# 5D Mark iii focusing issues



## naterz (Mar 26, 2012)

Hi there!

I've had the 5D3 for 3 days and I'm loving it so far. Despite one big major pitfall. While the AF is lightning fast, it seems to produce soft images. I had issues with 50-70% of my images turning out very soft, even in controlled conditions. I decided to print out a focusing chart and see if my lens was back/front focusing. Turns out in my test, it was severely backfocusing. Corrected the probably (-15 af fine tune) and was in love with what I was getting with anything 4-8 feet away from me. Then I took a picture of something further away, and now it severely back focuses. As in, the camera/lens need the AF fine tune with close subjects, but not with far subjects. So how do I calibrate for back focusing when I'm close to my subject, but then normal or front focusing when I'm far from my subject.


----------



## dwischnewski (Mar 26, 2012)

Bring your lens in for calibrating. Best to do it together with the camera. But it might not be the camera after all. Check again with your old camera.


----------



## peederj (Mar 26, 2012)

It would be useful if people posted their relevant settings when making complaints. So what AF mode and point selection are you using? This is a completely new and complex autofocus system and I wouldn't do manual calibration until I had mastered it completely. I have no idea if you've done that study from this post, but if you haven't fully understood the system, default away all those calibrations as they may just hang over your situation.


----------



## JR (Mar 26, 2012)

naterz said:


> Hi there!
> 
> I've had the 5D3 for 3 days and I'm loving it so far. Despite one big major pitfall. While the AF is lightning fast, it seems to produce soft images. I had issues with 50-70% of my images turning out very soft, even in controlled conditions. I decided to print out a focusing chart and see if my lens was back/front focusing. Turns out in my test, it was severely backfocusing. Corrected the probably (-15 af fine tune) and was in love with what I was getting with anything 4-8 feet away from me. Then I took a picture of something further away, and now it severely back focuses. As in, the camera/lens need the AF fine tune with close subjects, but not with far subjects. So how do I calibrate for back focusing when I'm close to my subject, but then normal or front focusing when I'm far from my subject.



I experienced something similar with my 5DmkIII using even the single spot center focus point (hey, am still used to my old obsolete AF system from my mkII after all ). I did not try MA because I decided to get a different unit and returned the one I had instead...


----------



## naterz (Mar 26, 2012)

peederj said:


> It would be useful if people posted their relevant settings when making complaints. So what AF mode and point selection are you using? This is a completely new and complex autofocus system and I wouldn't do manual calibration until I had mastered it completely. I have no idea if you've done that study from this post, but if you haven't fully understood the system, default away all those calibrations as they may just hang over your situation.



I'm on a tripod shooting at a tack sharp image on a wall using the center focus point on one shot AF. There's not a lot you can mess up there. If I don't put in any AF fine tuning, the image looks somewhat great at distances greater than 10-12 feet. But as soon as I get closer (4-8 feet), the image is badly soft and back focused. Again...on a tripod, center focus point. If I fine tune the lens, I get great results at 4-8 feet, but as soon as I move the tripod back to 10-12 feet, now the images are severely front focused.


----------



## naterz (Mar 26, 2012)

JR said:


> naterz said:
> 
> 
> > Hi there!
> ...



I may end up doing this.  I don't want to. Are you just returning it and re-buying it or did you send it into Canon?


----------



## peederj (Mar 26, 2012)

naterz said:


> peederj said:
> 
> 
> > It would be useful if people posted their relevant settings when making complaints. So what AF mode and point selection are you using? This is a completely new and complex autofocus system and I wouldn't do manual calibration until I had mastered it completely. I have no idea if you've done that study from this post, but if you haven't fully understood the system, default away all those calibrations as they may just hang over your situation.
> ...



So the different autofocus modes (available from the M.Fn button) you are using the leftmost spot focusing mode? because that is a very narrow pinpoint focus. I wonder if changing the mode to different ones (say expand or surround) will alter the situation.


----------



## naterz (Mar 26, 2012)

peederj said:


> naterz said:
> 
> 
> > peederj said:
> ...



No I'm using the one right next to that. Just the normal spot focus. Not the "NARROW" spot focus that there's an option for. The spot focus SHOULD be able to hand a flat image on a wall on a tripod in complete controlled environment with plenty of light...right!?


----------



## JR (Mar 26, 2012)

naterz said:


> JR said:
> 
> 
> > I experienced something similar with my 5DmkIII using even the single spot center focus point (hey, am still used to my old obsolete AF system from my mkII after all ). I did not try MA because I decided to get a different unit and returned the one I had instead...
> ...



