Andy Work
Well-known member
I used a yardstick at a 45 degree angle for the target.
Lens testing Equipment
- Thread starter PAUL50
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
Have any of you used Reikan FoCal? How is it compared to LensAlign?
I used the Spyder LensCal.
It is smaller and probable less pricy, but it works. I have done all the AF fine tuning with it upon recommendation and I got good results.
However, I just did it for the long end from 300m up (including combos with TC) but have no experience with doing it for very fast lenses if shorter lengths, e.g. a 85mm f1.45 used for portraiture.
It is smaller and probable less pricy, but it works. I have done all the AF fine tuning with it upon recommendation and I got good results.
However, I just did it for the long end from 300m up (including combos with TC) but have no experience with doing it for very fast lenses if shorter lengths, e.g. a 85mm f1.45 used for portraiture.
I use Reikan FoCal and have been pleased with the results. I don't know much about the other testing software but Focal will do focus calibration, AF consistency, aperture sharpness, and dust analysis. I have not used the options other than focus calibration much so I can't really comment much on them. FoCal uses a flat target to do the calibration and the target can be purchased or printed.
I usually use the Nikon AF fine tune process or the Dot Tune AF fine tune process first to have some values to compare the software results to.
While I think the focus software works well and gives good results I always feel like I have to do a series of practical tests in order to verify the focus accuracy. This can be using a target of some type or by finding some natural scene that would display front or back focusing if it exists.
Capturingtheunseen.com
Well-known member
Redneck lens calibration:
Try doing this: put an object on textured ground like grass, pebbles, etc. I've used a toy soldier, a soda can, etc. Take captures from different distances, handheld if you want or on a tripod. Then put the images into Lightroom.
In the library module, use a free plugin called Focus Point to ensure that you indeed focused on the correct spot on your target.
Go to the develop module, detail section. Take the sharpening slider down to "1." Take the radius and detail sliders down all the way.
Put your finger on the ALT key and move the masking slider up. You will see white disappear until what is left is your depth of field.
Since you aren't on the same plane (standing while object is on ground) you can expect to see the depth of field appear to be somewhat larger in front of the target than behind it due to physics being what they are.
It's not LensAlign, but I use it all the time to check my lenses at different distances. Use different apertures to see how they differ.
Let me know what you think.
Try doing this: put an object on textured ground like grass, pebbles, etc. I've used a toy soldier, a soda can, etc. Take captures from different distances, handheld if you want or on a tripod. Then put the images into Lightroom.
In the library module, use a free plugin called Focus Point to ensure that you indeed focused on the correct spot on your target.
Go to the develop module, detail section. Take the sharpening slider down to "1." Take the radius and detail sliders down all the way.
Put your finger on the ALT key and move the masking slider up. You will see white disappear until what is left is your depth of field.
Since you aren't on the same plane (standing while object is on ground) you can expect to see the depth of field appear to be somewhat larger in front of the target than behind it due to physics being what they are.
It's not LensAlign, but I use it all the time to check my lenses at different distances. Use different apertures to see how they differ.
Let me know what you think.
Dustydewey
New member
I purchased the Lens Align kit couple of yrs ago but with Apple upgrade, the program has not caught up with 64 bit tech . I tried contacting Micheal with a notice he is having health issues and at this time , until further notice ,will not be any upgrade . Last time i checked 6wks ago.
James May
New member
Hi, I used Micheal Tapes system to all my lens. Any zoom lens I did a test at for example 100,200,300,400,500mm and when I was all done my test I recorded the results . I then made a pdf file for each lens on each camera I have (D4,D850,D800) and carry that pdf file on my iPhone in iBooks with me in the field . It has worked out great .
James May
New member
Yes I found that out to but I was lucky had my laptop with the older operating system on it.
JerryF
Member
Good point on the defocus each time. To add to that you might also want to try defocusing to both the short end and infinity end of the lens to see if it makes a difference on focus when coming to focus from both directions. I tried this using the dot tune method and I was shocked to find that my lens was off by the same amount but in the opposite direction. This led me to believe that my lens was as close as it was going to get to handle any scenario. It also helped me to realize that AF is not nearly as perfect as I had believed.
Yeah, in engineering terms we'd call that a classic overshoot problem which could be the result of the mass or lack of dampening of the internal lens elements. But yeah, there are limits to precision depending on the specific equipment being tested which is why a bit smaller aperture can add some additional AF margin when the light allows.
Jucaboes
New member
Reikan Focal is a good piece of software. I do like it very much.
DrBob
Member
I use FoCal. It's a bit on the expensive side, but works great. Following their procedure, it will automatically set the AF fine tune. I used it to set the AF Fine Tune for all my lens/camera combinations.
Laurent Dieu
Active member
Hi, as many others, I used Micheal Tapes system to all my lens + his software.
I never tested any other method, so I can't compare and say it's better... But, I'm really happy with the results.
Look at it's Web sites and FAQ section, you'll find answer to most of the questions raised before, he also recorded few videos to show how to setup everything correctly for proper calibration, same for the use of the software.
Laurent.
I never tested any other method, so I can't compare and say it's better... But, I'm really happy with the results.
Look at it's Web sites and FAQ section, you'll find answer to most of the questions raised before, he also recorded few videos to show how to setup everything correctly for proper calibration, same for the use of the software.
Laurent.