LensAlign MkII Focus Calibration System

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

12/11/2011 04:31:31 PM · #1

With all the new gear floating around this house suddenly, it seems like it's time to bite the bullet and bring this highly-regarded bit of kit into the fold. Anyone else have experience with the LensAlign MkII Focus Calibration System?

It just seemed to me that now that Penny and I both have Canons that can be calibrated to specific lenses and L-glass for both cameras, it was time to do it right. So here we go.

Should be here Wednesday. I'll keep you good folks posted on how it works. Also am getting a gridded screen for the new body at the same time.

R.

Message edited by author 2011-12-11 16:32:15.

yanko

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

12/11/2011 06:11:26 PM · #2

What made you choose that one over the LensAlign Pro? Price?

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

12/11/2011 06:43:52 PM · #3

Originally posted by yanko:

What made you choose that one over the LensAlign Pro? Price?

They don't make the "PRO" anymore, this replaces it.

yanko

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

12/11/2011 10:53:25 PM · #4

Been thinking about getting one myself but it looks a little flimsy. Does that have the same build as the PRO?

12/11/2011 11:04:42 PM · #5

Originally posted by yanko:

Been thinking about getting one myself but it looks a little flimsy. Does that have the same build as the PRO?

I don't think so, but it's the only game in town :-(

12/12/2011 12:12:25 AM · #6

Yeah well that guy is not getting any more of my money even if it's the only game in town. There are other ways without buying that but I guess it does give you a method and tool. I used the printed bit of paper & tripod and playing around until I got it right... probably more error prone and less repeatable.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G

12/12/2011 12:51:38 AM · #7

The way I look at it, we've got lots of expensive gear and I've yet to actually undertake calibrating anything to the 7D, because cursory attempts made me realize how unrepeatable my results were. This has to be better. It's got *system* in its favor. If it's totally worthless I'll tell B&H I want my money back. They DO supposedly have a no-questions return policy...

R.

JamesA

Nikon D800

12/12/2011 03:40:13 AM · #8

How do to calibrate for different lenses?

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

12/12/2011 01:53:25 PM · #9

Originally posted by JamesA:

How do to calibrate for different lenses?

Don't know about the 40D but on the 7D you have a menu option to do overall or by specific lens. It remembers some nbr of lenses and can split a lens vs. the same lens with a (I assume Canon) extender. Reminds me... I should stick the lenses on and write the nbr down sometime (although I assume it changes over time a little).

It's hard to argue with the results when you get it dial in via whatever method - it has worked great for a couple of my lenses.

Giles

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

12/12/2011 02:01:29 PM · #10

so what is the point of it, to get better focus result from your lens? or sharpness or both?

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70 f2.8 L IS

12/12/2011 02:02:58 PM · #11

Right now I just don't worry, 'cause I can't micro-calibrate anyhow, LOL. When I do update my body (camera that is) I will probably invest in this tool. I could build something myself, but for what they are asking, I'm better off buying it. The construction seems well-thought-out, even if it is essentially cardboard. Robert, I will be anxiously awaiting your thoughts on the device!

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

12/12/2011 03:09:58 PM · #12

Originally posted by Giles_uk:

so what is the point of it, to get better focus result from your lens? or sharpness or both?

Look at it this way:

1. All optical devices are built to a certain tolerance, they can't be absolutely perfect.
2. For the sake of argument, let's say Canon builds to a tolerance of +/- 3 units (whatever those units may be, I don't know).
3. This means you can get a +3 body and a -3 lens matched up, and they are off by a total of 6 units. Or you can luck out and get a pair of zeros, everything nominal. Or yopu can luck out and get a +2 lens that happens to match your +2 body. It's a crapshoot.
4. This is the reason for so many of the anguished cries you hear about "front focus" or "back focus" in these forums; there's nothing "wrong" with these lenses, they just don't match their bodies precisely.
5. So people who keep sending lenses back until they get a "good copy" are really looking for a lens that is off-zero to match the deviation of their body.
6. And when people who happen to HAVE precisely-matched combos upgrade their bodies, suddenly their lens "goes soft" because the new body isn't exactly the same as the old one on the tolerance continuum.

ENTER Canon's introduction, with the 50D, of user-enabled micro-calibration to match lenses to bodies. Now, in theory, it's possible to *test* your lens/camera combos and make adjustments to zero everything in for truly precise focusing. In practice, however, this is not a simple thing. You need a comp[letely repeatable target environment that is capable of measuring a number of variables in a structured manner.

Which is what this system is supposed to do, at a reasonable price. The professional camera adjustment people do it with "optical benches" but that's out of the question, cost-and-space wise, for ordinary mortals :-)

Should be here in a couple days, and we'll see what we have.

