Fine Tuning a new lens
Dec 30, 2017 15:52:33 #
Subject: Eagle @ 100 yards
First photo AF Fine Tune @ 0
Went throught the Fine Tune process described in Steve Perry's
book "Secrets To The Nikon Autofocus System" ver 1.2.0. I used the DOT TUNE
method because it seemed to be the easiest method of the three he describes.
The results indicated that +2 should give me sharper photos. I set +2 and went
out to photograph my eagles.
The first photo was taken at the original 0 setting
The second photo was taken at the +2 setting.
There is a difference and you're going to have to compare them side by side to see it.
I hope the enlarged photos show you the difference - look at the glint in the eye and the
sharper feathers.
Aaaaaah ... I think you're just going to have to trust me; plus 2 is sharper.
First photo AF Fine Tune @ 0
Went throught the Fine Tune process described in Steve Perry's
book "Secrets To The Nikon Autofocus System" ver 1.2.0. I used the DOT TUNE
method because it seemed to be the easiest method of the three he describes.
The results indicated that +2 should give me sharper photos. I set +2 and went
out to photograph my eagles.
The first photo was taken at the original 0 setting
The second photo was taken at the +2 setting.
There is a difference and you're going to have to compare them side by side to see it.
I hope the enlarged photos show you the difference - look at the glint in the eye and the
sharper feathers.
Aaaaaah ... I think you're just going to have to trust me; plus 2 is sharper.
Dec 30, 2017 16:15:04 #
Howard5252 wrote:
Subject: Eagle @ 100 yards br First photo AF Fine ... (show quote)
If you say so. If there is a difference it is very subtle. Maybe if I had each photo sitting side by side as you said I could see it. Your lens and camera combo did a job đź‘Ź
Bud
Dec 30, 2017 16:22:20 #
TBPJr
Loc: South Carolina
Howard5252 wrote:
Subject: Eagle @ 100 yards br First photo AF Fine ... (show quote)
On my monitors, the 0 setting gave the sharper result; I swapped the pictures between monitors and still thought the 0 picture was sharper. But the difference was really subtle.
Dec 30, 2017 18:29:57 #
I have posted the two images side by side. I know it's a word doc. but it does show the difference between 0 and +2.
You can see it in the edges of the feathers and the glint in the eye. Thank you to all for your patience
You can see it in the edges of the feathers and the glint in the eye. Thank you to all for your patience
Dec 30, 2017 18:52:45 #
Why don't you just post two full sized images, properly labeled, rather than a screen capture that effectively shows nothing?
Dec 30, 2017 19:00:56 #
Howard5252 wrote:
Subject: Eagle @ 100 yards br First photo AF Fine ... (show quote)
A lot of work for a marginal improvement at best. As long as you see a difference who cares what the rest of us think. I don’t see it.
Dec 31, 2017 05:03:54 #
I didn't do a good job of showing the difference that Fine Tuning did.
The point I was trying to make was that it did make a difference.
Thanks to all who tried to see it. Happy New Year!
The point I was trying to make was that it did make a difference.
Thanks to all who tried to see it. Happy New Year!
Dec 31, 2017 09:23:27 #
I am in agreement with Bud, if there is a difference my eyes cannot see it that well.
I cannot remember a lens made by Nikon that needed adjustments with my cameras. If that would have not been the case I would have preferred to discuss it with Nikon and send the camera and lens to them for adjustment.
In your particular case, if you are satisfied with + 2, I would say keep on shooting at that setting.
I cannot remember a lens made by Nikon that needed adjustments with my cameras. If that would have not been the case I would have preferred to discuss it with Nikon and send the camera and lens to them for adjustment.
In your particular case, if you are satisfied with + 2, I would say keep on shooting at that setting.
Dec 31, 2017 09:38:08 #
Howard5252 wrote:
Subject: Eagle @ 100 yards br First photo AF Fine ... (show quote)
You apparently missed what he said, that typically if you get with 5 points of spot on you probably won't notice the difference in you images.
You are seeing an optical placebo.
Dec 31, 2017 09:57:29 #
It was tough to see originally. The side by side download did show a considerable difference.
Why did you use word instead of putting them side by side in an editing program?
Have a Happy New Year!
---
Why did you use word instead of putting them side by side in an editing program?
Have a Happy New Year!
---
Dec 31, 2017 11:42:51 #
Howard: What is this adjustment of focus of +1 & +2? Some don't know just what it is so they can try it on any lens? I presume they were shot using a tripod? If not what was the shutter speed, F stop & the lens? I appreciated the blow up so a difference could be seen.
Dec 31, 2017 12:26:30 #
My suggestion is to ONLY fine tune if you know you have a problem. The pictures you showed were probable shot at a distance and wouldn't show a major difference. Try shooting an object at 5-7 ft away and lens wide open.
Dec 31, 2017 12:43:43 #
joer wrote:
You apparently missed what he said, that typically if you get with 5 points of spot on you probably won't notice the difference in you images.
You are seeing an optical placebo.
You are seeing an optical placebo.
Just to be clear ... we're not talking about out of focus photos, but rather "Acceptable" photos vs "Spot On" photos and the percentage of one to the other.
I don't want to drag Steve Perry into this but he does point out that there are two camps regarding Fine Tuning. 1- If it ain't broke, don't fix it, and 2- Those who want to improve the odds of getting a "Spot On" image.
Referring to the default setting, he writes: "Sure, many of the images may even fall into the “acceptably sharp” category most of the time – and quite a few may be spot-on (remember, it’s not perfectly consistent). However, AF fine-tuning allows us to get a higher percentage of these spot-on images, and that’s the kind of performance I want to experience."
After looking at many of my images, I felt that the "Spot On" ones were too few and far between. I did one of the procedures and the results were that a +2 setting was warranted for my lens/camera combo. Believe me, I will be expecting a higher percentage of "Spot On" photos :-)
Dec 31, 2017 12:49:21 #
Jim S
Loc: Barrington RI, DC now Hilton Head,
TBPJr wrote:
On my monitors, the 0 setting gave the sharper result; I swapped the pictures between monitors and still thought the 0 picture was sharper. But the difference was really subtle.
I agree with you totally
Dec 31, 2017 12:59:15 #
I put no faith into DIY focus-shifting single point of adjustment as a permanent solution. Neither does Nikon. The reality is that while you may find a "perfect" solution for a given focal length and distance you have adjusted the entire focus setting for all focal lengths and distances, which may not have needed adjustment at all, or a different value entirely.
The beat solution is to ensure that your camera is not at issue, which you will know if other lenses are fine. Then you can send in the lens for proper and thorough calibration.
The beat solution is to ensure that your camera is not at issue, which you will know if other lenses are fine. Then you can send in the lens for proper and thorough calibration.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.