Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

How many 20Ds have had auto focus calibrated

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
April 29, 2005 3:12:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

It's odd that I bought 2, 20Ds last year and both needed to have the back
focus calibrated. One focused forward of the focus point and the other aft
of it. I thought because they had similar serial numbers they might have
been from a "made on monday" batch but recently I've come across others
who also have focus problems and the latest 20D I bought is out of focus
too.

When I took this one back to Canon, the female I gave it to with
copies of the charts showing the problem couldn't have cared less when I
told her I couldn't afford to be without this 'new' camera for the
six weeks she quoted for the adjustment. I guess I'll have to decide to
either stand douwn one photographer or buy another camera for her and use
this as a spare when it comes back. This happened at Christmas and I don't
feel like repeating the fiascoe.

It seems to me thatCanon SLRs are poorly made and even more poorly
serviced - in Australia at any rate. Anyone have any experiences to add?

Douglas
Anonymous
April 29, 2005 3:12:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Sheldon wrote:

> Now, now. Let's play nice.

Why? FUDsters need to be squished like the intellectual cucarachas
they are.
Anonymous
April 29, 2005 7:21:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Douglas FUDdled:

> [... he owns a 1DMkII, an SD9, and 20D that he doesn't want to have
repaired
> because he has no backup, or something ...]
>
> [...]
>
> If someone gave me the choice of taking only one camera into the
jungle and
> I could choose from a SD9 or 20D, I'd take the SD9 based on the
performance
> and servicability I've had from the Canon's. The single most reliable
Canon
> I've had was a 10D and even this would often lock when I changed
lenses and
> need to be rebooted. My question was to discove if anyone else has
had these
> problems. The shutter activations of this camera are at 16,000 and
despite
> the glowing reports about these cameras, I have not found them to be
as
> reliable as their 35mm counterparts were/are.

In one hand, we have N million "glowing reports".

On the other hand, we have one (1) FUDster.
Related resources
April 30, 2005 12:25:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Sheldon" <sheldon@XXXXXXXXsopris.net> wrote in message
news:6NSdnXwZEv_F_O_fRVn-tA@comcast.com...
>
> Now, now. Let's play nice. I'm curious if you did your own experiments
> regarding focus, and if you were able to manually focus and do a better
> job? I'm not saying you don't have a problem with your camera, but
> sometimes focus and exposure problems are not the camera but the user,
> especially with autofocus.
>
Randall is just being Randall. Eventually he will realize this (or any
other) group is not his alone.

I made a chart of lines with Corel draw which has a facility to duplicate
lines at exact intervals. In my case it was every 2 mm but could be less or
more, depending on the lens being used. I put 2 rows of them about 50 mm
apart and one horizontal line in the middle as the point of focus.

I used a 24~70 f2.8 "L" series lens locked at f2.8 with the camera on a
tripod and used mirror lock to avoid any shake. The lens does indeed focus
correctly when I use manual. Perhaps it focuses on the front of the line
instead of the back but it's splitting hairs to decide. The autofocus on
this camera was grabbing focus 20mm past the focus point at 450mm distance @
60mm focal length.

If you only ever shot objects at 4 or 5 metre distance and used f5.6 or
smaller, the amount of error is not noticable. This camera has been doing
portraits for several months and no one noticed the error until I shot a
wedding ring on a bride's finger and it was out of focus. That's when I
spent the time to check all our cameras. Even the 1D MkII does not pull
focus on the focus point but it is so close, I decided not to send it back
too.

I originally bought an SD9 Sigma after being dissapointed in the extreme
with a Fuji (Nikon) I bought as my first entry to digital. Ever since then
the SD9 has been the mainstay backup camera for all my lengthy shoots. It
does not resolve the detail of a 20D and it does have some odd behaviour due
to the sensor but what is totally undeniable is that it's complete
reliability compared to the Canons we have.

If someone gave me the choice of taking only one camera into the jungle and
I could choose from a SD9 or 20D, I'd take the SD9 based on the performance
and servicability I've had from the Canon's. The single most reliable Canon
I've had was a 10D and even this would often lock when I changed lenses and
need to be rebooted. My question was to discove if anyone else has had these
problems. The shutter activations of this camera are at 16,000 and despite
the glowing reports about these cameras, I have not found them to be as
reliable as their 35mm counterparts were/are.

Douglas
April 30, 2005 3:49:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Douglas wrote:

> It's odd that I bought 2, 20Ds last year and both needed to have the back
> focus calibrated.

How DARE you post a negative coment about a canon product. BURN HIM!!!

--

Stacey
Anonymous
April 30, 2005 3:49:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 23:49:07 -0400, Stacey <fotocord@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Douglas wrote:
>
>> It's odd that I bought 2, 20Ds last year and both needed to have the back
>> focus calibrated.
>
>How DARE you post a negative coment about a canon product. BURN HIM!!!

First we must test him, dunk him in the lake, if he drowns he is not a witch, if
he doesn't drown he is a witch and must be burned!
April 30, 2005 1:07:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Bill Spanger" <k7kkg@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b90671hn1kugqt1fv47avbe80e51ru5k18@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 23:49:07 -0400, Stacey <fotocord@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Douglas wrote:
>>
>>> It's odd that I bought 2, 20Ds last year and both needed to have the
>>> back
>>> focus calibrated.
>>
>>How DARE you post a negative coment about a canon product. BURN HIM!!!
>
> First we must test him, dunk him in the lake, if he drowns he is not a
> witch, if
> he doesn't drown he is a witch and must be burned!
>
>
And me... A deciple of EOS
Oh well, can't help bad luck!
Anonymous
April 30, 2005 4:42:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Douglas" <decipleofeos@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:p an.2005.04.29.11.12.28.391000@yahoo.com...
> It's odd that I bought 2, 20Ds last year and both needed to have the back
> focus calibrated. One focused forward of the focus point and the other aft
> of it. I thought because they had similar serial numbers they might have
> been from a "made on monday" batch but recently I've come across others
> who also have focus problems and the latest 20D I bought is out of focus
> too.
>
> When I took this one back to Canon, the female I gave it to with
> copies of the charts showing the problem couldn't have cared less when I
> told her I couldn't afford to be without this 'new' camera for the
> six weeks she quoted for the adjustment. I guess I'll have to decide to
> either stand douwn one photographer or buy another camera for her and use
> this as a spare when it comes back. This happened at Christmas and I don't
> feel like repeating the fiascoe.
>
> It seems to me thatCanon SLRs are poorly made and even more poorly
> serviced - in Australia at any rate. Anyone have any experiences to add?
>
> Douglas

I wonder if some 20Ds have the autofocus sensor slightly higher or lower
than the target on the focussing screen, or is the vertical height of the
sensor large enough that it might focus on a line other than the one in the
vertical center of the frame? It seems that everyone who is reporting
problems with back focus is using a test chart slanted relative to the focal
plane. This would be a definate problem if the central, cross shaped sensor
is being used for the autofocus test.

It would seem like a more valid test to focus on a test target that is
parallel to the focal plane and then compare the blown-up auto and manual
focus digital images.

Dean
April 30, 2005 5:17:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Douglas" <decipleofeos@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:p an.2005.04.29.11.12.28.391000@yahoo.com...
> It's odd that I bought 2, 20Ds last year and both needed to have the back
> focus calibrated. One focused forward of the focus point and the other aft
> of it. I thought because they had similar serial numbers they might have
> been from a "made on monday" batch but recently I've come across others
> who also have focus problems and the latest 20D I bought is out of focus
> too.
>
> When I took this one back to Canon, the female I gave it to with
> copies of the charts showing the problem couldn't have cared less when I
> told her I couldn't afford to be without this 'new' camera for the
> six weeks she quoted for the adjustment. I guess I'll have to decide to
> either stand douwn one photographer or buy another camera for her and use
> this as a spare when it comes back. This happened at Christmas and I don't
> feel like repeating the fiascoe.
>
> It seems to me thatCanon SLRs are poorly made and even more poorly
> serviced - in Australia at any rate. Anyone have any experiences to add?
>
> Douglas

No focus problems here - sharp as hell. Infact I've had _zero_ problems with
my 20D since I bought it over 6mos ago.
Anonymous
April 30, 2005 8:06:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Dean Franks wrote:

> It would seem like a more valid test to focus on a test target that is
> parallel to the focal plane and then compare the blown-up auto and manual
> focus digital images.

What I found to be the 'right way' (for me anyway) was a very oblique
shot towards a target lying flat. But at the intended focal point, I
placed a round metal part with the front edge right on the goal line.
For manually focussing, this was neccesary and placing the AF FP there
allowed it to AF as well. Good light is of course neccesary as well to
create the neccessary contrast.

For AF tests, the oblique is the way to go.
For focus/sharpness tests, the parallel to the film plane is the way to go.

Cheers,
Alan.




--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 12:45:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In message <d50ofc$k85$1@inews.gazeta.pl>,
Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>For focus/sharpness tests, the parallel to the film plane is the way to go.

But then, you really don't know if you're focused.

Personally, I like a 5 to 10 degree angle between the target and the
focal plane, because *something* is probably going to be in focus, and
if it isn't under the camera's focus point, then you know that the
system is miscalibrated.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
Anonymous
May 1, 2005 12:45:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

JPS@no.komm wrote:

> In message <d50ofc$k85$1@inews.gazeta.pl>,
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>For focus/sharpness tests, the parallel to the film plane is the way to go.
>
>
> But then, you really don't know if you're focused.

Then revert to the oblique. Most appropriate for AF testing.

>
> Personally, I like a 5 to 10 degree angle between the target and the
> focal plane, because *something* is probably going to be in focus, and
> if it isn't under the camera's focus point, then you know that the
> system is miscalibrated.

Go really oblique with a fine line, high contrast target and you will
really see how close the AF is.

Cheers,
Alan.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
!