Canon users are reporting front-focusing issues with the RF 70-200mm F2.8

Yes but the difference here is that (a) it's an OEM lens (not some third party where front/back focusing is normal), (b.) it's been reported supposedly but more than just a few people and (c) Canon doesn't have a way to for customers to tweak the focusing (either with a dock or in camera that I'm aware of).

I think it's good that DPR has this so those who bought it can keep updated on the issue. Sounds like Canon is addressing it.

Dec 17, 2019*permalink

BIOGONS

It is said that the final field QC with these new lenses is made by the first users.
It is advisable to wait a year to ensure that the new lenses or cameras are fully optimized and reliable.

Dec 17, 2019permalink

Class A

This demonstrates that focusing with the sensor itself (i.e., not using classic PDAF) is not the silver bullet it is often purported to be.

Hopefully this is a healthy reminder to those that have been spreading the message that "PDAF = bad" and "OSPDAF" or "CDAF" = "infallible".

Dec 16, 2019permalink

armandino

@Class A
different problem and once it is fixed for one it is for all, while DSLR each lens needs its its own calibration on each camera.
Good try though

Dec 16, 2019*permalink

Class A - Except for the fact that Canon has its own dual pixel focus system which is unique to Canon...

Dec 16, 2019permalink

StevoPhilo

Who said those systems were infallible? I think OSPDAF is one of the best systems now, but that wasn't the case a couple of years ago.

Dec 16, 2019permalink

Aegon Targaryen

@Stevo:
A LOT of Sony fans make the OSPDAF is infallible (or paraphrased) argument ad nauseum. It is nauseous.

Dec 17, 2019permalink

RandyPD

From what I have read, the problem is not with OSPDAF but with the way the lens communicates back with the camera body to signal if it had achieved the proper focus point.

Dec 18, 2019permalink

(unknown member)

Don't worry folks the internal zooming Mark II will be out next year.

Dec 16, 2019permalink

TheBestCameraIsTheOneYouActuallyShoot

Good luck - A 'firmware' update will fix this problem...

Really? How about those people that have not reported this problem?
How is that going to work out for them after they have run the 'fix'?

A micro adjustment built into a firmware will affect all lenses also to those that now work fine.

Let hope for those people that just put down a near 3000 dollars for this lens that this lens will not turn out to be a dog.

I think we will see some good and some bad copies of this lens going around, just like the 24-70mm f2.8 EF (version I). You had to had luck to get a good copy, but most people ended up with a soft copy of this lens.

It would not surprise me if we are going to see the same thing going to happen with this lens. One thing can be said QC failed. This lens was not tested properly before it was released.

Dec 16, 2019*permalink

RobertN5D

Well, since it's a firmware fix, maybe it'll be smart enough to detect the issue and address it if need be. Though, improved QC would be better.

Dec 18, 2019*permalink

Why is it unlikely that the fix is only for this lens? Companies release firmware updates for individual lenses sometimes. Nikon just did on the 50mm 1.8S lens earlier this year:

https://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/download/fw/330.html

It improved a focus mode’s consistency for a specific lens.

Dec 27, 2019*permalink

JaimitoFrog

mine is fine.

Dec 16, 2019permalink

Peter LO

Kudos Canon for promising a FW fix.
Except adding a line of disclaimer in fine prints to the user manual, Nikon did nothing at all to a similar issue with its 80-200/2.8 "professional" zooms throughout the decades-long production period.

Dec 16, 2019permalink

ovlov

I had to chuck my lens in the rubbish bin because of this defect! I could not carry on knowing that i would have to wait for a firmware update. Very disappointing!

Dec 16, 2019permalink

photofan1986

Where is that bin located?

Dec 16, 2019permalink

(unknown member)

never happened

Dec 17, 2019permalink

snapa

That's what happens when you try to make a lens too small, and don't test it correctly and completely. Sounds like a design issue, or a QC issue or both.

Dec 15, 2019permalink

If its only a firmware fix it doesnt seem like a big problem

Dec 15, 2019permalink

snapa - Please name ONE brand that hasn't at some stage had a firmware update to correct a design issue or manufacturing issue. Just ONE.

... and name ONE other company that has jumped into action literally within hours of being notified of an issue, rather than trying to pretend it doesn't exist.

