Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/07/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]and thank you again Ken. good to know. and rather good design on C's part. (hard to believe they'd let do that given the recent link to precision of the sensor placement) h-m-m-m Regards, George Lottermoser george at imagist.com http://www.imagist.com http://www.imagist.com/blog http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist On Jul 28, 2009, at 6:16 PM, Ken Carney wrote: > I did, actually. The 5D2 allows you to adjust the distance from > the sensor > to lens, and then records that (for up to 20 Canon lenses), and > sets it when > you mount that particular lens. It is a matter of shooting test > targets > (boring) with various increments of up to +20 to -20. With the > zooms (24-70 > 2.8 L and 70-200 2.8 IS L) the differences between correct focus > and no > adjustment were not at all subtle. The primes I have needed no > adjustment. > > Ken > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: lug-bounces+kcarney1=cox.net at leica-users.org [mailto:lug- >> bounces+kcarney1=cox.net at leica-users.org] On Behalf Of George >> Lottermoser >> Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 9:52 PM >> To: Leica Users Group >> Subject: Re: [Leica] summer flowers >> >> thanks Ken. >> who did the calibration? >> >> Regards, >> George Lottermoser >> george at imagist.com >> http://www.imagist.com >> http://www.imagist.com/blog >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist >> >> On Jul 27, 2009, at 6:55 PM, Ken Carney wrote: >> >>> I thought the images were a little soft at first, >>> but my L zooms were back-focusing and had to be calibrated to the >>> body (or >>> vice-versa). >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information