Microfocus adjustment frequency (Canon vs Third party lenses)

Started 3 months ago | Discussions
an_also
an_also Contributing Member • Posts: 562
Microfocus adjustment frequency (Canon vs Third party lenses)

I've never had to micro focus adjust/calibrate any of my lenses for my canon bodies so far.

I'm looking into getting a general purpose used third party lens for my 5D4 & 6D.

Eg. Tamron/Sigma 24-70, 24-105 etc.

Do third party lenses usually need AF adjustments? I've only ever had native canon lenses.

Thanks.

-- hide signature --
 an_also's gear list:an_also's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 400mm F4 DO IS II USM Fujifilm X-Pro1 Canon EOS 6D Canon Extender EF 1.4x III +3 more
Canon EOS 6D
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Vladyslav Kosulin Senior Member • Posts: 2,236
Re: Microfocus adjustment frequency (Canon vs Third party lenses)

Any zoom would benefit from microadjustment with DSLR IMHO. I had all my Canon zooms microadjusted with my 5D series cameras.

-- hide signature --

Vlad

 Vladyslav Kosulin's gear list:Vladyslav Kosulin's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L III USM Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L II USM Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM +2 more
Andy01 Senior Member • Posts: 4,294
Re: Microfocus adjustment frequency (Canon vs Third party lenses)
1

an_also wrote:

I've never had to micro focus adjust/calibrate any of my lenses for my canon bodies so far.

I think that this usually means that a person hasn't looked hard enough but not everyone is into pixel peeping .

Every lens I have owned (since getting a 70D - my first body with AFMA) has required some adjustment (usually minor). Lenses have been EF 35 f2 IS, EF 24-105L, EF 24-105 L ii, EF 100L f2.8 IS macro, EF 100-400L & EF 100-400L ii.

I don't think I have ever had to go back and redo the AFMA periodically.

I'm looking into getting a general purpose used third party lens for my 5D4 & 6D.

Eg. Tamron/Sigma 24-70, 24-105 etc.

Do third party lenses usually need AF adjustments? I've only ever had native canon lenses.

Thanks.

I can't comment on 3rd party AF lenses as I stopped buying them after a poorly performing Sigma 17-50 f2.8. Nearly all of them (3rd party AF lenses) seem to have some sort of issue with some or other Canon body (especially newer DSLRs) - even if it is a non-AF related issue like the Sigma 24-105 chewing batteries faster than a Canon lens. I have one 3rd party lens and that is a Samyang 14mm f2.4 XP (their premium range of lenses) and it is MF.

Colin

 Andy01's gear list:Andy01's gear list
Canon EOS M5 Canon 6D Mark II Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II Canon EF-M 18-150mm F3.5-6.3 IS STM +5 more
jpegman
jpegman Senior Member • Posts: 1,320
Re: Microfocus adjustment frequency (Canon vs Third party lenses)

I have a 6DII and several Canon lenses and they all were require some MFA using LensAlign from Michael Tapes - why would 3rd party lenses be "better" ?

-- hide signature --

Epson P800

 jpegman's gear list:jpegman's gear list
Canon 6D Mark II Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM +3 more
an_also
OP an_also Contributing Member • Posts: 562
Re: Microfocus adjustment frequency (Canon vs Third party lenses)

Andy01 wrote:

an_also wrote:

I've never had to micro focus adjust/calibrate any of my lenses for my canon bodies so far.

I think that this usually means that a person hasn't looked hard enough but not everyone is into pixel peeping .

haha. It might be because I only own two lenses which are both primes and seem super sharp. Maybe I’ve just been lucky, but maybe I just haven’t owned enough lenses 😂

Every lens I have owned (since getting a 70D - my first body with AFMA) has required some adjustment (usually minor). Lenses have been EF 35 f2 IS, EF 24-105L, EF 24-105 L ii, EF 100L f2.8 IS macro, EF 100-400L & EF 100-400L ii.

I don't think I have ever had to go back and redo the AFMA periodically.

I'm looking into getting a general purpose used third party lens for my 5D4 & 6D.

Eg. Tamron/Sigma 24-70, 24-105 etc.

Do third party lenses usually need AF adjustments? I've only ever had native canon lenses.

Thanks.

I can't comment on 3rd party AF lenses as I stopped buying them after a poorly performing Sigma 17-50 f2.8. Nearly all of them (3rd party AF lenses) seem to have some sort of issue with some or other Canon body (especially newer DSLRs) - even if it is a non-AF related issue like the Sigma 24-105 chewing batteries faster than a Canon lens. I have one 3rd party lens and that is a Samyang 14mm f2.4 XP (their premium range of lenses) and it is MF.

Colin

ah that’s good to know about third party lenses.

