#Reikan focal pro review software
#Reikan focal pro review windows

But canon notebook about AFMA calibration say to shoot with the lighting that you normally shoot. More on that below.ДЇoCal told me that the type of lighting isn't a problem. Had to stop the calibration at that distance.

#Reikan focal pro review software

The software didn't do any difference because although not following the minimum distance because wanted to calibrate at working distance of 1.5m the software was not able to conclude anything. I have purchased the software to take this doubt out of my head because this lens was/is requirement +18 to shot at 1m to 1.2m of distance. You can easily see if you have back or front focus then go and adjust your AFMA till you get the same plane of focus as the shot, shot with Live View. Probably one is better of using David Abbott's procedure to do the lens calibration manually.

#Reikan focal pro review windows

That's obviously a limitation of the OS windows and their software API and communication protocols. I understand that but if it a bit flaky it is useless because my expectation is high given the advertisement - it should be a software that would work for which is not the case even in regards to being fully automated (6D alows this) as it is always saying that it loses connection or whatever and we are required to go to the AFMA menu and change manually the adjustment to allow the software to proceed. Is this normal or expected?ДЄny comments and advice? Thanks in advance. But one thing I have noticed on the AF consistency check the astigmatism was lower like 3/4%. Probably there are a lot of variables that come in to play from the positioning of the target against the sensor and all that. When performing the test the astigmatism was out of the optimal value although below 10%. Is this normal and expected for some reason? One time it was basically 100%, another time it was on the lower end of the tolerance, on the other test it was bellow the minimum of the range another time it was within the range, etc. When I performed the AF consistency several times the results changed a bit. Repeat the test at around 1.5m from the target.ДЄnother thing. Perform the test at the recommended distance.ДЈ. Increase lighting to have high shutter speed.Дў. Just as a side note in regards to future calibration test that I will be doing:ДЎ. What about for those that use lenses for distances below the calibration distance? Probably this might work very well for you. Probably for people that use their lenses for targets well above the minimum recommended distance probably this isn't an issue because the far your subject is the wider your DoF is. I question the efficacy of this software. I did change the +5 to +17 and repeated the shots and they were bang on.Д¬an someone tel me what is going on here? In the past I have had tested the lens manually at a given distance, closer that 3.5m, and the AFMA came out to be +17. Nevertheless, after the calibration like mentioned above did some shots to try the new AFMA (was assuming the software did more that just putting the AFMA setting) and the images were not in focus. If not probably putting there +5 would make sense. But that is a question that I have, does the software do anything else besides setting the AFMA value? If so, ok. It was strange the software returning that same setting. At that time the lens had +5 in the AFMA settings but that is because one day, to my eye, when I went out to try the lens for the first time I have put it at that setting because the image looked better in terms of focus. Felt like it just needed a couple of mm to be in focus. On the other day I went out and did some shots wide open and also at f/2 to test the lens out and the images were not in focus as well. Not a surprise the images didn't come out in focus. Being a portrait lens you expect to take picture at 1.5m or so from your subject if you want shoulder or half-chest. Picking up the 2.9m test the AFMA came out to be +5. The recommendation to perform the test for the 85mm is around 3.5m but because on the room I was I didn't have enough space I did it at 2.9m and also tried at 2.1m. I have used a very well lit room with artificial lighting. I have performed the calibration just out of curiosity whilst still waiting for the delivery of the targets but don t know if it will make a big difference. I have performed the calibration as it is suggested with the exception of the target in which the one I used was a printed version of the physical targets that they sell. However, I am finding the results for the 85mm not in line with what I was expecting, that is, the AFMA that I got does not serve my needs. I got this software to perform calibration on my lenses specially for the 85mm f/1.2L II.