I returned it and since my local dealer did not have other unit in stock and since I already decided to get the 1DX as well I decided to wait for the 1DX instead and also wait to see what happens in the next few weeks to be honest. I am sure this camera is amazing, so no way I am switching because of this - BTW my dealer wanted me to try the D4 and D800 in the store before I left to convince me to pre-order them instead. This is when I realized how much I love the ergonomic of the canon stuff! For me in the end I decided that if I was going to have the 1DX, the sensor of the new 5DmkIII seem to close in real life use to the 1DX to justify having both camera. Will keep my second body money for the 5DX!


----------



## peederj (Mar 26, 2012)

You scared me into doing the leaning ruler test (a'la the lens cal things they charge $80 for). On my 24-105L, 5d3, I tested every af mode without any prior calibration at a close and far distance...and I'm happy to report the focus was always dead on to the millimeter.

So there is at least one 5d3 in the world that with a 3 year old 24-105L focuses perfectly straight out of the box.

Sorry if your camera and lens fairs worse than this, but I am really impressed with the AF system!


----------



## naterz (Mar 26, 2012)

peederj said:


> You scared me into doing the leaning ruler test (a'la the lens cal things they charge $80 for). On my 24-105L, 5d3, I tested every af mode without any prior calibration at a close and far distance...and I'm happy to report the focus was always dead on to the millimeter.
> 
> So there is at least one 5d3 in the world that with a 3 year old 24-105L focuses perfectly straight out of the box.
> 
> Sorry if your camera and lens fairs worse than this, but I am really impressed with the AF system!



Thanks for Posting! That's seriously great to hear. I want so bad to love this camera, but haven't been able to yet because of that. I need to test with another lens as well to see if it's just the lens or just the body or a bit of both.


----------



## JR (Mar 26, 2012)

peederj said:


> You scared me into doing the leaning ruler test (a'la the lens cal things they charge $80 for). On my 24-105L, 5d3, I tested every af mode without any prior calibration at a close and far distance...and I'm happy to report the focus was always dead on to the millimeter.
> 
> So there is at least one 5d3 in the world that with a 3 year old 24-105L focuses perfectly straight out of the box.
> 
> Sorry if your camera and lens fairs worse than this, but I am really impressed with the AF system!



Encouraging.


----------



## DanielG (Mar 26, 2012)

I did the ruler test as well.

Used mirror lock up and a remote shutter release and everything hits the mark. Canon 24-70mm, Sigma 50mm 1.4, ect..

Are you viewing these photos in DPP? When I import the photos from the camera DPP makes them look extremely soft. (I don't use DPP for anything other than downloading photos). So after I download them, I noticed they look very soft through the application. After I import to CS5 they are definitely not soft at all.


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (Mar 26, 2012)

JR said:


> naterz said:
> 
> 
> > Hi there!
> ...



I had a similar problem with my 5dii but it wasn't with all lenses and I didn't sort it until the warranty was out. After that Canon agreed to calibrate lens / camera combinations for free under CPS membership, but I really WISH I had returned the body and got a new one  It's been the bane of my life every time I buy a new lens


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 26, 2012)

this sounds like what I am experiencing with focusing, vastly different results at different ranges :'(


----------



## PhotoMoose (Mar 27, 2012)

The focus issue is ruining my day, so I spent the day seeing if I could convince myself I made a mistake buying. THe only thing I can conclude so far is that with my 300 f2.8 (we can all agree is a very sharp lens) it may be slightly front focused which is easy to fix on the new 5D3. You can see from the images attached that this test is non conclusive with the 24-105 f4. Real world images with the 24-105 are sharp.


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 27, 2012)

photomoose this is EXACTLY what is happening with mine too!


----------



## dabocx (Mar 27, 2012)

I hope i get lucky with mine, if not im just going to trade it for another or just send it in to canon.


----------



## JR (Mar 27, 2012)

Is it possible the tolerance of the new AF system is much tighter in what it accept from the lenses, with the result that maybe more then in the past we will need MA to "bring" our lenses within the new 61 pts range?

From many different threads, a lot seem to experience some sort of erratic behavior from the AF, but all will say at the same time the new AF is great!?!?


