- REIKAN FOCAL PRO ZOOM LENS FOR MAC
- REIKAN FOCAL PRO ZOOM LENS MANUAL
- REIKAN FOCAL PRO ZOOM LENS SOFTWARE
I did my kit 18-200 zoom at 200mm and came up with a -4. The TC added a +4 to the plain 300 MFA value and I ended up with a +10 and +14 value for the two. My tests for a max focus 300mm prime and that plus a 1.4x TC. The newer Focal documentation states 25x should be good and ignore the crop factor. There was some discussion about ignoring the crop factor. When I did my lenses last summer I used Canon's recommended distance but I used the effective focus due to the crop factor (1.6) times 50. What I did was if I get let us say a four point spread between a near defocus and far defocus result I'll select the middle value. I have not looked at the version 1.6 tests yet. Try it on a few MFA points near your max range. In the Testing guide for 1.3 included look at section 6.1 on semi-auto testing of focus consistency. In another section in thr Expert Settings area you can increase or decrease the number of tests for each MFA step essentially controlling resolution.
REIKAN FOCAL PRO ZOOM LENS MANUAL
In the test ops manual check out paragraph 18.3.1 Defocus Method. I'd be interested in anyone else's result in this regard.
![reikan focal pro zoom lens reikan focal pro zoom lens](https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0353/1246/8099/files/Sigma_60-600mm_2_480x480.jpg)
Now, which AFMA value do you choose? Split the difference for the different defocus directions? But then what about the distance dependence? If the AFMA is so dependent on the distance and defocus direction what's the point of these results obtained in relatively well-controlled lab conditions compared to in the field conditions? +2.1 and -0.3 for near and far defocus, respectively. Similar results were obtained at 700 mm with a 1.4 TCII and 12.7 meter distance though again at different absolute values, e.g.
![reikan focal pro zoom lens reikan focal pro zoom lens](https://d33v4339jhl8k0.cloudfront.net/docs/assets/5805f65dc697915a23d7a92c/images/5aabbe7d2c7d3a56d88706bf/file-iCguP2qImW.png)
While the trend is the same (near requires more positive AFMA than far) the values are clearly offset from the previous results. Then I repeated the test at a distance of 8 meters (26.2 ft) and got average recommended AFMA values of +6.6 and +4.0 for near and far defocus, respectively. the recommended AFMA results for near max defocus for the 6 runs were 5.2, 5.5, 4.4, 4.4, 4.1 and 3.7 and clearly outside of the range of values for far max defocus (0.9, 1.0, 0.6, -0.1, 1.3, 0.3). I have high confidence that the results are legitimate as I got pretty consistent values for each run with the same defocus direction even when switching from the recommended base ISO of 100 to 3200 to reduce the chance of vibrations influencing the results. Huh? Yes, different values depending on the focusing direction.
![reikan focal pro zoom lens reikan focal pro zoom lens](http://travelthroughpictures.com/wp-content/uploads/MFA-Target.gif)
The average recommended AFMA value for each case was +4.6 and +0.7, respectively. Half of the times I selected to defocus to max near and the other half to max far. I ran the autofocus adjustment fully automatic procedure a total of twelve times at a distance of 12.7 meter (41.7 ft) from the camera to the target. Unfortunately, not everything was rosy though the reason is most likely of Canon's origin.
REIKAN FOCAL PRO ZOOM LENS SOFTWARE
The ease of aligning the target to the camera alone makes the Reikan software worthwhile for me. To summarize: the ease of setup and reproducibility of the results were pretty good, especially compared to the Lens Align Target and software.
REIKAN FOCAL PRO ZOOM LENS FOR MAC
Last weekend I finally got around to test the latest beta version of the Reikan Focal Pro software for Mac with my Canon 1DmkIV and 500F4LIS.