Dec 15, 2019*permalink

Please. Have you ever tried to MFA a Sigma zoom lens using their dock? And then find that it has "drifted" after a week? Seriously, this is *nothing* to worry about. It'll get fixed, and like all other RF lenses will focus perfectly.

Dec 16, 2019permalink

snapa

@dmanthree, well... I hope you get your $2,700 lens fixed with a FW update. If not, I guess you will be screwed and live with a less than adequate lens and a real PITA to use.
BTW, I've never needed to use docks and update lenses, since I use only native lenses. All that updating lenses via docks, is a fool’s errand and a waste of time IMO. I hope you don’t loose too many great shot fooling around with missed shot because you needed to update your lens, when it fails you.

Dec 16, 2019permalink

snapa - You vindictive Sony trolls just aren't worth the effort.

Dec 16, 2019permalink

Daniel L

@snapa Here's what i have updated to electronics / household devices via FW to correct issues that some don't related or not affected my units but i've been though them like MILLIONS others... you never heard of them?

On top of my head....TV, computer, cell phone, camera, DSLR lenses, game console, AV Receiver and automobile! Yes, a freaking Car!

Dec 16, 2019permalink

I read ”yes even a freaken cat” Hahahah

Dec 16, 2019permalink

@snapa--Thanks for completely missing my point. I don't actually own one...yet. But it's a stellar piece of kit and Canon will address the issue. Not worried about it. And yes, I *used to* use docks when I shot DSLRs, but no more. Since I bought the R all lenses, RF, EF, or whatever, focus perfectly. The new zoom is not typical. Lastly, even if I did have it, the issue would mean nothing to me. I'd never shoot MFD at 200mm. But hey, keep up the sarcastic posts. Your fan club seems to love you.

Dec 16, 2019permalink

Daniel - my wife could do with a firmware update..

Dec 16, 2019permalink

Aegon Targaryen

Lol, entoman! Tell me about it! I'm ready to move to Stepford! 😂

Dec 17, 2019permalink

GIALLO63

Tested my own rf 70-200, no issue detected

Dec 15, 2019permalink

Patlezinc

Does anyone checked that on EF versions? Because I said to myself some weeks ago there was focus issue too on my V2. Could not really focus on my cats eyes at close distant. I guess it is the same here.

Dec 15, 2019permalink

thx1138

The EF version is fine.

Dec 15, 2019permalink

Jennings Ford

My EF70-200 IS USM f 2.8 does the same on my 5d IV. Fine at all focal lengths except when in within 1/4 inch of the closest focus allowed on the focus ring. Then it is very noticeably off! Still I like the lens very much. Just don't try to get it fully close at 200 mm.

Dec 18, 2019permalink

Just curious, but do the Canon R/RP cameras have AFMA or was that only in their DSLRs? If it does, I'm not saying that this should be the fix, but at least a work around for now to help address the issue (depending on how bad it might be for the specific copy in question).

I know NIkon included AF fine tune in their ML bodies (which was probably just carried over from the DSLRs). Either way, hopefully Canon can fix this issue and hopefully it's something that can be done via firmware update.

Dec 15, 2019*permalink

If om not wrong mirrorless cameras dont have that cause they dont need it

Dec 15, 2019permalink

The Oly EM 1.2 has it. And needs it with some lenses.

Dec 16, 2019permalink

Nikons still have it as an option. Not sure about the Canons. Yes ML don't realy need it, although I guess it's a nice feature to have anyway, even if I (or anyone else) never use it. For the case of NIkon, it is helpful for lenses that are adapted from F-mount (although Tamron and Sigma lenses can be tuned with the docks, some of the cheaper ones, like Samyang and Rokinon cannot, and that's where in camera AF fine tune is helpful). Its one of those things that doesn't hurt anything if it's there, but nice to have if you need to tweak a lens.

Dec 16, 2019*permalink

AF Finetuning is in the Nikons for those that use 'old' lenses that were hand made. It might not be needed for modern lenses but it is still good they included this option into their Z. It can also be helpfull for those few lenses that fall out of the specifications and can be corrected this way.

Lenses are produced at location A - Cameras are being produced at location B. They only end up as a combination in the hand of the user. If both were at the outer end of the specification limits, the combination of both lens and camera could still need to have some correction applied to work fine.