----------



## PhotoMoose (Mar 27, 2012)

I'm trying to convince myself that I agree. I sold my mkiv on the hopes that the AF would be faster and better in low light conditions and that seems to be so( I thought the mark iv was very slow in AF and awful in low light). The high ISO of 25,600 is also much better, but really for my applications I'm happy with the improvements with most real life applications like 3k to 6k ISO and they are much improved. So if adjusting the AF for each lens makes the difference I give the camera 'two thumbs up'. Logic tells me that Canon would not release a camera that was producing soft images, but am surprised that their software got out with major issues. That does give me pause.


----------



## PhotoMoose (Mar 27, 2012)

One more example of my test. The dog was shot at ISO 800 70-200 f2.8, 1/8000, center focus point and Al Servo. I think it is more than except-able. The moose was shot at ISO 250, 300mm aperture f3.2 center focal point. Tight crop and no sharpening or color enhancement. Again, I think were off to a good start. These are from converted raw files using the Photoshop techniques available with DNG files. So these are my thoughts and results of my tests today. Would like to see other results and thoughts. Thanks everyone, I think I can sleep tonight.


----------



## tron (Mar 27, 2012)

This whole situation worries me a little. Anyway I was not going to get a 5DmkIII soon because of the price and the fact that my 5DmkII pleases me (for static subjects) and is not used too much at the same time. However being a Canon fan with a lot of lenses I would like to know that everything is OK with 5DmkIII so as to continue relying on Canon. I do not want to switch. I have started using Canon since 1988 with an EOS620 and built upon it. Let's hope that what was mentioned here was an exception.


----------



## JR (Mar 27, 2012)

PhotoMoose said:


> One more example of my test. The dog was shot at ISO 800 70-200 f2.8, 1/8000, center focus point and Al Servo. I think it is more than except-able. The moose was shot at ISO 250, 300mm aperture f3.2 center focal point. Tight crop and no sharpening or color enhancement. Again, I think were off to a good start. These are from converted raw files using the Photoshop techniques available with DNG files. So these are my thoughts and results of my tests today. Would like to see other results and thoughts. Thanks everyone, I think I can sleep tonight.



While these are really nice Photomoose, they look a bit soft to my eye at 100% crop. I remember seing similar shots taken with a 1DIV which were much sharper (I think from The Digital Picture with Brian or maybe it was Brian S, from this forum)...


----------



## PhotoMoose (Mar 27, 2012)

Yes, that is my point. I made the switch from my mrkIV on the promise of improved focus. The 5Dmrk3 is much faster to focus, but not seeing better results. The improvements in high ISO is noticeable, but for my application (wildlife and scenic) shooting in the dark is not really applicable. Sharpness and speed of focus is key for me. Could the 61 point focus system be so technically advanced that many users will have difficulty using it and achieving focus? Could it be that advanced? I have established that I'm a fool for selling my mrkIV, now what is a fool to do? Return the 5Dmrk3 and than purchase what? I'm asking myself if it is time to jump ship? Considering the issues with this focus system not sure that the 1DX will be any different, after all the 1DX has the same focus system. The only other advantage of the 1DX is the weather proof body and 14 fps. I don't shoot in the rain and unless your shooting hummingbirds I don't need 14fps either. I have one more test and calibration test to do today, then its decision time. It still bothers me that canon released a camera with focus issues and DPP software that is not up to the task. Canon has been quoted saying that the software fix will take 'some time'. REALLY? What where they using when they tested this camera?


----------



## mrmarks (Mar 27, 2012)

Is the sharpness problem due to the DPP software problem, or is it due to lenses needing microadjustment? With my 5D2, all my L zoom and prime lenses did not need any microadjustment and it seems that the focus is factory calibrated to zero MA for most lenses. I use this MA method with great results so far http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/cameras/1ds3_af_micoadjustment.html I am just so surprised that the 5D3 has so much sharpness issue and I hope that it is more of the DPP software issue rather than a hardware issue. I am holding back my purchase of the 5D3 until the dust settles on this and a couple other issues with the 5D3.


----------



## PhotoMoose (Mar 27, 2012)

That is part of my disappointment. I have not used the DPP software because of the known issues. I'm using the Adobe DNG converter and photoshop and than maybe importing into lightroom, but going from the converter to photoshop is the best option at this time (actually its the only option). At the risk of repeating myself, I'm uncomfortable with the fact that the camera is released without any software that can process the images. Its a big leap of faith to assume that all is well with the raw images when cannon has not released software that can process them and the raw images where not available to the pre-testers either. Since I'm not using the DPP software it seems to be a hardware issue, but It could be operator error. Maybe the focus system is so advanced that it requires schooling to achieve acceptable results. I just don't know. Learned a big lesson, never buy a pre-released product. My father taught me to never throw away your old shoes until you have a good new pair. I forgot that lesson this time.


----------



## mrmarks (Mar 27, 2012)

PhotoMoose said:


> That is part of my disappointment. I have not used the DPP software because of the known issues. I'm using the Adobe DNG converter and photoshop and than maybe importing into lightroom, but going from the converter to photoshop is the best option at this time (actually its the only option). At the risk of repeating myself, I'm uncomfortable with the fact that the camera is released without any software that can process the images. Its a big leap of faith to assume that all is well with the raw images when cannon has not released software that can process them and the raw images where not available to the pre-testers either. Since I'm not using the DPP software it seems to be a hardware issue, but It could be operator error. Maybe the focus system is so advanced that it requires schooling to achieve acceptable results. I just don't know. Learned a big lesson, never buy a pre-released product. My father taught me to never throw away your old shoes until you have a good new pair. I forgot that lesson this time.



Have you tried ACR 6.7 beta?


----------



## PhotoMoose (Mar 27, 2012)

Yes that is in fact what I have been using. Also your MA calibration method is one of three that I have done. There are great deals on 1Ds mark III on ebay. This maybe my option.


----------



## odie (Mar 27, 2012)

That happened to me when I was testing for any focussing issues with the 24L. 
Opened to 1.4 and tripod mirror up focus using the middle point. The focus point and the actual focus spot was off by a little and a -5 adjustment did it perfectly. 

Lent the camera and lens to a friend and he said it's soft at f/8 doing some landscape shots. Calibrated it back to +0 and everything was fine but not when it's at 1.4 >.<


----------



## JR (Mar 27, 2012)

PhotoMoose said:


> Yes, that is my point. I made the switch from my mrkIV on the promise of improved focus. The 5Dmrk3 is much faster to focus, but not seeing better results. The improvements in high ISO is noticeable, but for my application (wildlife and scenic) shooting in the dark is not really applicable. Sharpness and speed of focus is key for me. Could the 61 point focus system be so technically advanced that many users will have difficulty using it and achieving focus? Could it be that advanced? I have established that I'm a fool for selling my mrkIV, now what is a fool to do? Return the 5Dmrk3 and than purchase what? I'm asking myself if it is time to jump ship? Considering the issues with this focus system not sure that the 1DX will be any different, after all the 1DX has the same focus system. The only other advantage of the 1DX is the weather proof body and 14 fps. I don't shoot in the rain and unless your shooting hummingbirds I don't need 14fps either. I have one more test and calibration test to do today, then its decision time. It still bothers me that canon released a camera with focus issues and DPP software that is not up to the task. Canon has been quoted saying that the software fix will take 'some time'. REALLY? What where they using when they tested this camera?



I hear you buddy. I ask myself some of the same questions. I really hope the 1DX will prove better. There are too many of us experiencing softness in the image for it to be purely user error. Something is weird here. I am also starting to doubt that DPP issue and the fact we dont have a full release verison of LR4 that support the 5D mkIII will solve this. I picked up my 5D mkII last night again and man I found all my pictures to be sharper!

:-\ :-\ :-\


----------



## peederj (Mar 27, 2012)

Maybe we can ask Canon for a version of DPP that makes it work like the Lytro.


----------



## tron (Mar 27, 2012)

peederj said:


> Maybe we can ask Canon for a version of DPP that makes it work like the Lytro.



;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 28, 2012)

JR said:


> There are too many of us experiencing softness in the image for it to be purely user error. Something is weird here.



Or several somethings. 

1) Recall there were many complaints about the 7D's AF system, too, when that camera was released. So, there's a component of AF system complexity. Using an AF mode not well suited to the task (e.g. Spot AF for sports) can result in blurry shots.

2) Many people don't have a strong understanding of how an AF system works, in particular the fact that an actual AF point is larger than its representation in the viewfinder (even with Spot AF), and that the AF system will lock onto the feature that gives the greatest phase difference at the proper orientation regardless of where in that AF point's area the feature falls. _You_ know you're focusing on the eye, but if the hairline falls under the selected AF point, too, the camera may lock onto that as a stronger contrast - it neither knows nor cares that the eye is centered under the AF point.

3) There is a known issue with DPP that results in soft images with RAW conversion in High Quality mode (but not High Speed mode). At this point, ACR to DNG seems to be the nest approach, but it's an RC not final, and it doesn't run natively in LR yet.

So, it may be that if you combine all of these different factors, that accounts for the '5DIII image softness' - different people with different problems, all leading to the same result. Of course, there may be an actual hardware problem at play here, too - time will tell.


----------



## mrmarks (Mar 29, 2012)

.


----------



## JacquesV (Apr 1, 2012)

I have the same problems with some of my lenses. I'm finding that my 200 f/2 is front focusing by about 50mm at f/2 from 3m. What worries me is that it is not every shot that has this problem?
More than this is also the abnormal noise from the IS system in AI Servo mode that I now avoid with this lense while I wait for a fix form Canon. 
I also agree that this new SUPER focus system seems like it needs a SUPER user to get it to perform as I hope it can :-\ 

Update:
50 f/1.2 front focus
200 f/2 front focus
70-200 f/2.8 ii @ 70 spot on @ 200 front focus
400 f2.8 ii back focus allot!
:-\  
not nice so every lens is different and with every doubler the trouble doubles :'(


----------



## idratherplaytennis (Apr 14, 2012)

I'm still in that paranoid group pondering if my lens/body is soft or not, and exchanging or more tests, altering settings etc. I kept trying out shots on our golden, trying to land her eyes, on the rare instances I did get her to stand still (which is no small feat for a 1 yr old pure golden, oh my gosh the energy and add!!!). I'm pretty convinced by like, two or three of every ten or more photos that I take, when I pixel peep just the standard jpegs at 100% that it's not soft because on the ones I do land, it's blowing me away. The soft ones, I can tell the focus was someplace else, be it her fur which in certain areas lands super sharp, or it was some other setting that threw something off.

I'm pretty sure a lot of the issues and focus problems are, in fact, my user error, and focusing on something so small and zooming in to 105mm on the kit lens. Just wish I could figure out how to embed/attach photos to my posts (could someone please shoot me a pm or something at least to say the easiest way they've done this??).

Anyone else have any updates on what steps they took for testing their 5D M3's?


----------



## JR (Apr 15, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> JR said:
> 
> 
> > There are too many of us experiencing softness in the image for it to be purely user error. Something is weird here.
> ...



Sorry missed your post neuro. These are all valid points and likely apply to a lot of the situation we are seeing in various threads. However i can only speak for myself here, but realizing the complexity of the af system, i did make sure i used only very simple mode for myself at first like single center points and still got some mixed result. I the end i lost patience to figure out why my new $4500 camera (had bought the kit) was not up to par to my current one. 

Looking back i did take a lot of great shots, but the softness was still there...i just hope the 1dx produce more crisp image like my mkii does...


----------



## te4o (Apr 15, 2012)

I got my 5D3 last Friday 13th April! It is as sharp as a knife with all my Zeiss lenses. MA for MF did help a bit. LV tests were perfect. Not less sharp than the 5D2. 
Borrowed a 70-200/4 IS for testing AF. AriHazegis MA procedure over MacPro-based LV. the lens did need +5 at 70 and 0 at 200. Tack sharp on wall testing. In real world shooting the AF tends to miss if misused: like Neuro says, AF is still only a machine, a hair in front of an eye and "off she goes". 
Cheers
Wickid - I hope you get your second copy sharp and with light-leak-tight LCD!


----------



## Viggo (Apr 15, 2012)

I found the same thing, HOWEVER, I have solved it. It doesn't really miss different at different distances, it's just that invisible adjustments up close, makes a MASSIVE difference at longer distances. I own only f1,2 and 1,4 lenses (for the most) where this AFMA can be a total bitch.

I have found that going +-5 steps at the time is pointless, as you can get almost any results. I for example found my 85 L front focus like nothing else at +4 but spot on at mfd, and then +5 it's dead on perfect at any distance. I never thought one step would make such a difference. 

SO I have been back and forth, but all my lenses which suffered from missing way different on different distances all work at all distances now. 

My 50 L looks to be quite a bit in front using the Spyder LensCal, but in real life it's dead on. So trying, in good and even light with real life subjects are extremely important. Also, indoor light for calibration is almost useless. But once calibrated properly in great light, it works in lower light also.

Just fwiw, I'm not saying no people can have an issue with their camera, but I got the same stuff, but was able to correct using real life subjects and one step at the time adjustment. It seems to get better after a +5 adjustment, but it really should be +3 for example, was hard for me to catch.


----------

