Backfocus/Frontfocus: Something to live with for DSLR?


Status
Not open for further replies.
Sep 9, 2002
452
0
0
Visit site
#1
Is front focusing or back focusing something that we have to live with when using DSLRs if it is not too serious? :dunno: I dun understand why u can obtain good focus with some lenses whereas you can't for others. And if we re-calibrate those problematics ones, we will end up with mis-calibration for the good ones. :cry:
 

clive

Senior Member
Oct 9, 2002
2,537
0
0
Visit site
#4
just buy, use, check, recalibrate if needed..end of story. sometimes its suay, soem times its manufacturing error..nothing much actually
 

Sep 9, 2002
452
0
0
Visit site
#5
clive said:
just buy, use, check, recalibrate if needed..end of story. sometimes its suay, soem times its manufacturing error..nothing much actually
Like I said earlier, it is not just a matter of re-calibration. A re-calibration of one lens resulting in a mis-calibration of another. The cycle continues.
 

Sep 9, 2002
452
0
0
Visit site
#6
Ah Pao said:
:kok: :bsmilie:
Backfocus? What's that?

- millions of film SLR users
I doubt they examine it as much as the digital users who can see their photos at full size on the computer.
 

XXX Boy

New Member
Jan 11, 2004
1,159
0
0
43
GEYLAND LOR 15 LO
#7
shutterfly said:
I doubt they examine it as much as the digital users who can see their photos at full size on the computer.

I believe that the problem could be due to lousy QA in their manufacturing plant in Thailand.
Those people are not truely experienced in assy lens like those Japanese conterparts.
 

justarius

Senior Member
Nov 9, 2003
1,226
0
36
Northeast
Visit site
#8
shutterfly said:
I doubt they examine it as much as the digital users who can see their photos at full size on the computer.
oh really? you know what a loupe is? As far as I know, good photos appeared long before the apperance of digital anything. Don't disgrace yourself and insult all the film shooters at the same time.
 

Kit

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
11,698
42
48
42
Upper Bukit Timah
Visit site
#9
Ever notice why there is always this snowballing effect on this problem. One start complaining, the others follow? Why are pictures illiustrating focussing problems usually show, a ruler, newspaper on wall, etc. Are these things people usually shoot? Why can't they see the problem with ordinary pictures(which actually counts more)? If you can't see the problem in your pictures(minus "test" shots), then what problem? Or is the the mentality of "I must own the perfect camera" tricking you into believing you have a camera with problems? People spend thousands buying cameras and use them to shoot rulers, think about it.
 

Sep 9, 2002
452
0
0
Visit site
#10
justarius said:
oh really? you know what a loupe is? As far as I know, good photos appeared long before the apperance of digital anything. Don't disgrace yourself and insult all the film shooters at the same time.
Do you claim that all film shooters shoot slides and examine their slides using loupe? What I meant was when using digital, it is so much easier to view your photos at larger magnification. Some film shooters(quite a few of my friends) simply shoot, develop and print 4R.
 

Sep 9, 2002
452
0
0
Visit site
#11
Kit said:
Ever notice why there is always this snowballing effect on this problem. One start complaining, the others follow? Why are pictures illiustrating focussing problems usually show, a ruler, newspaper on wall, etc. Are these things people usually shoot? Why can't they see the problem with ordinary pictures(which actually counts more)? If you can't see the problem in your pictures(minus "test" shots), then what problem? Or is the the mentality of "I must own the perfect camera" tricking you into believing you have a camera with problems? People spend thousands buying cameras and use them to shoot rulers, think about it.
Likewise, there there is this "biased mentality" that once someone complains abt focusing prob, he/she must be a newbie who doesn't know what he/she is doing, lack skills and knowledge. :D I know some guys who got to know their cams might have prob through shooting real "subjects" and not rulers. Another myth among the "pros".
 

Kit

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
11,698
42
48
42
Upper Bukit Timah
Visit site
#12
Then perhaps you should ask them to post their results here for discussion. I've yet to see an image(not those testers) that illustrates back/front focussing problem. I'm not denying that there are cameras with genuine problems but most of the time, these are blown out of proportion by paranoid individuals who would rather test cameras than using them.
 

justarius

Senior Member
Nov 9, 2003
1,226
0
36
Northeast
Visit site
#13
shutterfly said:
Do you claim that all film shooters shoot slides and examine their slides using loupe? What I meant was when using digital, it is so much easier to view your photos at larger magnification. Some film shooters(quite a few of my friends) simply shoot, develop and print 4R.
true, not all film shooters shoot slides and examine them using a loupe. But does it mean that their pictures are bad? How are the pictures of your friends who only print 4R? Does it look good to you? If it's good enough for them, does it matter if there camera has a backfocussing problem?

Digital has made it easier to measurabate. It's so easy to cut out a 100% crop of anything and say, hah, it's not sharp! There's backfocus! There's chromatic aberrations at insanely high shutterspeeds which I would never use and would never be visible if I was shooting at anything else other than a piece of white paper.