Dec 16, 2019permalink

Hasa

The Nikon Z6/Z7 have it. It may be needed for predictive AF modes where emphasis is on speed rather than a feed-back loop of a series of adjustments giving increasingly sharp results, AKA "hunting" on a tiny scale. I have consistent results with a 300mm F lens on a Nikon FtZ adapter on the Z7. It required an adjustment of +3 once and for all. It is not about "mirrorless" vs. DSLR it is more about whether the AF routine has a feedback loop, that tests whether the calculated AF adjustment sent to the lens gave the optimal result or not. Lacking a feedback loop the AF software never really TESTS whether its calculations wee spot on. Hence for some specimens of lenses AFMA may be necessary. It is down to tolerances in the lens and adapter manufacturing process, I assume.

Dec 21, 2019permalink

trungtran

And i thought the front and back focus issues were limited to AF sensors on DSLRs.

I guess Canon is bringing it over to mirrorless now.

Dec 15, 2019permalink

J A C S

Canon are late in this game.

Dec 15, 2019permalink

barrym1966

I thought so too, back and front focusing was something that happened many years ago, certainly not in the mirrorless age

Dec 15, 2019permalink

Rensol

With phase focus it is possible depends on camera brain interpretation of the distance.
This woukd be cured by itself with contrast focusing as in case of contrast focusing lens shoukd move back and forth in the search of the best contrast/focus.
With phase focus lens focusing group mobes where camera tells it to move based on the calculation! of where is the optimal focus.
Sony FF bodies also have fine focus tuning for said reason.

Dec 15, 2019permalink

trungtran

So dual pixel is quick but can be prone to errors.

Canon can has another product feature it can put on higher end bodies being AFMA.

Third party lenses may have focus compatibility issues with Canon bodies.

Dec 15, 2019permalink

PredatorsPrey

The lens has two focusing groups with two seperate (linear) motors which is a new innovative way for focusing. I guess there's a slight discrepancy in the distance control for one of these groups for closer ranges causing the described front focus.

Dec 16, 2019permalink

thx1138

A long time ago companies paid you to be beta testers, now you pay them an obscene amount of money for an unfinished product. Did anybody even test the lens at mfd. It’s not an isolated incident and is trivially reproduced. QC is always one of the first victims of cost cutting

Dec 15, 2019permalink

Camera100

It is up to each buyer to decide whether waiting for a QC (review) or buying the lens now and risking quality issues. If you want the best quality of a product you should buy it near the end of the product’s life cycle and not when it just been launched. But there could be a value in getting a product early. So what’s the right decision?

Dec 15, 2019permalink

I guess it depends on how eager someone is to impress the other guys on the block by buying the latest and greatest.

If we're honest, very few, if any of us, actually *need* the latest gear. If we are any good as photographers, anything manufactured in the last 5-10 years is more than good enough.

Virtually all products have "teething troubles" because every manufacturer is under intense pressure from consumers, to get their products on the market quickly.

Most people have the sense to wait until a product has been on the market a few months. By then any issues will have been fixed via firmware updates or recalls, and the price will be considerably cheaper.

Dec 15, 2019*permalink

carton

It's a good and new thing that a large class of problems can be fixed without a recall. To some extent we're all in this together. Since the tool has a lifespan, the point where I would rather have the thing than not have it, to get the most value out of it, is pretty early.

I do expect them to do a lot of bench testing, though. It's strange an end user is the one to uncover a problem like this. It seems like a problem best uncovered by controlled conditions and good tools, not a rare problem you need large scale user testing to uncover.

Dec 15, 2019permalink

carton - I suspect that the vast majority of bug fixes with all brands are the result of user complaints (cameras being returned, or complaints brought to the manufacturer's attention via forums, dealers etc).

Early adopters are beta-testers. Unfortunately that's the chance you have to take if you buy early. You won't find pros buying early. They know the risks and can't afford to have cameras with "issues", so they rent new models for assessment and only use them for non-critical shoots.

Dec 15, 2019*permalink

Memoochi

I've run 3 different integrated business units, all of which had a large manufacturing component. QC is the last to get cut. When looking for cost savings, the first places to go are complexity: number of product, and then cut the tail end. The second place is to reduce the pipeline: cut the number of products in the development. The third is indirect, by outsourcing non core functions.

The ONLY time QC is seen as a lever is when inventory is too high, and finding ways to reduce time in QC correlates to reduced inventory.

