TAP-in Console (Page 2): I agree...Steve Perry's video is great. I was hesitant to use Nikons Auto Fine Tuning before seeing his video. Sure glad he is a Nikon guy!!

markinvictoria Loc: Victoria TX

SuperflyTNT wrote:

It doesn't have to be trial and error. There's a well defined process by which you set up a target and determine the adjustment amount for different focal lengths and distance to subject. If you have a Nikon that has auto Fine Tuning then it's really easy to use that to get the adjustment numbers. Steve Perry has a great video on it.

I agree...Steve Perry's video is great. I was hesitant to use Nikons Auto Fine Tuning before seeing his video. Sure glad he is a Nikon guy!!

knelso4

My lens and camera will get back on Monday. Tamron calibrated twice but there was still back focus and 18-35mm wasn't as sharp as it should have been. Testing is easy and should be done on every 3rd party lens and probably EVERY lens just to be sure. Use a white ruler with a high contrast center section at 45 degrees for short distances and at all major FLs. I use the attached setup for 8 feet. Distance for infinity is harder. Use a DOF calculator and find the distance where infinity is just barely reached. For example, at 18mm 15 feet is plenty. Set the back target around 25 feet and front at 7. Center and back should be sharp but front slightly out of focus. For 400mm the farther away the better. At 250 feet DOF is about 18 feet so it is practical to see front or back focus. After adjusting find a way to verify it at longer distances. You would need about 4300 feet to test actual infinity.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

Tony Northrup says fine focus adjustments are a rat hole and not worth the time. He says the fine focus does not yield consistent results because of slight variances in focus from shot to shot.

Food for thought.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

JD750 wrote:

Tony Northrup says fine focus adjustments are a rat hole and not worth the time. He says the fine focus does not yield consistent results because of slight variances in focus from shot to shot.

Food for thought.

Tony Northrup says a lot of things. Steve Perry says you don’t take one reading from auto fine tuning, you take a dozen and average them. I trust Steve Perry over Tony Northrup

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

Some good info. I need to bo more research

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

Some good info. I need to bo more research

JD750 Loc: SoCal

SuperflyTNT wrote:

Tony Northrup says a lot of things. Steve Perry says you don’t take one reading from auto fine tuning, you take a dozen and average them. I trust Steve Perry over Tony Northrup

I think Tony is out to sell his video-web products and he says controversial things to do that because he gets more hits. However that does not mean that what he says is wrong.

Sorry I couldn't find the video link, but his point was that cameras have a variance in focus lock, so if you take several pics in sequence, refocusing in between shots, even on a tripod, there will be a slight variance of focus between shots. So if you dial in a micro focus adjustment, and you take several shots you will still have that variance. It might even be worse after the micro-adjustment. So if it's not broke, don't fix it. If it's broke, send it back.

He also noted that some lenses tend to front focus a little, some rear. His point was, know your equipment, and compensate when you shoot.

Pistnbroke Loc: UK

I give up with UHH ,I explain the procedure for the D500 and two posts down people are saying they don't know how to do it .
The post above is also wrong ...I have found over many years that the fine focus figure for a lens on one Nikon body can be used on other Nikon bodies you don't have to do it all again

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

JD750 wrote:

I think Tony is out to sell his video-web products... (show quote)

I don’t quite get that. If you know your lens front or rear focuses compensate? What focus manually, use live view? Yes there can be micro differences in focus, that’s why Steve Perry says take 12 shots and average. Those are micro differences, probably from -1 to +1 either way. If you take 12 shots and they’re all off between +5 and +7 and it averages to +6 and you use -6 as an adjustment, the end result will still be much better than without. Those micro differences aren’t even discernible to our vision.

DebAnn Loc: Toronto

Ron Krause wrote:

I just purchased a new lens (Tamron 18-400) and B&H sent me a TAP-in CON. I am completely lost as to how to us it, what it does and how to go about using it. Is it something I must do or is it a correction device. I would appreciate any and all advice. Thanks in advance to all. Everyone have a great holiday season!!

I was at a pro photography show recently and chatted with the rep from Tamron. She said they are working on a simple tutorial about how to do this and it should be ready in January. I will post then if I find it. In the meantime, put the tap-in thing away. You probably don't need it if your lens is new. Practise with it a bit and see how you do. I am very happy with my 18-400 lens and don't feel it needs any adjustment.

knelso4

JD750 wrote:

I think Tony is out to sell his video-web products... (show quote)

Yes, there can be variance. But that doesn't mean front / back focus should be ignored. After getting most of the adjustment done I shoot at least 3 to see if there is any difference -- and there sometimes is. Only after I get consistent results do I know where the focus is really at.

Just how does one "compensate" for front or rear focus? In some cases it might be possible to select a spot in front or behind the desired point, but then you have to remember how far off your lens is either at wide / tele or even at multiple FLs.

If you can tune the lens, and if it needs it, tune it. If you can only adjust the camera, and it will help achieve more consistent focus, do it. But without testing you will never know.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

JD750 wrote:

Tony Northrup says fine focus adjustments are a rat hole and not worth the time. He says the fine focus does not yield consistent results because of slight variances in focus from shot to shot.

Food for thought.

SuperflyTNT wrote:

Tony Northrup says a lot of things. Steve Perry says you don’t take one reading from auto fine tuning, you take a dozen and average them. I trust Steve Perry over Tony Northrup

Oddly Perry's idea that you should "take a dozen and average them" supports Northrup's idea that it does not yield consistent results.

Think about it.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

dsmeltz wrote:

Oddly Perry's idea that you should "take a dozen and average them" supports Northrup's idea that it does not yield consistent results.

Think about it.

Im not arguing that there are no differences in focus, but those very minor differences aren’t enough to be visible. The fact that there may be small differences in focus in no way makes fine tuning a waste of time. That’s where Northrup is wrong. The differences you’re adjusting for are greater than the minor differences in focus.

Pistnbroke Loc: UK

Superfly TNT ..you are talking total rubbish,,if the auto adjust averages at +6 then you put in +6 not -6.
This type of stupid information just misleads people . Please turn on Brain before posting.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Pistnbroke wrote:

Superfly TNT ..you are talking total rubbish,,if the auto adjust averages at +6 then you put in +6 not -6.
This type of stupid information just misleads people . Please turn on Brain before posting.

My mistake, in the manual process you adjust to the opposite of your readings, but the auto process gives you the adjustment value. But to be clear, only that part of my post was “rubbish” as you so rudely put it. The fine tuning process itself is not a waste of time.