results useless I am afraid. Focus of red spectrum light is further back than mid-band. This is one of the reasons Leica Monochrom users have problems when shooting with a red filter on. It's only of use if you intend to shoot under red light! So I always use scrimmed daylight, and this makes a significant difference: such that, for the single point fine tune test, I absolutely trust my results and they are very consistent, though they do vary depending on whether my testing room is cold or warm...
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top