Dec 16, 2019permalink

paulski66

Nice, very fast response from Canon. Even if the solution weren't immediately forthcoming, to acknowledge that there is an issue so quickly is outstanding. Nikon could learn a thing or two here...and I say that as a lifelong Nikon shooter.

Bravo!

Dec 14, 2019permalink

thenoilif

They likely already knew of the issue.

Dec 15, 2019permalink

Mac McCreery

Stuff happens. Chill.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

rajaramki

Canon's version of Boeing 737 Max?

Dec 14, 2019permalink

jxh

Missed focus will kill no one. It appears to be fully fixable in software.

And also, unlike a certain automobile, it has not resulted in crashed cars

Dec 15, 2019*permalink

Let's hope, but not that easy to do it in a moment, evidently!

Dec 15, 2019permalink

rajaramki

jxh
Analogy was just to compare the issue of fixing a hardware defect with software patch. No need to read beyond that.

Dec 17, 2019permalink

scokill

You should used stacked batteries on a table for a focus test.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Jennings Ford

Don't like that idea, because, batteries have round cases. You can not be sure you actually are focusing on the exact front of a particular battery or not. Perhaps a ruler with hash marks along its center from side to side and turned 45 degrees to be photographed.

Dec 18, 2019*permalink

visualenvy

Is the problem with the optical lens design itself? New form factor play a part?
Does the firmware correct for a firmware miscalculation or compensate for an optical flaw?
How was this simple test not performed during development?
How does the service engineer claim nothing is wrong yet Canon now state they are aware and a firmware update will be available?
Will the update be delivered via camera firmware or will the lens need to be sent back?

Dec 14, 2019permalink

What if the problem is mechanical, the lens still uses cams to move the glass.
The fix may be to change the closest focus to 2.4 ft from the current 2.3 ft.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

ozturert

Sometimes service engineers aren't informed. Probably Canon HQ analyzed the problem.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

visualenvy - Canon have stated that they are developing a firmware update to address the (dare I say it?) phenomenon.

I think it's exceedingly unlikely that a manufacturer with as much experience in optics as Canon would produce a lens with any significant "optical flaw", so IMO the most likely explanation is a data "miscalculation".

The problem for Canon is what to do, if this issue is caused by a probelm with the initial batch of some electronic component differing from specification. If they "correct" it with firmware via Canon bodies, how will this affect future batches of lenses in which the electronics are *within* specification?

Dec 14, 2019*permalink

Entoman,

That is a good question! Hopefully, all lenses just have to be returned to Canon for individual adjustment.

A firmware upgrade could easily upset the lenses that work OK!

Dec 15, 2019permalink

How would a firmware update for this lens affect other lenses?

Dec 16, 2019permalink

@dmanthree,

Entoman wondered what happens if some of the lenses of this 70-200 model are OK and some are not, what happens if a firmware update is introduced that is affecting the focusing of all the 70-200s, will it also affect those that worked perfectly before, will they then become faulty?!

Dec 16, 2019permalink

dmanthree - What I'm assuming is that the fault is in the first lens lens batch, and that Canon will correct the fault in future copies of the lens.

That effectively means there will be 2 versions of the lens floating about, i.e. those with the fault, and those without it.

Canon lens firmware is applied via the bodies. So if bodies are updated with new firmware, the danger is that they'll focus fine with some versions of the lens, but not with others. It's also possible that the firmware might adversely affect other models of lens.

Dec 16, 2019permalink

Fotoni

I would like to see the faces of people who bought this when they find out their photo subject looks blurry. Software error is the least bothersome to customer to fix, but before that the lens has more limited use.

No, I don't blame Canon alone. These are tons of reports from several premium lens brands with various problems. I had soft left side with Pentax DFA*50 and it was repaired with warranty, but it is annoying to see from photos and also the wait before you get the lens back.

Dec 14, 2019*permalink

Sad story and not unheard of.

Happily, I have not had such problems with my Pentax or Nikon lenses, nor the wife with her Panasonic and Olympus lenses, but we sure had a mixed back from Sony.

Dec 16, 2019permalink

The Silver Nemesis

It takes one negative attribute to anihilate 1000 positive attributes.

This is how human nature works (yep, no matter how hard you try, it is not related to the Sony Orc army here).

So: what might cause this “error”? Because, if the firmware will not fix it, that’s real trouble...

