Dec 7, 2016, 22:18
So yesterday I spent 6 hours calibrating 7 lenses to two bodies. I downloaded a calibration target that is cut apart and assembled on foam core to create a three-dimensional calibration target.
A few lenses needed next to no adjustment, while others were quite a bit off.
So I was just wondering, does anyone else calibrate their lenses to their bodies?
I wouldn't know how. Never read anything about it or heard anyone talk about it, before now.
Interesting to hear if you see any visible/tangible differences. I was not aware this was possible. No mention instruction wise about this, although I have a fairly basic Sony. Ed.
Thanks for that information. As I have never had a camera that had the facility to calibrate for lenses, that may explain my ignorance of the procedure.
Special equipment is not really needed, except that it's best to mount the camera on a tripod. Lay a 30cm ruler (one with mm markings) on the table in line with the axis of the lens, then tilt the camera and lens down at roughly 45 degrees, and at about 50cm away from the ruler. Set the lens to a wide aperture, and adjust the position of the ruler so that the 15 cm mark is in the centre of the field of view. Set the camera to use the centre focus point, and use the camera's self-timer to eliminate camera shake when taking the shot. In the image, the "15" and its line mark should be sharp, with blur increasing towards 14 and 16. If not, adjust the focus calibration in the camera, and repeat as necessary.
My Sony inst make no reference to this, was not aware this was possible, so does not apply.Would like to see some before and after conventional pics.
Surprised the manufacturers could not get it right! Ed.
Years ago I had a Zorki 4K which produced the sharpest, snappiest negatives/transparencies of any camera I have ever owned. Foolishly, I sold it, then years later bought another. What a disappointment. The second one was mediocre, to say the least.
The first camera was obviously "centre of spec", whereas the second was just "in spec". When building performance engines, for bikes or cars, there is a term "Blueprinting", which means picking all the components which are spot on in middle of spec. This gives superior performance without using any performance parts. The same goes for cameras, Hi-Fi, etc.
That's the target I used Graham, the petapixel one.
Have only shot a few pics with the 5dIII and 24-70 since calibration, and they do seem a little sharper.. or I should say a higher percentage are satisfying me.
I had the same experience, Craig. Especially when I went to a higher resolution camera
Well after a Christmas trip and only taking 2 lenses and 1 body to travel light, I can say I do see a marked improvement on focus with the 5dIII and my Sigma 24-70 f2.8. The most noticeable change was in lower light, the images were noticeably sharper. Seems that the focus was much closer to the target focal plane. I was already happy with the daylight performance.
Had far fewer missed focus shots though, I feel it was a day well spent. (of course, this could all of been blind luck and the placebo effect!)