-- hide signature --
 an_also's gear list:an_also's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 400mm F4 DO IS II USM Fujifilm X-Pro1 Canon EOS 6D Canon Extender EF 1.4x III +3 more
an_also
OP an_also Contributing Member • Posts: 562
Re: Microfocus adjustment frequency (Canon vs Third party lenses)

jpegman wrote:

I have a 6DII and several Canon lenses and they all were require some MFA using LensAlign from Michael Tapes - why would 3rd party lenses be "better" ?

I never said they would be better...I was just asking if third party lenses are more prone to micro adjustments than native lenses.

-- hide signature --
 an_also's gear list:an_also's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 400mm F4 DO IS II USM Fujifilm X-Pro1 Canon EOS 6D Canon Extender EF 1.4x III +3 more
an_also
OP an_also Contributing Member • Posts: 562
Re: Microfocus adjustment frequency (Canon vs Third party lenses)

Vladyslav Kosulin wrote:

Any zoom would benefit from microadjustment with DSLR IMHO. I had all my Canon zooms microadjusted with my 5D series cameras.

Got it. Thanks for the reply.

-- hide signature --
 an_also's gear list:an_also's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 400mm F4 DO IS II USM Fujifilm X-Pro1 Canon EOS 6D Canon Extender EF 1.4x III +3 more
Graham Meale
Graham Meale Veteran Member • Posts: 3,313
Re: Microfocus adjustment frequency (Canon vs Third party lenses)

I adjusted a couple of lenses way back with the 5D II (if my memory serves me correctly), but since then have never needed to adjust any. One exception: my 24-105 from 2005 developed a fault (the dreaded error 1) four years ago, and after repair it needed a little tweaking. My non-Canon lenses have never needed adjustment.

-- hide signature --
 Graham Meale's gear list:Graham Meale's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II +7 more
GreatWhiteWing Senior Member • Posts: 1,367
Re: Microfocus adjustment frequency (Canon vs Third party lenses)

an_also wrote:

I've never had to micro focus adjust/calibrate any of my lenses for my canon bodies so far.

I'm looking into getting a general purpose used third party lens for my 5D4 & 6D.

Eg. Tamron/Sigma 24-70, 24-105 etc.

Do third party lenses usually need AF adjustments? I've only ever had native canon lenses.

Thanks.

I found improvements in both Canon and third party lenses. Probably time to recalibrate and see if there was any drift.

Based on my aging memory without digging through the cal files of FoCal I remember more adjustment generally with third party lenses but, as I said, all benefited. Wide angle less so than tele-zooms

 GreatWhiteWing's gear list:GreatWhiteWing's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Tamron SP 70-200 F2.8 G2 Canon EF 24-70mm F4L IS USM Canon EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM +2 more
ikolbyi Contributing Member • Posts: 635
Re: Microfocus adjustment frequency (Canon vs Third party lenses)

Andy01 wrote:

I can't comment on 3rd party AF lenses as I stopped buying them after a poorly performing Sigma 17-50 f2.8. Nearly all of them (3rd party AF lenses) seem to have some sort of issue with some or other Canon body (especially newer DSLRs) - even if it is a non-AF related issue like the Sigma 24-105 chewing batteries faster than a Canon lens. I have one 3rd party lens and that is a Samyang 14mm f2.4 XP (their premium range of lenses) and it is MF.

Colin

Colin - unfortunately I need to disagree based on my experience with Sigma.  I own 2 Sigma lenses an Art and Sports and I use to own a legacy EX but sold that.

The Art and EX out of the box flawlessly worked.

The Sports lens was back focusing for me.  I drove the 3 hours to Long Island NY where Sigma has their service center and they adjusted the lens to my Canon 5D.M4 at no charge.  While I was their they confirmed the performance of my Art lens.

I have a lot of praise for Sigma and their lenses in how they perform both as a company and product on my Canon body.

If (and this is a big if) I stay with Canon in the future after my 5D breaks, I will still use Sigma my go-to lens brand.  But right now my Olympus (with Olympus glass) are my primary camera system, and the Canon has been regulated down to low-light photography only.  I have owned 3 Canon DSLR camera bodies over 20 years and that is all in jeopardy because of their decision to EOL the EF mount and the EOS R body was a terrible product when I evaluated it.  I have no experience with R5 or R6.  Olympus on the other hand, has completely blown me away....with exception of low-light performance.  It's small sensor struggles to handle ISO greater than 5000.

 ikolbyi's gear list:ikolbyi's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 24-70mm F4L IS USM Olympus E-M1 III Canon EOS 70D Sigma 105mm F1.4 DG HSM Art +8 more
Andy01 Senior Member • Posts: 4,294
Re: Microfocus adjustment frequency (Canon vs Third party lenses)

ikolbyi wrote:

Andy01 wrote:

I can't comment on 3rd party AF lenses as I stopped buying them after a poorly performing Sigma 17-50 f2.8. Nearly all of them (3rd party AF lenses) seem to have some sort of issue with some or other Canon body (especially newer DSLRs) - even if it is a non-AF related issue like the Sigma 24-105 chewing batteries faster than a Canon lens. I have one 3rd party lens and that is a Samyang 14mm f2.4 XP (their premium range of lenses) and it is MF.