I'm not saying that there isn't a problem. I acknowledge that there are well documented problems. But are these problems severe enough to destroy picture quality (note not pictures of test charts, but actual photographs of landscapes etc) and for people to be sending every other camera to the service centre? I would hazard a guess that most pro's (I'm not one) would rather bring their new camera outside and take actual pictures and see the quality from there rather than stay indoors and squint at a computer screen image of test charts.
 

Sep 9, 2002
452
0
0
Visit site
#14
justarius said:
true, not all film shooters shoot slides and examine them using a loupe. But does it mean that their pictures are bad? How are the pictures of your friends who only print 4R? Does it look good to you? If it's good enough for them, does it matter if there camera has a backfocussing problem?

Digital has made it easier to measurabate. It's so easy to cut out a 100% crop of anything and say, hah, it's not sharp! There's backfocus! There's chromatic aberrations at insanely high shutterspeeds which I would never use and would never be visible if I was shooting at anything else other than a piece of white paper.

I'm not saying that there isn't a problem. I acknowledge that there are well documented problems. But are these problems severe enough to destroy picture quality (note not pictures of test charts, but actual photographs of landscapes etc) and for people to be sending every other camera to the service centre? I would hazard a guess that most pro's (I'm not one) would rather bring their new camera outside and take actual pictures and see the quality from there rather than stay indoors and squint at a computer screen image of test charts.
I agree and I did not say anything abt their pictures been bad. I am just stating it is easier for digital users to examine than film users. But I think you are very mean in saying things like "Don't disgrace yourself and insult all the film shooters at the same time." which is not my intention at all.
 

justarius

Senior Member
Nov 9, 2003
1,226
0
36
Northeast
Visit site
#15
shutterfly said:
I agree and I did not say anything abt their pictures been bad. I am just stating it is easier for digital users to examine than film users. But I think you are very mean in saying things like "Don't disgrace yourself and insult all the film shooters at the same time." which is not my intention at all.
right, I might have been a tad touchy. :embrass: Sorry if I had been offensive. :sweat: kiss and make up? :bsmilie:
 

2100

Senior Member
Mar 3, 2004
3,591
0
0
48
#16
I have ever seen a 20x24 wedding portrait print done by a pro wedding photog (with MF of coz!) "backfocus". The scene is that the couple's background which is the house is much sharper than the couple. Very evident. Quite bad since it's considered pro work. :nono:
 

justarius

Senior Member
Nov 9, 2003
1,226
0
36
Northeast
Visit site
#17
2100 said:
I have ever seen a 20x24 wedding portrait print done by a pro wedding photog (with MF of coz!) "backfocus". The scene is that the couple's background which is the house is much sharper than the couple. Very evident. Quite bad since it's considered pro work. :nono:
wah, like that ah? maybe his eyesight is going... some MF cameras are manual focus...
 

Jed

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
3,911
0
0
UK
Visit site
#18
Gentlemen cool down.

I don't know the reasons, but back and front focus is unfortunately a common problem among DSLRs (not that it might not be among film SLRs either). But it is true of made in Thailand cameras (well maybe, can't say I've seen the problem in one made in that country) and also in made in Japan bodies (1D, 1DII, D1h, D1x, D2h). So let's not start on the "you're not pro" and "shut up" and "i've never seen it so it doesn't exist" kind of arguments please.
 

sriram

New Member
Mar 10, 2002
1,253
0
0
#19
Not sure about the rest of you guys, but I've gone through and owned several Canon film SLR's and lenses, and have never encountered a focusing problem except with third party lenses. I've even owned an ancient EOS 630 for a while and it performed flawlessly on my new 100-400L.

In the beginning I thought the back/front focus problem with DSLR's was overhyped by people posting in dpreview and other forums, but I've encountered back focusing on two occasions with two different DSLR's (not mine) with my lenses (which, btw, perform flawlessly on my film SLR's). Having seen so many complaints and after experiencing this myself, it looks like there may be a problem right up at engineering or maybe materials/component tolerance and QA. Dunno what it is, but this is one major factor putting me off buying a DSLR.
 

lytefunk

New Member
Feb 15, 2002
353
0
0
Visit site
#20
i believe the reason why theres such thing as back focus and front focus issues is that its a consumer camera.. A mass produced, cheaply available (although people would argue $2k isn't cheap), low QC tolerance camera..

Look at it this way, by understanding back focussing, its not a inherent fault of digital cameras, its heavily due to tolerance levels in components used for making the product.. You want a better product? pay for it..

the argument that $2k isn't cheap.. its relative actually..digital cameras start on a higher initial cost than say, a film SLR or even a film compact

$400 would barely buy you an average digital compact, but it gets you a damn good film compact (or even better, maybe an entry level SLR)

so if theres such thing as a $1k film body.. or $2k film body, what makes you think that a $2k dSLR is comparable to them? Its like, they spend this amount of money making the body (mount, shutter, controls/dials) you still have to have extra money to make the sensor, and I don't think thats cheap.

basically, if you don't want to have front/back focussing issues, pay for it...

I don't have money. so I get a D70.. I know what it can do, I know what are its limits, of course, I have my complains, but $$$ doesn't allow me to complain too much
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom