# FoCal Pro version 1.5 and the 5D Mark III



## revup67 (Jul 20, 2012)

I opted to pull the trigger and acquire this much anticipated software. At first glance, it can be a bit overwhelming in printing targets, lining up the camera so the targets are precise, installing software on a laptop (not a desktop) as you will more than likely need space to roam especially with Tele's zooms . There are many things to keep in mind when setting up for this calibration though the software does a good job of pointing most of those out.

I noted however the software did a few unusual things to at least my 5D that weren't there before. For one, the shutter release was reprogrammed to perform a different function other than to focus. I found this out when I tried to focus on the printed chart and lost all AF capabilities. I swapped out the 24-105 lens with a 100mm 2.8 L and nothing (still no focus). I put the 24-105 on my 7D and it was fine so I had isolated it was in fact the 5D. I then checked Custom Controls and found the 5D M3 was reprogrammed. I also noted Spot Metering kept getting turned on as well as the Exposure was up by a +1. On a few occasions I also found Custom White Balance toggled on and not AWB. The printed 8.5 x 11 FoCal chart did not work with the 16-35mm 2.8 MK II lens. It just simply wouldn't focus at 1 foot (MFD is .92 feet) or 5 feet which is perhaps due to the target being too small? Not sure. I ran the Aperture sharpness tests on the same lens (the 100mm 2.8 L) consecutively twice and got different results. The camera nor the light did not change. The first time is showed the 7.1 was the sharpest aperture then it showed on a second run that 4.5 was the sharpest aperture. One would think it would be consistent - same test same camera, same lens.

Any one else have any comments on this or own this software with the 5D Mark III? PS I found the Martin Bailey site had it on a promo for £45 British pounds or $73 US vs £69.95 or $112.21 USD.

PS I did see the blurb on the web site: "Does FoCal change my camera settings?"

"FoCal changes a number of settings on the camera while running the test (e.g. aperture, ISO, metering etc.). Before each test is run, the current settings of the camera are stored on the computer. When the test completes, the settings are restored so your camera is back exactly as you had it before running the test.

Should anything go wrong (e.g. a power cut, the camera battery running out, the cable being unplugged etc.), the next time FoCal is run with the camera connected it will offer to restore the settings exactly as they were."

The camera was not reset hence the documenting of the above issues. Perhaps this is specific to the 5D MK 3


----------



## crash (Jul 20, 2012)

Yeah, I had FoCal crash on one of my tests with the 5d3 and left my settings all screwed up but to be fair it did warn me that it was not able to restore all my settings. I missed fixing one or two that really messed with me for a day.

I did get different results on different test runs but when run with consistent lighting, distance, etc... they were in the same ballpark and I am definitely getting better shots having applied the recommended AFMA settings. As I understand it we're talking about tolerances in manufacturing and such. From what I have read it is expected that in real world and controlled scenarios that there will be some variances from shot to shot. As far as what the sharpest aperture is, I get different results on that, too, but overall the graphs of sharpness are pretty consistent. I know what range to work in with each lens to get best results - good enough for me. 

I get the impression that this is definitely more of an art than an exact science at this point but I'm seeing it where it counts - my pictures. I wasn't getting anything near this sharp until I ran FoCal. (Yes, the pic needs some work but I have a good sharp file to start with.)







My cousin is using FoCal on his Nikon and kit lens - that has been all over the place.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 20, 2012)

If you change lenses while its running on your PC, it will sometimes crash and fail to reset the camera to its original settings, sometimes it crashes for unknown reasons too.
This is covered in the documentation, and has not been a big issue for me, its happened twice over several months.
As far as setup goes, its basically the same process as for doing a manual AFMA, but the software guides you to do it right.


----------



## revup67 (Jul 21, 2012)

Crash and Mt Spokane thank you for the tips advice.



> If you change lenses while its running on your PC, it will sometimes crash and fail to reset the camera to its original settings, sometimes it crashes for unknown reasons too.
> This is covered in the documentation, and has not been a big issue for me, its happened twice over several months. As far as setup goes, its basically the same process as for doing a manual AFMA, but the software guides you to do it right.



Though the software did crash, I was extra careful in fact not to change lenses without first a)powering down the 5D MK3 and b) shutting down FoCal and disconnecting the USB. The disruption of specific settings was a bit troublesome but after I realized this was happening I would simply glance through the menus and be certain that the settings were the way the were. Has anyone had any luck with the 16-35 getting calibrated? for some reason the camera won't focus on the target. Though two target pages were printed I have not used the other (without FoCal logo). Still weeding through the instructions and it is good to see / hear that it does make a difference. open to any other suggestions or comments on this app being the newbie that I am especially interested if you have lens aligned a macro or UWA lens ( I do realize no support for manual lenses i.e MP-E 65 as of yet) - thanks again


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 21, 2012)

revup67 said:


> Crash and Mt Spokane thank you for the tips advice.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Usually, if there is a issue getting it to calibrate, vibration is causing it to fail. Bright lighting is a absolute must, because it otherwise sets a slow enough shutter speed that images are too motion blurred to calibrate. Do not walk around or move during the process unless you are on concrete. I've had that happen to me on wooden floors even with very bright light.
You can use the larger target, or move the camera a little closer if that helps. 
If any of the above tips apply, see if you get better results by being careful to use bright lights and see how long you can hold your breath


----------



## revup67 (Jul 21, 2012)

> Usually, if there is a issue getting it to calibrate, vibration is causing it to fail. Bright lighting is a absolute must, because it otherwise sets a slow enough shutter speed that images are too motion blurred to calibrate. Do not walk around or move during the process unless you are on concrete. I've had that happen to me on wooden floors even with very bright light.
> You can use the larger target, or move the camera a little closer if that helps.
> If any of the above tips apply, see if you get better results by being careful to use bright lights and see how long you can hold your breath



Ok may change the lighting and go full on bright vs. two bulb lights faced at the target fairly evenly. camera was on a tripod and set on a concrete/porcelain floor in live view (mirror lock up). Tried moving camera up to 1 foot on 16-35 but no such luck so suspect it is a)lighting or b)will try alt. FoCal target.

When you calibrated with FoCal, did you use the Canon 50x multiplier theory x the focal length of the lens or just sort of approximate beyond the lens' MFD to a reasonable distance that you might shoot with that lens?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 21, 2012)

revup67 said:


> > Usually, if there is a issue getting it to calibrate, vibration is causing it to fail. Bright lighting is a absolute must, because it otherwise sets a slow enough shutter speed that images are too motion blurred to calibrate. Do not walk around or move during the process unless you are on concrete. I've had that happen to me on wooden floors even with very bright light.
> > You can use the larger target, or move the camera a little closer if that helps.
> > If any of the above tips apply, see if you get better results by being careful to use bright lights and see how long you can hold your breath
> 
> ...


 
I tended to use 25-30X due to space limitations. When good weather came, I went outdoors and needed the larger target for 50X and FF. As you noted, the 50mm f/1.4 is difficult to adjust, I also had difficulty with my 100mmL.
The best was my older 300mm f/4L, it was almost flawless very consistent and "0" AFMA on all my bodies.
Same issues or worse for my Nikon D800 and 24-70mmg. Some lenses are not as good as others, but I do not know if its a individual lens thing or a lens model thing, except that I recall hearing that the 50mm is far from the best to calibrate.
I have a couple new bodies now, and have not yet decided about keeping them, so I need to do it all over again. I'm waiting on the mirrorless to decide if it is a fit for my use. I have a 7D, 5D 2, and 1D MK IV and only want to keep two bodies. I do not plan to buy another 5D MK III or 1D X unless there is a significant price reduction, or at least a fix for the black AF points.


----------



## revup67 (Jul 21, 2012)

> I tended to use 25-30X due to space limitations. When good weather came, I went outdoors and needed the larger target for 50X and FF. As you noted, the 50mm f/1.4 is difficult to adjust, I also had difficulty with my 100mmL. The best was my older 300mm f/4L, it was almost flawless very consistent and "0" AFMA on all my bodies.
> Same issues or worse for my Nikon D800 and 24-70mmg. Some lenses are not as good as others, but I do not know if its a individual lens thing or a lens model thing, except that I recall hearing that the 50mm is far from the best to calibrate.
> I have a couple new bodies now, and have not yet decided about keeping them, so I need to do it all over again. I'm waiting on the mirrorless to decide if it is a fit for my use. I have a 7D, 5D 2, and 1D MK IV and only want to keep two bodies. I do not plan to buy another 5D MK III or 1D X unless there is a significant price reduction, or at least a fix for the black AF points.



Thanks for the heads up on the 50mm..I have that lens but have not had time to calibrate that one just yet. Good to see you are using multiples of 25x-30x as 50x can be a stretch especially with a 400mm prime or higher and space limitations. That one would more than likely have to be done outside. Speaking of the black AF points, I've not had that hinder my photo shoots as of yet though I did express concern via Canon support awhile back and as we know, no news on that as of yet or at least that I am aware.


----------



## RunAndGun (Jul 21, 2012)

I wish I would have known about or done a search for discounts... Oh well. I'll forget about it soon enough. 

To the OP, I had the same issue with my settings not being restored after a crash and I unhooked my camera. Subsequent calibration sessions were fine and my settings were restored(except RAW on my CF card for some reason).

Something that has come in very handy is a USB extension cable that I bought last year for another reason. It gives me about 10'-15' of extra cable so I don't have to move my laptop around as much.


----------



## revup67 (Jul 23, 2012)

> I wish I would have known about or done a search for discounts... Oh well. I'll forget about it soon enough.
> To the OP, I had the same issue with my settings not being restored after a crash and I unhooked my camera. Subsequent calibration sessions were fine and my settings were restored(except RAW on my CF card for some reason).
> Something that has come in very handy is a USB extension cable that I bought last year for another reason. It gives me about 10'-15' of extra cable so I don't have to move my laptop around as much.



I know on that price of 69.95 BP to 108.59 USD then PayPal tacks on another $4 and change. I wanted to read more about the product and when searching I found the Martin Bailey site and get lucky.

I'm running the laptop on a fully charged battery when i start so have the freedom of moving around. Watch those lengthy USB cables they can have a reduction in power and it is possible to loose connectivity. There is a limitation with length on printers for this reason and I would imagine the same may apply to other USB devices


----------



## TC1006 (Jul 30, 2012)

So finally got a chance to play around with the software over the weekend and got some interesting results myself.

First, regarding the settings not being restored: Under Tools of the software there is an option for CAMERA SETTINGS. You can use that to backup your camera settings and restore them after done with your calibrations. This way you know that you are back to the previous settings.
Only caveat is that I dont think it stores every setting in the camera. My assumption is that it only backups the settings which FoCal will change.

Here is what it stored for mine:
4XXXXXXXXX1*1:LR|2:4|4:100|6:0|8:SingleFrame|9:Evaluative|10:MeteringAndAFStart|11:False|14:129|16:5200|15:0|17:1|

Secondly, I got some inconsistent results my self. Maybe the lighting was an issue as I was doing this indoors.

Last but not least.. for my 50mm 1.4 - The software recommended setting of +11. Does this seem pretty high?
I'm not sure if I have a bad copy of the lens.

The aperture sharpness test was some what inconsistent as well, but the results were fairly close to each other. 

Thanks


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 30, 2012)

An 11 unit adjustment is pretty substantial, but not so much that I be concerned about the lens. 

As for the inconsistent results, the software reports the light level in EV - what was yours? I do most of my testing indoors, except when calibrating lenses at 300mm and longer. But, indoors or out, I illuminate the target with a set of three 150W-equivalent gooseneck lamps - my light readings are usually around 12 EV, and I generally get very consistent results.


----------



## TC1006 (Jul 30, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> An 11 unit adjustment is pretty substantial, but not so much that I be concerned about the lens.



For my 50mm 1.4 I noticed severe vignetting as well. I might just send it to Canon to get it checked.



> As for the inconsistent results, the software reports the light level in EV - what was yours? I do most of my testing indoors, except when calibrating lenses at 300mm and longer. But, indoors or out, I illuminate the target with a set of three 150W-equivalent gooseneck lamps - my light readings are usually around 12 EV, and I generally get very consistent results.



From what I recall the EV value was around 7.2. I think I may need to illuminate the target a bit more.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 30, 2012)

TC1006 said:


> For my 50mm 1.4 I noticed severe vignetting as well. I might just send it to Canon to get it checked.



The 50/1.4 has ~2.5 stops of vignetting wide open.



TC1006 said:


> From what I recall the EV value was around 7.2. I think I may need to illuminate the target a bit more.



Should be at least EV 8 according to the manual, and the more light the better. If your shutter speed is too low, and there's any instability in your setup (e.g. not using a cable release), that also results in instability. With my bright lighting, I can shoot even f/5.6 lenses at 1/1000 s or faster without going over ISO 400.


----------



## 96Brigadier (Jul 30, 2012)

If you are doing your tests indoors on a normal floor you will see different results. The reason is any vibration in the floor impacts your camera. I found that I couldn't run the test on the main floor of my house, I had to move to the garage with its concrete floor. Concrete basement would have also worked. I also use a double halogen work light to keep the target well lit.

When trying to test my 100-400 lens there was enough of a breeze outside to slightly vibrate the tripod, again that was enough to throw the test off (or more to the point the graph is all over the place making it hard to determine the right adjustment).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 30, 2012)

96Brigadier said:


> If you are doing your tests indoors on a normal floor you will see different results. The reason is any vibration in the floor impacts your camera. I found that I couldn't run the test on the main floor of my house, I had to move to the garage with its concrete floor. Concrete basement would have also worked. I also use a double halogen work light to keep the target well lit.
> 
> When trying to test my 100-400 lens there was enough of a breeze outside to slightly vibrate the tripod, again that was enough to throw the test off (or more to the point the graph is all over the place making it hard to determine the right adjustment).



Indeed, vibration is a killer. I did testing a while back on my first floor (hardwood) and it worked ok with an empty house but had lots of failed runs if my daughters were running around. The basement works well. To go over 45 feet distance, I need to go outside - I used constant lighting to supplement the daylight, set ISO 400, and found that even at 400mm f/5.6 I got consistent results despite an occasional zephyr, likely because I was getting 1/1600 s shutter speeds.


----------



## Viggo (Jul 30, 2012)

I adjusted my lenses under artificial light, and had to skip it and after a few mails with the FoCal dudes, it turns out that the flickering in artificial light can create problems, for instance under fluorecent it was absolutely consistently in front by the same amount on all lenses. Outdoors, it was as consistent, but now they were all dead on. 

On a side not, I got a heads up from the FoCal people that my 50 L would cause trouble to adjust. I went great with the 5d3, but on the 5d2 I spent nearly three hours as it kept loosing the target during testing.


----------



## epsiloneri (Jul 30, 2012)

revup67 said:


> ( I do realize no support for manual lenses i.e MP-E 65 as of yet)


Very funny ;D


----------



## Sony (Aug 1, 2012)

revup67 said:


> I know on that price of 69.95 BP to 108.59 USD then PayPal tacks on another $4 and change. I wanted to read more about the product and when searching I found the Martin Bailey site and get lucky.



I was on the Martin Bailey site but couldnt find the link or something link to FoCal discount. Can you show me how? Thanks


----------



## TC1006 (Aug 3, 2012)

Sony said:


> revup67 said:
> 
> 
> > I know on that price of 69.95 BP to 108.59 USD then PayPal tacks on another $4 and change. I wanted to read more about the product and when searching I found the Martin Bailey site and get lucky.
> ...



Here you go. 
http://www.reikan.co.uk/focal/mbp45/


----------



## Jamesy (Aug 4, 2012)

revup67 said:


> Any one else have any comments on this or own this software with the 5D Mark III? PS I found the Martin Bailey site had it on a promo for £45 British pounds or $73 US vs £69.95 or $112.21 USD.



Thanks for the reference to Martin Bailey's site and the associated discount. His review is here:
http://blog.martinbaileyphotography.com/2012/02/06/podcast-321-lens-calibration-and-microadjustment-with-focal/
And the discounted page is here:
http://www.reikan.co.uk/focal/mbp45/

Although his page says "This discount will be available until March 31st 2012, but only if you buy from a special page setup specifically for MBP listeners" - I clicked through today and bought the Pro version for 45GBP or roughly ~$70CDN. I have been meaning to try out this software so that was just the incentive I needed to pull the trigger. I will let you know if it messes up my 5D3


----------



## Jamesy (Aug 4, 2012)

I forgot to ask, how much time should budget to calibrate my five lenses? 3-4 hours? I have the 24-105, 70-200 f4/IS, 85/1.8, 135L and a fifty prime.

Do you calibrate with IS turned off?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 4, 2012)

Jamesy said:


> I forgot to ask, how much time should budget to calibrate my five lenses? 3-4 hours? I have the 24-105, 70-200 f4/IS, 85/1.8, 135L and a fifty prime.
> 
> Do you calibrate with IS turned off?



Depends on how many focal lengths you test. I'd figure about 10 minutes each. Personally, I do the zooms at both ends and also in between, e.g. 24-105 at 24, 50, 85, and 105mm. I also test at distances of 25x and 50x focal length - gives me sufficient data to pick the best AFMA value. 

Yes, turn IS off.


----------



## revup67 (Aug 4, 2012)

I did the 100mm, 50mm the 24-105, the 16-35 and the 70mm only of the 70-300mm with the Canon 5D MK 3 and needed about 2 and a half hours. I accidentally bumped the tripod ever so slightly while the camera asked for me to change the AFMA setting, I clciked OK at the software prompted and it immediately knew there was a change. I got a prompt that basically said if you continue there's a chance there will be some inaccuracies. I knew that was due to the bumping so I began the test over.

I saw some folks commenting on the 50mm 1.4 . Though when I use the lens it appears to do a very good job however when I ran the software that was a different story. See the attachment as it had recommended I AFMA adjust by 20 which is the max. All other lenses I tested above fell between 0 and +/- 7 as I recall.

Another side note with the 5D MKIII. When I set up the target I began getting the restore settings loop again. I reviewed the recommendations in the guide and was certain I had everything correct but kept receiving a metering message. I didn’t see anywhere in the guide about metering so left in on evaluative. I then recalled in my previous tests the camera was put on Spot Metering by FoCal software. Once I made this change FoCal was able to find the target and the Metering error and loop message went away and the target was found. I've attached the results of the 50mm from yesterday's session for anyone that wants to gain further insight. Lastly, all of the L lens I tested scored from 900-1100 note how this 1.4 dropped to roughly a score 455 at 1.4 on the Sharpness Test. I've heard there are better lenses out there 3rd party than this 1.4 lens with roughly the same aperture. I guess I need to keep in mind that this was a $350 lens #1 and #2 if I am pleased with the shots then its a moot point. Has anyone out there ran Focal on a Canon 1.2 ? Would not mind seeing that score sheet.


----------



## Jamesy (Aug 4, 2012)

Thank you both for the time guidelines and pointers to do the testing. I won't have time today or tomorrow but possibly Monday.

That is a very cool report the software puts out. It is interesting that the shutter speed goes from 1/200 at 1.4 to 1 second at F22. That reinforces the comments about a sturdy floor and mirror lockup for these tests.

A quick question about the settings on the 5D3 - I have never MA'd a camera as I am coming from the 40D. Do I get a short and long MA reading for each lens? If so, if I test four focal lengths for a lens such as the 24-105, which suggested readings would I use? Or do you just average them out?


----------



## revup67 (Aug 4, 2012)

> A quick question about the settings on the 5D3 - I have never MA'd a camera as I am coming from the 40D. Do I get a short and long MA reading for each lens? If so, if I test four focal lengths for a lens such as the 24-105, which suggested readings would I use? Or do you just average them out?



In the 5D it is listed as "Wide" and "Tele" when you mount a zoom. So when you put on a zoom if you start on the widest angle Focal will know (we'll use the 16-35 here as an example) it is on 16. I choose Fully Automatic in FoCal and it knows at that point as it walks its way through its processes you are going to be adjusting the WIDE portion only. It will clearly state this as well. When the test is done, I save my results, then go to the zoom and put it on 35 and begin the test again. Then you will see it prompts you to change the TELE section on the 5D Mark III. Normally these adjustments are done automatically but Rich at FoCal explained with the 5D Mark III you have to walk over to the camera, input the parameter, go back to the PC click OK then it will advance to the next step. Careful not to bump the tripod or camera as Focal is quite sensitive. I might suggest putting your Metering on Spot as well though ti doesn't say this in the instructions. I kept getting a metering error until I did so.. Keep in mind when you finish with your tests go back to your menus on the Mark III and check everything as it didn't restore all of my settings correctly. I even found my camera on JPG Small vs. RAW L where I had it. Also I would run these tests of a Full battery. Don't get caught in the middle and have the battery poop out though it does give warnings but also states a low battery may cause inconsistencies.


----------



## bornshooter (Aug 4, 2012)

what other methods do you recommend for afma?


----------



## RunAndGun (Aug 5, 2012)

FoCal assigns a numeric IQ(image quality) value to each AFMA value. The higher the numeric IQ value, the better the IQ. Has anyone else noticed that the recommended AFMA value is usually NOT the one with the highest numeric IQ value?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 5, 2012)

Jamesy said:


> A quick question about the settings on the 5D3 - I have never MA'd a camera as I am coming from the 40D. Do I get a short and long MA reading for each lens? If so, if I test four focal lengths for a lens such as the 24-105, which suggested readings would I use? Or do you just average them out?



With the 5DIII and 1D X, you can enter separate wide and tele values for zoom lenses (primes, and older bodies with AFMA, one value per lens).

I test at intermediate focal lengths, too, which lets me evaluate performance across the zoom range - I usually do a test for every 'x' of zoom, e.g. the 24-105 is a 4x lens, so I test the ends and two points in between (I 'cheat' on the 28-300, and only test 5 focal lengths for that 11x zoom). Testing at 25x and 50x focal length distances helps me to adjust for the distances at which I shoot, and account for DoF at different distances. It's more work - but picking a value is basically a compromise, since most people shoot at different distances and for zooms different focal lengths, and more data mean a better compromise. 

An example: for the 24-105mm on my 1D X, I tested 24, 50, 85, and 105mm, each at 50x and 25x distance. At 50x, the results were +2, +5, +3 and +2, respectively. At 25x, they were +4, +4, +4, and +2. Had I done both ends at 50x as recommended, I'd have +2 for both. I chose +4 for wide and +2 for tele, because of the +5/+4 at 50mm and because 50x distance at 24mm f/4 has a very deep DoF so I give more weight to the 25x value. 

NOTE: at intermediate focal lengths on a zoom, the camera does a simple linear regression between the W and T values to determine the AFMA to apply. If testing intermediate focal lengths, you should set both W and T to the AFMA value you're testing.


----------



## Jamesy (Aug 5, 2012)

Hey Neuro, In your impressive gear list you have Lens Align Pro - what made you switch to FoCal Pro instead?


----------



## Jamesy (Aug 5, 2012)

I forgot to mention - thanks again for the helpful hints on testing. I will read the manual and put the tips to use in the coming days


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 5, 2012)

Jamesy said:


> Hey Neuro, In your impressive gear list you have Lens Align Pro - what made you switch to FoCal Pro instead?



A few things. First, it's a process that screams for automation (and I'm a big fan of automation where appropriate - lots of robotic liquid handlers, plate stackers, etc., in my labs!). Second, it's accurate - results aligned very well with my LensAlign values when I first started using FoCal. It's also less subjective - I prefer quantitative measurement to a judgement call any day of the week (an argument I often have with anatomic pathologists, who prefer 0/1+/2+/3+ scoring to digital image analysis). Third, it's faster with much less hands-on time. That was very true with the 5DII and 7D, where FoCal Pro gives walk-away automated testing, but even with the 1D X which currently means manual image captures, the analysis runs in the background.


----------



## revup67 (Aug 5, 2012)

+1 with Neuro. I too have the LensAlign..your more dependent on your eye site vs. accurate data to make the decision for you. It was time consuming to find that little red dot with the LA MKII as well. I lost my patience with it one day and searched for another solution then found FoCal in one of the threads. It was a hard switch for me for a number of reasons but ultimately pulled the trigger about 30 days ago. Very subjective as Neuro states.


----------



## scottkinfw (Aug 5, 2012)

I upgraded to v1.5 Pro.
My experience has not been good on my 5D3. The recommended AF was all over the place for all lenses (24-105, 300mmF4L is, 400mm f 5.6L, 70-200 f2.8L). The optimal aperture recommendations were relatively the same. I ran at least 3 tests per camera and each lens. I was looking for two exact numbers, and it sometimes took 6 runs. It didn't run on my 50D. 

I am going on an African safari in two weeks, so I just gave up and sent the lenses and bodies in to Canon to be sure. 

The prior versions were good, but that was before the 5D3. I am sure that they will get the bugs out, but I don't think it is ready for prime time yet-especially if you have a 5d3 or 50D and an important shoot.



revup67 said:


> > I wish I would have known about or done a search for discounts... Oh well. I'll forget about it soon enough.
> > To the OP, I had the same issue with my settings not being restored after a crash and I unhooked my camera. Subsequent calibration sessions were fine and my settings were restored(except RAW on my CF card for some reason).
> > Something that has come in very handy is a USB extension cable that I bought last year for another reason. It gives me about 10'-15' of extra cable so I don't have to move my laptop around as much.
> 
> ...


----------



## bornshooter (Aug 5, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Jamesy said:
> 
> 
> > Hey Neuro, In your impressive gear list you have Lens Align Pro - what made you switch to FoCal Pro instead?
> ...


neuro why dont you create a youtube channel with tutorial im sure your wealth of knowledge would help others...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 5, 2012)

scottkinfw said:


> I upgraded to v1.5 Pro.
> My experience has not been good on my 5D3. The recommended AF was all over the place for all lenses (24-105, 300mmF4L is, 400mm f 5.6L, 70-200 f2.8L). The optimal aperture recommendations were relatively the same. I ran at least 3 tests per camera and each lens. I was looking for two exact numbers, and it sometimes took 6 runs. It didn't run on my 50D.



What was your setup like, and what EV values were reported? For good results, you need lots of consistent light and stability. I use 3 lights totaling 450 W at close range (~15") and get reported EVs of around 12. Shooting with the tripod on a hardwood floor, if anyone was walking around nearby I got inconsistent results, after moving the setup to the basement (concrete floor), I get very consistent results (I've tested both intra- and inter-day variability).


----------



## Jamesy (Aug 5, 2012)

Neuro,

The Focal manual (p14) says that Canon recommends 50x the focal length and you mentioned you use 25x and 50x - what is the rationale behind the shorter test? Are you trying to get an average over you most used focal distances?

The manual does go on to say:
"In practice, the distance you calibrate at is the distance that the selected AF microadjustment value will be correct for. So you should try to pick a distance that is around the “most used” distance for your particular shooting style."


----------



## bornshooter (Aug 5, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> scottkinfw said:
> 
> 
> > I upgraded to v1.5 Pro.
> ...


why no answer?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 5, 2012)

Jamesy said:


> Neuro,
> 
> The Focal manual (p14) says that Canon recommends 50x the focal length and you mentioned you use 25x and 50x - what is the rationale behind the shorter test? Are you trying to get an average over you most used focal distances?
> 
> ...



That's the main rationale, yes. Plus, more data points are better (within reason), and 25x is the distance LensAlign recommends.


----------



## revup67 (Aug 5, 2012)

> I upgraded to v1.5 Pro.
> My experience has not been good on my 5D3. The recommended AF was all over the place for all lenses (24-105, 300mmF4L is, 400mm f 5.6L, 70-200 f2.8L). The optimal aperture recommendations were relatively the same. I ran at least 3 tests per camera and each lens. I was looking for two exact numbers, and it sometimes took 6 runs. It didn't run on my 50D.
> 
> I am going on an African safari in two weeks, so I just gave up and sent the lenses and bodies in to Canon to be sure.
> ...



I had some issues with the 5D Mark 3 as well with the 16-35 but as soon as I achieved better light the issue went away and things went smoothly. I also used a mix of incandescent light and natural daylight on the target this helped greatly. Also did not go with the 25x or MFD but with 50x and this achieved success with the 16-35. no vibrations - set up on a tile solid floor. I bumped the stand twice by accident during the course of 2.5 hours and focal knew right away there was a change and suggested a do over which I did - be certain no vibrations take place as well as disruptions (even from a ceiling fan)which can cause a 60hz type of flicker. also make sure you target is not moving from wind say if you put it near an open window and it wasn't secure.


----------



## Jamesy (Aug 6, 2012)

Revup67 and Neuro - thanks for all your help and tips. I got my lenses done today - it took longer than expected but a lot of that was the newb factor.

A quick questions about when to register a lens with the camera - is that only when you have multiple copies of the same lens?

BTW, just like the FoCal manual said, when trying to AFMA a low-end lens like my 50/1.8 II, the test failed as it could not really lock onto a correct AFMA setting.

The sharpness test is also very interesting showing the sharpest value for a given lens.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 6, 2012)

Jamesy said:


> A quick questions about when to register a lens with the camera - is that only when you have multiple copies of the same lens?



Optional. I don't see any downside, though. I entered mine, on the off-chance I mount a different lens of the same type, or someone wants to try my 1D X with one of their lenses. In some cases, the serial number is stored, but it's irrelevant since multiple copies can't be registered - that's indicated by an asterisk next to the boxes on some older lenses (135L and 100-400L showed that, IIRC).


----------



## Jamesy (Aug 7, 2012)

I did a sharpness test on all my lenses was wondering if the numeric value or score is consistent across lenses. For example, on my 5D3, my 70-200 F4/IS is sharpest at 5.6 with a score of 1307.5 and my 135L is best at 5.0 with a score of 1331.4. Does this mean the 135L is sharper than the 70-200?

If so, my 85/1.8 scored a 1347.3 at 4.5 and that would make it my sharpest lens in the line-up.


----------