Colin

Colin - unfortunately I need to disagree based on my experience with Sigma.

Sure, everyone has their own experiences and from what I have read the newer Art lenses certainly seem to be better than the old EX lenses.

I own 2 Sigma lenses an Art and Sports and I use to own a legacy EX but sold that.

The Art and EX out of the box flawlessly worked.

A bit of searching when I was fighting with my Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX revealed that it seemed to be a fairly common issue. I first used it with a 600D (which doesn't have AFMA) and sometimes it would AF perfectly and be very sharp, and other times (usually at f2.8 and closer to 17mm) it would miss by enough to produce a soft image. No pattern to it - pretty random.

Then I got my 70D and I took great pains (a few times) to do the AFMA adjustment and got it to a point where it could produce results using OVF as good as LV, but the random inaccuracies persisted.

So I sold it and just used my EF 24-105L, and when that wasn't wide enough it was either a pano (if I could) or tough luck. I was fed up of getting home to find that some images were soft - they generally looked OK on the LCD, but when viewed on a 27" monitor, they just didn't cut it.

If I knew that a lens consistently produced bad results and under what conditions, I may have been able to deal with it with a work-around, but when it kept catching me by surprise, that was VERY unwelcome. Also the fact that the ONLY reasons I had the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 was for the 17-24mm range and for f2.8, and it was precisely that combination that gave me the most issues, it sort of took away the primary purpose for having the lens. My EF 24-105L never let me down - if the focus was off (which was quite rare), it was almost certainly user error.

The Sports lens was back focusing for me. I drove the 3 hours to Long Island NY where Sigma has their service center and they adjusted the lens to my Canon 5D.M4 at no charge. While I was their they confirmed the performance of my Art lens.

In Australia I don't have that luxury. The Sigma offices are in Sydney, which is a 1,900km (1,200 mile) round trip, and I am not sure that they even have a full tech centre there for doing this - they might ?

I have a lot of praise for Sigma and their lenses in how they perform both as a company and product on my Canon body.

It is great that you have got a working "set" that produces great results - something to hang on to.

I think it getting better, but there is still a large number of posts in Canon forums about poor AF or compatibility issues - especially with newer bodies and older lenses.

I own one non-Canon lens and it is a Samyang 14mm f2.4 XP MF lens, so no AF issues to deal with, and I think it will stay that way - at least until I upgrade one day (in the fairly distant future) to a mirrorless FF body (I have a M5) as there seems to be less issues with Sigma + Canon mirrorless than with Canon DSLRs.

If (and this is a big if) I stay with Canon in the future after my 5D breaks, I will still use Sigma my go-to lens brand. But right now my Olympus (with Olympus glass) are my primary camera system, and the Canon has been regulated down to low-light photography only. I have owned 3 Canon DSLR camera bodies over 20 years and that is all in jeopardy because of their decision to EOL the EF mount and the EOS R body was a terrible product when I evaluated it. I have no experience with R5 or R6. Olympus on the other hand, has completely blown me away....with exception of low-light performance. It's small sensor struggles to handle ISO greater than 5000.

Colin

 Andy01's gear list:Andy01's gear list
Canon EOS M5 Canon 6D Mark II Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II Canon EF-M 18-150mm F3.5-6.3 IS STM +5 more
ikolbyi Contributing Member • Posts: 635
Re: Microfocus adjustment frequency (Canon vs Third party lenses)

Andy01 wrote:

ikolbyi wrote:

Andy01 wrote:

I can't comment on 3rd party AF lenses as I stopped buying them after a poorly performing Sigma 17-50 f2.8. Nearly all of them (3rd party AF lenses) seem to have some sort of issue with some or other Canon body (especially newer DSLRs) - even if it is a non-AF related issue like the Sigma 24-105 chewing batteries faster than a Canon lens. I have one 3rd party lens and that is a Samyang 14mm f2.4 XP (their premium range of lenses) and it is MF.

Colin

Colin - unfortunately I need to disagree based on my experience with Sigma.

Sure, everyone has their own experiences and from what I have read the newer Art lenses certainly seem to be better than the old EX lenses.

I own 2 Sigma lenses an Art and Sports and I use to own a legacy EX but sold that.

The Art and EX out of the box flawlessly worked.

A bit of searching when I was fighting with my Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX revealed that it seemed to be a fairly common issue. I first used it with a 600D (which doesn't have AFMA) and sometimes it would AF perfectly and be very sharp, and other times (usually at f2.8 and closer to 17mm) it would miss by enough to produce a soft image. No pattern to it - pretty random.

Then I got my 70D and I took great pains (a few times) to do the AFMA adjustment and got it to a point where it could produce results using OVF as good as LV, but the random inaccuracies persisted.

So I sold it and just used my EF 24-105L, and when that wasn't wide enough it was either a pano (if I could) or tough luck. I was fed up of getting home to find that some images were soft - they generally looked OK on the LCD, but when viewed on a 27" monitor, they just didn't cut it.

If I knew that a lens consistently produced bad results and under what conditions, I may have been able to deal with it with a work-around, but when it kept catching me by surprise, that was VERY unwelcome. Also the fact that the ONLY reasons I had the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 was for the 17-24mm range and for f2.8, and it was precisely that combination that gave me the most issues, it sort of took away the primary purpose for having the lens. My EF 24-105L never let me down - if the focus was off (which was quite rare), it was almost certainly user error.

The Sports lens was back focusing for me. I drove the 3 hours to Long Island NY where Sigma has their service center and they adjusted the lens to my Canon 5D.M4 at no charge. While I was their they confirmed the performance of my Art lens.

In Australia I don't have that luxury. The Sigma offices are in Sydney, which is a 1,900km (1,200 mile) round trip, and I am not sure that they even have a full tech centre there for doing this - they might ?

I have a lot of praise for Sigma and their lenses in how they perform both as a company and product on my Canon body.

It is great that you have got a working "set" that produces great results - something to hang on to.

I think it getting better, but there is still a large number of posts in Canon forums about poor AF or compatibility issues - especially with newer bodies and older lenses.

I own one non-Canon lens and it is a Samyang 14mm f2.4 XP MF lens, so no AF issues to deal with, and I think it will stay that way - at least until I upgrade one day (in the fairly distant future) to a mirrorless FF body (I have a M5) as there seems to be less issues with Sigma + Canon mirrorless than with Canon DSLRs.

If (and this is a big if) I stay with Canon in the future after my 5D breaks, I will still use Sigma my go-to lens brand. But right now my Olympus (with Olympus glass) are my primary camera system, and the Canon has been regulated down to low-light photography only. I have owned 3 Canon DSLR camera bodies over 20 years and that is all in jeopardy because of their decision to EOL the EF mount and the EOS R body was a terrible product when I evaluated it. I have no experience with R5 or R6. Olympus on the other hand, has completely blown me away....with exception of low-light performance. It's small sensor struggles to handle ISO greater than 5000.

Colin

Some additional info based upon reading our feedback:

My Sigma EX that I had (and eventually sold) was 85mm prime.  Due to the complication of zoom lenses, I can see why Sigma earlier products may have some issues.  Older EX lenses didn't have the same build quality as their current line.

I have 1 Canon lens in my bag ( 24-70mm f4L) and it's focus hit/miss ratio is fractionally better than both my Sigmas.  On flip side both Sigma lenses are sharper than that specific Canon L glass. Is that an even trade?

 ikolbyi's gear list:ikolbyi's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 24-70mm F4L IS USM Olympus E-M1 III Canon EOS 70D Sigma 105mm F1.4 DG HSM Art +8 more
1Dx4me Forum Pro • Posts: 10,941
Re: Microfocus adjustment frequency (Canon vs Third party lenses)

an_also wrote:

I've never had to micro focus adjust/calibrate any of my lenses for my canon bodies so far.

I'm looking into getting a general purpose used third party lens for my 5D4 & 6D.

Eg. Tamron/Sigma 24-70, 24-105 etc.

Do third party lenses usually need AF adjustments? I've only ever had native canon lenses.

Thanks.

AF has been the achilles heel of the 3rd party lenses based on the owners and their complaints in this forum! most of times when canon comes out with a new model camera body, there goes the AF accuracy of the 3rd party lenses. i don't think it is a big deal but it is the headache of it

John Spaar
John Spaar Contributing Member • Posts: 869
Re: Microfocus adjustment frequency (Canon vs Third party lenses)

I own as many third party as I own Canon glass. I stay with Tamron when not buying Canon.  I have had to do some slight MFA (3) or less on some of my Tammy zooms, but by far the most I have ever had to adjust was on the original Canon 300 2.8 on a 7D Mk2 body. (6)

Also my newest Tams both G2's can use the tap-in console. Haven't bought one yet. Does anyone know if it is better than the MFA ?

-- hide signature --

A purist at heart to protect the art

 John Spaar's gear list:John Spaar's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon 6D Mark II Canon EF 135mm F2L USM Canon EOS 50D +10 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads