10-08-2011, 09:55 PM
[quote name='Vieux loup' timestamp='1318108585' post='12229']
With respect, if you read Ciala's article, there is really only one point he is trying to make; whether a lense is good or just so, so, depends not only on the lens but also on the body. To find a really good set of lenses, one needs to micro-adjust all ones lenses to one body and then stick with them, because they may seem bad on another body. This because of QC tolerances that are not likely to become any smaller. Therefore, (my thesis) invest in metal bodies that are much less likely to move and more likely to keep lens alignment optimal! When you think of the fortune invested in good lenses, the investment in a pro body is cheap insurance as far as I m concerned.
[/quote]
I did read Roger Cicala's article, so I guess I am allowed to comment <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />.
I have had my lenses and cameras all adjusted by Canon to work together not just the way it gets normally done, but actually asked for a specific set up for myself <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />. That works for me.
As to tolerances: considering indeed the minute tolerances required for todays best lenses to work optimally, it becomes obvious when doing some calculations that if one wants to obtain the sharpest images consistently, not only body firmware, lenses and lens firmware have to be adjusted, but also lens mounts and sensors themselves.
Furthermore, investing in a metal camera body may not necessarily be the best option either, due to the fact that temperature differences, as indicated in the article, may result in non-optimal conditions for lenses. If that can pose a problem with lenses, it also can with camera bodies. Best therefore would be to use a camera body made from a material with an extremely small temperature coëfficient, such as some of the "engineering plastics" used <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />.
Having said that, micro-adjustment always is a good option to be able to use new lenses in an optimal way until they too can be adjusted. Provided of course there is enough leeway to make these adjustments, and that the lens is not faulty beyond just a very simple and small back or front focus issue.
Kind regards, Wim
With respect, if you read Ciala's article, there is really only one point he is trying to make; whether a lense is good or just so, so, depends not only on the lens but also on the body. To find a really good set of lenses, one needs to micro-adjust all ones lenses to one body and then stick with them, because they may seem bad on another body. This because of QC tolerances that are not likely to become any smaller. Therefore, (my thesis) invest in metal bodies that are much less likely to move and more likely to keep lens alignment optimal! When you think of the fortune invested in good lenses, the investment in a pro body is cheap insurance as far as I m concerned.
[/quote]
I did read Roger Cicala's article, so I guess I am allowed to comment <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />.I have had my lenses and cameras all adjusted by Canon to work together not just the way it gets normally done, but actually asked for a specific set up for myself <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />. That works for me.As to tolerances: considering indeed the minute tolerances required for todays best lenses to work optimally, it becomes obvious when doing some calculations that if one wants to obtain the sharpest images consistently, not only body firmware, lenses and lens firmware have to be adjusted, but also lens mounts and sensors themselves.
Furthermore, investing in a metal camera body may not necessarily be the best option either, due to the fact that temperature differences, as indicated in the article, may result in non-optimal conditions for lenses. If that can pose a problem with lenses, it also can with camera bodies. Best therefore would be to use a camera body made from a material with an extremely small temperature coëfficient, such as some of the "engineering plastics" used <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />.Having said that, micro-adjustment always is a good option to be able to use new lenses in an optimal way until they too can be adjusted. Provided of course there is enough leeway to make these adjustments, and that the lens is not faulty beyond just a very simple and small back or front focus issue.
Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....