Dec 14, 2019permalink

I do not see a "Sony Orc army" around here, or any where. Yes there are people who like Sony (like me) and people who like Canon, Pentax, Nikon, Fuji or Olympus, but none of them are an army at all.
When something negative (like this one) comes out for a brand, some people will jump on it, but most people know that this happens with all brands. Canon is acting in hte right way by not ignoring the problem, but make a FW update to solve it. Great response from Canon here.
It is time we stop bashing other brands, just help each other to become better photographers with the gear we have chosen.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

The Silver Nemesis

gfrensen, I agree - but you will have to tell it louder, as my “Sony Orc army” is something reactive (and please believe me that I know what I am talking about; edit: check the comments below) - there are many here who do not understand that ANY camera today can produce outstanding results (and the limiting factor is the photographer itself).

Dec 14, 2019*permalink

I see loud talking people defending their brand from every brand. They come to places like this to tell how great their brand is, because it has 1/10000000000000 of a stop better DR or low light or what ever...
Or they tell that their camera has so great colours, although nobody can tell the brand of camera that took a given picture. Or they tell that their brand is...
these kind of persons are all over the place, not only Sony Orc armies, but armies of Canon zombies, and Nikon ghosts...

Dec 14, 2019*permalink

vscd

The Sonytrolls are somewhat special, believe us :)

Dec 14, 2019permalink

jxh

Extremely unlikely that it can't be fixed in firmware. As long as the basic design is decent, firmware can even compensate for hardware limitations (I personally think it's a software problem,not hardware)

Dec 15, 2019permalink

vscd - So true, so very true.

Dec 15, 2019permalink

Auf Reisen

Is this because of the cheap plastic body?

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Unlikely.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

AlexLex

I don't see anything cheap about this lens!?

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Michigan Photography

The Lens Rentals tear down indicates anything other than “cheap”.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Auf Reisen

I have been assured by multiple forum commentators and Youtube armchair experts that the use of anything other than the densest metal possible indicates cheap build quality. And I mean, they would know, wouldn't they?

Dec 14, 2019permalink

More than likely it is something that they can fix via firmware, and probably has little to nothing to do with physical construction (at least in terms of the barrel or other elements other than maybe the optics inside). But more than likely it's a software issue in the firmware.

Dec 15, 2019permalink

BIOGONS

Some SONY users have similar issue with the new 70-350 tele zoom lens. No answer from SONY yet...
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/63391811

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Jonathan Mac

I wonder what's causing it as my understanding is that focusing done using the imaging sensor is immune to front & back focusing as happens with DSLRs, which is caused by slight mis-alignment of the lens to imaging sensor compared to lens to focusing sensor.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Yes, focusing is done using data from the sensor, which are translated and sent to the lens where the corresponding electro-mechanical processes result in adjustments to the optical elements.

In this case, it seems the problem is in firmware, so one might assume the data or data interpretation (probably in firmware within the lens itself) introduces an error.

Dec 14, 2019*permalink

IamJF

But you should not get focus confirmation from the camera when your focus point is not sharp?

Dec 14, 2019permalink

spidermoon

Canon use dual focus, it’s like pdaf, with constrast detect i think there no front/back focus problem

Dec 14, 2019permalink

@IamJF One would think not - which suggests the issue may implicate the camera body firmware. It will be interesting to see if Canon's firmware fix full resolves it. Let's hope!

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Digimat

With phase detect, the camera calculates the position where the lens has to be driven to. and sends that information to the lens. it doesnt matter if you do phase detect on the image sensor or via a separate sensor (like in a dslr). thus, if something goes wrong in that chain of events, the lens will fail to archive correct focus.

they will release a firmware update and the problem will be gone.

Dec 15, 2019*permalink

IamJF

With PURE phase detection it would be that way and mirrorless would still make small focus errors.
But normally they use a combined focusing, detect the distance with pd and do the last mm with contrast detection. You have to analyse the picture anyway (eye detection etc) and you only get that precise with contrast detection and some understanding of the picture.

And I'm sure they can find the mistake, no big thing. It's just technical interesting what's going on.

