MFA on 80D

I am new to MFA, I am finding the focus is a bit out on my 100mm macro IS Lens. Which is the best method to use? TIA

FoCal

As long as you use a proper target, good lighting and correct distance for the lens then any method will work. Reikan Focal is probably the fastest but I have found the manual method to be most accurate.

With a macro lens you will need to decide whether you want it to perform best at macro or far away distances, it is unlikely that you will get it perfectly calibrated to be spot on at both distances. I have adjusted my 100mm macro to be right at about 1:2 magnification because that is where I use it most.

Will it work with 3rd party lenses too?

Whichever way you do it will work with all autofocus lenses of any make because MFA only adjusts data values within the body. The camera stores a seperate data set for each lens.

The only complication that can sometimes arise is that the body may not correctly identify a 3rd party lens or it may not be able to detect the difference between 2 third party lenses and apply the wrong data set.

For my macro lens, I set a ruler on a 45 degree angle, place the camera at it's MFD to a number on the ruler and adjusted to that.

Is there a reliable free method?

vickylou said:

I am new to MFA, I am finding the focus is a bit out on my 100mm macro IS Lens. Which is the best method to use? TIA

Click to expand...

I used to try every possible method when I had a 70D. I spend way less time with my 80D.

Here are my findings:

- FoCal does not work well. I don't know why, but the values it finds are often a bit off. Maybe I do something wrong, maybe FoCal has some incompatibility with the 80D.

- The dot tune method is not accurate either. With the 70D, it could be automated with the help of Magic Lantern, but Magic Lantern is not available for the 80D (yet)

- My preferred method is (successfully used with all my lenses on the 80D): I shoot a target, correct the MFA value depending on front- or back- focusing. I repeat the process until it looks correct. Then, to fine tune: I select the value I have found, I add 5 and take a shoot, then I subtract 10 (from the last setting, i.e. - 5 from the initial setting) and take a shoot. So if my tentative MFA value was correct, I should now have two images with the same amount of blurr, both being 5 MFA "units" away from being perfectly in focus. If not, I correct my tentative MFA setting and I repeat the fine tune process.

Now a few recommendations:

- MFA is quite sensitive to temperature. My observation is approximately 0.5 MFA units per degree C (YMMV). If the temperature is too high or too low compared to the temperature at which I did MFA, I usually redo the MFA in the field.

- MFA is sensitive to color temperature. The camera has a sensor to compensate, but it's not always accurate. In particular, its response time is a bit slow, causing transient focus errors when the color temperature is changing (for example if a cloud hides the sun). In other words, whatever method you choose, make sure that your lighting provides a constant color temperature during the whole process.

- the adjustment is more accurate in good light on a contrasty target

- I always use the center point, One Shot focusing mode

- most people will recommend to use a tripod, but I do it hand held without problem. However, I need to make sure that the camera is aligned with the target

- there are recommendations regarding the minimum distance to target (usually 50 times the focal length), but I break that rule if my typical distance to subject is shorter.

I agree the Dot Tune method is unreliable and not consistent. I have found FoCal (starting with version 2) to be extremely consistent and accurate IF you use very good lighting and for longer lenses use a larger target.

The “eye-balling method is iffy. That’s what I used before FoCal. I was amazed at the difference FoCal made. (I have no connection to FoCal, just a very happy customer.) It’s worth it to get consistently sharp images.

I just shoot (and check) until it's correct too. Easy Peasy.

BTW, are you having issues at normal distances, or macro distances?

R2

vickylou said:

Is there a reliable free method?

Click to expand...

Micro Focus Adjustment - Dot-Tune: Autofocus Fine Tuning in under 5 minutes - FM Forums

Micro Focus Adjustment - Micro Focus Adjustment Align Ruler

Micro Focus Adjustment - Resolution Charts Explained - Lensrentals

Micro Focus Adjustment - test images for printing and lens resolution

I tried the Dot-Tune method and found it silly and not reliable.

I tried the Adjustment Align Ruler method and it was better but it requires you to decide where the image goes out of focus twice, once closer to and once further from the center of the target.