R.

yanko

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

12/12/2011 04:16:29 PM · #13

Originally posted by kirbic:

Robert, I will be anxiously awaiting your thoughts on the device!

Yes, looking forward to it myself. Although if he posts examples he better put a warning on the link. Otherwise the razor focus could crack a few monitor screens...

Message edited by author 2011-12-12 16:17:11.

JamesA

Nikon D800

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G

12/13/2011 06:03:21 PM · #14

I can see why someone would use this but my view on it is similar to mine of monitor calibration (obviously I'm not talking about extreme cases) which is that life's to short to constantly worry yourself if everything is perfect, get the composition right and nobody will care if the colour or focus is slightly off.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70 f2.8 L IS

12/13/2011 06:46:21 PM · #15

Originally posted by JamesA:

...get the composition right and nobody will care if the colour or focus is slightly off.

Except ourselves. My line of thought is, I've invested into five figures in equipment, I'd like to be able to get optimal performance out of it. $79 is a pretty small price to pay to be able to optimize focus performance. honestly, if it means that I nail focus on one shot that I wouldn't have otherwise and can't re-create, it's paid for itself.

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

12/13/2011 07:48:28 PM · #16

Originally posted by JamesA:

To a point I might agree BUT I see focus misses more then most people and it bugs ME when it's off in a good image I capture. I am a huge fan of the MA itself - I have what I saw as a soft 50f1.4 on my old 20D wondering what people were smoking when they raved about the lens.... playing with MA on the 7D.. wow wow the thing is just amazing.....

What I don't get is them putting this on cameras with ZIP ability to tune what can be really complex... It should be software based IMO... I dunno.. Maybe a button forces the camera to take a series of test images and software to pick the sharpest by some definition..... self calibration sort of.

m_a_r_c

Nikon D70s

12/17/2011 07:55:50 AM · #17

I still don't get the idea of the product, sorry. Whenever I'd ever tested focus calibration I'd photographed a 6" metal rule placed on a desk. Set viewfinder 'focus' to the 3" rule graduation and examine the actual focus in the recorded image.

And besides, unless you're always shooting with the lens 'wide-open' 100% of the time, it's unlikely IMO an accumulation of manufacturer's tolerances would ever be significant.

Message edited by author 2011-12-17 08:03:15.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70 f2.8 L IS

12/17/2011 01:49:32 PM · #18

Originally posted by m_a_r_c:

Your method will work, no doubt, if executed carefully. What the tool does is to take some of the common errors out of the equation, like lining the lens up perpendicular to the test subject. It also provides a flat target to focus on, which is a *far* better way of doing this than trying to focus on the diagonal surface.
Believe me when I say, stack-up of manufacturing tolerances can and does make a difference, and not just wide open.

chromeydome

Nikon D7000

12/17/2011 02:37:24 PM · #19

Just saw this item pop up on twitter/facebook. I think the idea seems okay, but simple things like using "to" instead of "too" in their presentation suggest a general sloppiness, too. But for 10 bucks, might be a reasonable gamble. The one Robert has on order seems better made, and has the targets to verify perpendicularity, and this cheaper one does not seem to have that feature.

Since my D7000 has this adjustment feature, I will probably go thru the exercise. Very interested to get your impressions, Robert.

12/17/2011 04:04:48 PM · #20

Originally posted by kirbic:

Believe me when I say, stack-up of manufacturing tolerances can and does make a difference, and not just wide open.

No kidding. It's a "known fact".

As for the device, I'd thought I was getting the one with the optional 24-inch ruler, and instead I have the 12-inch ruler, a little harder to work with for the lon g lenses, so I'm checking with B&H about fixing that before I completely unpack it and run it through its paces. It's a pretty good-looking piece of gear, though.

R.

m_a_r_c

Nikon D70s

12/18/2011 02:41:39 PM · #21

Originally posted by kirbic:

Believe me when I say, stack-up of manufacturing tolerances can and does make a difference, and not just wide open.

Since these calibration aids are so easy to use, how about the owners of these measure for us this said accumulation manufacturer's tolerances, and then posting for us images that demonstrate if it can and how much visible effect there is, not just at wide open.

edit: might be advantageous to use monochromatic light for illumination, i.e. green.

Message edited by author 2011-12-18 14:51:05.

12/21/2011 04:36:53 PM · #22

System has been returned to store. I was under the impression I was getting the one with the "optional" 24-inch ruler, not the 12-incher it came with. That's pretty useless for calibrating at 200-400mm, and I did get a little bummed out that they were taking all that money for a cardboard product, sop it's gone back for a refund from B&H... I'll pursue Plan B sometime in January, whatever Plan B turns out to be. They DID offer me a 32-inch supplementary target for another $79.95. but that's ridiculous. I could see it if it were all on indestructible plastic, but...

R.

Message edited by author 2011-12-21 16:37:06.