Dec 15, 2019permalink

pollup

This is simply a case of lack of QC. Fortunately, early adopters worked as beta testers, and for free! The lens will be perfectly fine after the firmware fix.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

dtibi

Without QC probably you would get a very buggy randomly behaving lens. Corporate internal softwares and basically any other internal tools are like that. Probably the lens calibration process has a minor flaw or some process gap, maybe design mistake. My dslr makes worse focusing mistakes randomly. Also look at many sigma lenses, their factory calibration is straigth garbage so you need to buy the dock, and tweak it manually to make it useable.

Dec 14, 2019*permalink

Crypt Keeper

What? Wasn't it a marvel?

Dec 14, 2019permalink

It is, most innovative lens released in a While.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

PankajDubey

No , it was a phenomenon ;-)

Dec 14, 2019permalink

The Silver Nemesis

Even the Crypt Keepers are no longer what they were...

Dec 14, 2019permalink

mick232

It's not a bug, it's a feature. They call it nose-detect AF.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Thomas Mottl

Banana lens, it ripens at the customer :)

Dec 14, 2019permalink

KLO82

I wish Canon release a similar lens for EF mount (without the focusing issue, of course).

Dec 14, 2019permalink

We won't be seeing anymore EF lenses. I'm not familiar with this RF. What is the difference between it and the EF 70-200 2.8 II other than the barrel moving in and out?

Dec 14, 2019*permalink

davev8

Zeee its takes a 1/3 less room up in your bag

Dec 14, 2019permalink

I see. Thanks.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

KLO82

This lens is 1070g only, compared to EF version which is 1440g. This one is probably the lightest 70-200mm f2.8 ever (for any mount).

Of course Canon will make new EF lenses. Many professionals use DSLRs and will continue to do so due to lag free viewfinder.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

I'm thinking the pro version that is rumoured to come out next spring may address that. I don't know anything about Sony but I think I read it is better? Or si this still just an issue that is dictated by physics?

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Zeee - I think you are wrong about their being no more EF lenses.

There probably won't be any in 2020 because Canon will obviously be concentrating design and production efforts on RF.

But independents such as Sigma have caught up with, and sometimes surpassed the optical quality of existing EF lenses, so Canon will want to release more of their own EF lenses to compete with them.

I do however believe that future EF lenses will be purely iterative updates, rather than completely new designs.

Dec 14, 2019*permalink

Mister Anders0n

But MILCs don't need AF fine tuning?!!! LOL. What are the actual advantages of ML again, 'cuz I'm just not seeing it. The only advantage is for the camera makers, who have suckered people into selling all their old glass, and replacing it with new glass that does the exact same thing.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Shadow9d9

This has nothing to do with fine tuning. It is something faulty across the board. You never need to calibrate on mirrorless. How desperate are you?

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Barple

You're not understanding the difference between Canon MILCs and other MILCs.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

pollup

I was looking for the dislike button, unfortunately there isn't one, I'm sure it would be at 50+. So much ignorance here.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Neo, are you using glass from the 1960's then? Or a 8x10 view camwra? Because all brands make new stuff and are always trying to coax you away from your money.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Barple. What is the difference between Canon and other MILC's? I'm not asking to stir anything up. I'm just curios.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

MFA numbers on my EF 70-200 2.8 II were out far to much on my DLSR for my liking. Canon found a mis-calibrated board in the lens. Manufacturing or FW glitches can happen.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

There is something wrong with the lens, not a major thing, but it is wrong indeed. So this has to be solved and Canon is doing it. This did happen in the DSLR time, and now in the MILC time. glitches do happen!
The focus system is a lot more complicated (both for DSLRs as for MILCs) then people realize. So problems with the system can happen!

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Mister Anders0n

Aww, I see I offended the little, mirrorless snowflakes. Poor babies.

@Pollup
I'm sure your IQ is around 50-

@Shadow
Only true if the camera uses purely CDAF. At any rate, the fact of the matter is, the camera is indeed missing focus. So yes, ML cameras don't always have perfect focus. It may not happen for the same reasons as on a DSLR, but as we've just seen, it does happen.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Mister Anders0n: Your first comment was flawed. And your last one is flawed too!
Nobody is telling that mirrorless cameras always focus perfectly.
And yes there is a slight problem (when you look into it you will see that most people would never notice the problem) with the given lens that will be fixed by Canon. Again it is a LENS problem, not a focus problem caused by the AF system in the camera.
So before making stupid remarks about peoples IQ I would say that you look into your own IQ...

Dec 21, 2019permalink

CaPi

As with any ambitious product kinks at an early stage do happen. They’ll fix it

Dec 14, 2019permalink

George Zip

Early adopters beware I guess

Dec 14, 2019permalink

RedFox88

Buyers

Dec 14, 2019permalink

It's not like the lens doesnt work you know. At 200mm at minimum focus it's out 3mm. Three millimetres. For people shooting sports, or landscape or portraits most would never even notice. Now, if you're trying to shoot test charts at pseudo macro distances, you might. But then that's the wrong lenses for such leisure. 🤓

Dec 14, 2019permalink

George Zip

For sure. It just seems the are often bugs and annoyances on anything new to market.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Perhaps. But they are far outweighed by the benefits and shooting pleasure they bring.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Yes there are more bugs and annoyances today then there were in the past. Why? Thanks to the internet! This "problem" wouldn't been found at all when this lens was used on a old film camera as we accepted these very small glitches and thought it was our own mistake. In the digital time we can look up at our pictures to very close range and can see the problem, then we put it on the internet and everybody (owning this lens) can see the problem. Then a FW update is issued to solve it.
In the end we all get better thanks to this, although not many would find this problem in their daily work with the lens.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Well this is pretty rare when it comes to Canon lenses. Not saying it OK I don't think I'll stop being an early adopter because of this. Mind you I don't own it but it still wouldn't stop me in the future.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

wcan

Nothing like a really well built modern marvel!

Dec 14, 2019*permalink

You don't think it's well built? The genius award awaits your reply.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

It is well Extremely well built, light as a f4 version, short as a 24-70mm when you zoom out and sharpest in its class so you are right it is a well built marvel :)

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Closest focus is 2.3 ft, does the lens focus correctly at 2.4 or 2.5 ft at 200mm or what is the closest distance it will focus correctly at?

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Who cares, Canon are fixing it as we waffle.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

My point that I did not make clear was that if the focus issue is only at the closest focus distance of 2.3 ft and not at 2.4 ft, it wouldn't be a problem for me and likely not for most people; I have a 105mm macro for close work.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Edmond Leung

I still put more trust in EF L series legacy lenses. I experienced bug-free in all my EF L series lenses during the past 10 years.
Better to wait for one more year before investing in the large aperture RF lenses.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

https://photographylife.com/what-is-focus-shift

In this case, it appears that the hardware itself may be bug free, and the issue is in the firmware.

Not sure if that means camera firmware or (more likely) lens firmware - but either way it's not a physical/manufacturing issue.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

akjos

That's still way better then any Dslr combo would do probably. As much as i liked OVF I will never buy one again just because of focus issues and no amount of AF tuning fixing them consistently. This is actually not bad at all .

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Discombobulated

Leica would be all over the place front, back and shift too. lol

Dec 14, 2019permalink

four under

Whatever.

Dec 15, 2019permalink

Frank_BR

A mirrorless camera should not suffer from problems with front-focusing because, unlike DSLR cameras, the AF sensor and the image sensor are always in exactly the same plane (in many mirrorless cameras, the image sensor is the AF sensor itself).

The only possibility I can imagine is that the Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8 suffers from focus shift, which is when the spherical aberration causes the focus plane to shift slightly with the aperture.

If a lens suffers focus shift and the AF system focuses using the lens wide open lens as usual, the image would be slightly out of focus for smaller apertures.

Dec 14, 2019*permalink

weisman

I was thinking this too... but hey I'm not an optical/electrical engineer.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

rrc1967

no, it's not focus shift. shots are wide open and missing focus.

there's no guarantees if a) the AF logic is open loop b) relies only on phase detect - that even with mirrorless errors can occur in calculations.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Prolenscamera

Actually, a front-focusing problem is a focus-shift problem (shifting can be to the left or to the right). Front-focusing is the symptom of lens focusing in front of intended focus point and can be caused by many reasons and affects particularly (though not exclusively, mirrorless are also affected) DSLRs. Here, it is probably caused by lens/motor/algorithm imperfections (more visible at high magnification).

Dec 14, 2019*permalink

miles green

What? i thought this kind of thing was reserved to dslrs!

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Prolenscamera

Actually, front-focusing is the symptom of lens focusing in front of intended focus point and can be caused by many reasons and affects particularly (though not exclusively, mirrorless are also affected) DSLRs. Here, it is probably caused by lens/motor/algorithm imperfections (more visible at high magnification).

Dec 14, 2019*permalink

dlb41

Tony Northrup reported on this as well. He says that it's a common problem. He has had many such instances with other long lenses.

Dec 13, 2019permalink

Has he declared that Canon is going out of business because of this major gaffe? That's usually his style.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

AlexLex

Fony Northrup is just a YT personality that runs Northrup's reality show. Alpha click baiter, liar and many more...

Dec 14, 2019permalink

ozturert

Canon said they'll fix it with firmware update.

Dec 13, 2019permalink

What if the problem is mechanical, the lens still uses cams for focusing.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

ozturert

Canon SAID they will fix it.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

The firmware fix could be to change the closest focus from 2.3 ft to 2.4 ft or more to correct an issue with a cam. Unlikely, but maybe.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

istscott

That's interesting. Maybe some calibration issue at the factory. I've had a few EF lenses exhibit inconsistency with focus on EF-M cameras like the M50 (a new EF 85mm f1.8 for example), so putting phase detect on the sensor isn't a silver bullet. My EF-M 32mm f1.4 is by far most consistently focusing lens.

Dec 13, 2019permalink

GinoSVK

Problem with this lens also mean you have this lens, which is not that bad at the end.

Dec 13, 2019permalink

R5D4

That is a very valid point

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Karroly

In other words, the lens that never fails is the one you do not own... ;-)

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Tapper123

I'm sure they'll fix it via firmware. It's an amazing looking lens, and I'm not even a Canon user.

Dec 13, 2019*permalink

(unknown member)

I can take all your Canon gear if you're switching brands. For free of course

Dec 13, 2019permalink

bardick

I can beat your offer, I will pay the postage.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Funniest thing ever, DSLR fans jumping on this article to chortle about mirrorless AF accuracy, as if they don't know the difference between a software coding error and the limitations of a technology as a whole.

Dec 13, 2019permalink

Wanderer23

What's a DSLR?

Dec 13, 2019permalink

Mister Anders0n

Don't worry about it, bro. It's what the pros use.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

Shadow9d9

Don't forget to add a random apostrophe when typing pros!

Dec 14, 2019permalink

What is the definition of 'Pro' Mister AnderS0n?

As I know many people who earn their full income and living with a mirrorless camera these days. I also know a lot of amateur shooters still working with a DSLR calling themselves 'pro' but can't make a dime through photography.

Dec 16, 2019*permalink

torogeephoto

fPrime be like: No there's nothing wrong with the lens. canon lenses are perfect.

Dec 13, 2019permalink

fPrime

Actually, no, I find it quite funny too that this Canon mirrorless lens has an AF issue at MFD. It shows that Canon, just like Nikon, still has teething problems with its first generation mirrorless.

Actually proud that DPR is reporting on a user problem here. If only they had done the same in 2012 when users were complaining their D800’s couldn’t focus with the Left AF points!

Dec 13, 2019permalink

Its not canons first generation mirrorless cameras, their first milc was 2012

Dec 14, 2019permalink

marc petzold

@Johans81

It's Canons 1st Fullframe DSLMs (EOS R & RP) Sony is at the 4th Stage here-by, because the A7 1st Gen came out into Oct. 2013, and a little later, the A7R/S iterations. A7R IV is current, whileas the A7 is at the Mark III Stage, and the A7S just at Mark II. Weird world. Therefore, Sony does have a few years advance of Canikon & Panasonic. Without the A7 Series, perhaps Canikon still would rely just 2019 on DSLRs only, and APS-C Mirrorless, but no Fullframe DSLMs, one must admit. Panasonic also.

And Canon came late into 2012 to the DSLM Party, Nikon was already being there 2011, with the Nikon 1 J1/V1, and Sony even into 2010, with the NEX-3/5 Bodies - so what? Canon is often late, and not the "Inventor" as they claim to be. They're only Leader in terms of Market Share, and therefore, since the EOS EF System started into March 1987, have sold tons of L-Mount Lenses, and the Pros switched from Nikon to Canon, because of the quirks from the Nikon F4, etc.

Good Light.

Dec 14, 2019permalink

LenRivers

The issue with front focusing can be resolved by removing the lens cap after you turn on the camera... :)

Dec 13, 2019permalink

Rootbeer Man

OVF is best than EVF and LiveView. 🤔

Dec 13, 2019permalink