The method I found most straightforward was to use a high resolution target printed on semi-matte photo paper. I taped the target to a wall and positioned the camera on a tripod so that the lens was at the center of the target and according to the tripod bubble level and the camera's electronic level it was level. I then moved the camera off to 25 times the effective focal length of the lens.

I first took photos at 5 Microadjustment steps and picked out the two best images. Next I took photos at 1 step intervals between those two 5 step intervals. To check for AF consistency I took two photos, manually adjusting the lens to closest focus before switching to AF for one photo and then to ∞ before switching back to AF for the second photo. I checked both photos. I could get down to about 3 steps being about equally sharp so I just chose the one in the middle.

Three of my lenses gave small adjustments of, +1, +3, and -4 with no noticeable increase in sharpness. My Tamron SP 90MM F/2.8 Di 1:1 Macro lens went from not very good to great after applying a Microadjustment of +13.

--
Living and loving it in Pattaya, Thailand. Canon 7D - See the gear list for the rest.

FoCal. I just got a new 400 DO II and 2X III. On Saturday in about 2 hours I calibrated it to the 1.4 III, 2X III and both 7D2 and 5D4. I never had to think, evaluate or guess. Set up moving the tripod took, etc took up about 80% of that 2 hours. The running the software is quick.

Zeee said:

FoCal. I just got a new 400 DO II and 2X III. On Saturday in about 2 hours I calibrated it to the 1.4 III, 2X III and both 7D2 and 5D4. I never had to think, evaluate or guess. Set up moving the tripod took, etc took up about 80% of that 2 hours. The running the software is quick.

Click to expand...

FoCal may work well with other cameras (it was ok-ish with my 70D), but it is not the case with the 80D, at least for me. It is quite consistent, but consistently wrong.

See also this post from a long-time Canon pro:

CameraCarl said:

See also this post from a long-time Canon pro:

https://www.gerlachnaturephoto.com/single-post/2018/05/16/AF-Microadjust-for-Sharper-Images

Click to expand...

A few things. This is why I use FoCal and I do it indoors. I light my target with a daylight balanced light source.

http://arihazeghiphotography.com/blog/focus-micro-adjustment-is-it-always-needed/

Here is a pretty good explanation of various methods. I have always had my own tolerances for how much I'll MFA before sending a lens in. I don't have an opinion on 3rd party lenses, just same manufacturer. I have always felt this way about it and then found this. Section 11. More below.

https://photographylife.com/how-to-calibrate-lenses

Also I have had two US Canon service reps tell me MFA is for emergencies only. My 70-200 2.8 was out to lunch at 200mm and one encouraged me to send it in. They found a mis-cablirated board. I'm not going to send it in for a + - 3 adjustment and my first threshold is about + - 5. I have yet to get a modern Canon lens than needed more than - +5 except for that 70-200. Typically around +3 and I figure that is because manufacturers sets it up for ⅓ - ⅔ rather than 50/50, which is how we MFA.

I don't care what anyone does but Canon recommends to use a parallel target, not an angled one. If people are getting good results then all the best to them. I don't really want to discussion about cause I really don't care. This is not a shot at anyone. I know I won't set over $10,000 of precision equipment on an angled ruler, but that is just me. Products like lens align use a parallel target establish focus and then you judge via the ruler.

Also a well know birder and member here - Liquidstone who MFA's at MFD. The last time I chatted with him on a forum he uses a monetary bill taped to a wall. That has a lot of detail. I did that with my 100-400 II and 1.4 III and it took me 2 days of re-shooting and second guessing myself. I finally settled on a number. I got FoCal a week later and it gave me the same number in less than 2 minutes.

Unfortunately you need a laptop to use the software. Not moving my main PC. No need for a laptop. Bummer.

greg

Lots of great information here that definitely matches my experience. Having said that I personally haven't had any luck trying to do AFMA hand-held but is looks like it works for some.

I really struggled with it on my 80d and 7d mk2. Also I only have used it with long focal length lenses.

I wonder if I can find a shop that will do it for me?

Canon service will if you send in the lens and camera. In fact they will properly calibrate the two so you should end up not needing AFMA at all. It is the best option but will cost money time and hassle of shipping...