|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
March 30th, 2008, 06:52 AM
|
#61 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kelkheim, Germany
Posts: 375
|
Quote:
Yes, please post split screen image.
__________________
Michael |
|
|
|
|
March 30th, 2008, 08:19 AM
|
#62 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Malta
Posts: 306
|
Nick thanks for your interesting explanation. Following these recent posts I checked again my camera and realised that I had mistakenly thought to be a FW 1.03. In fact it is a FW 1.02 and it has never been sent back to Sony. It seems that Holger has almost solved his problem even though it is a 1.02 by going further away to do the test. I have yet to find such a scenario where I can do the test from about 10 meters away. Are there any more 1.02's who managed to solve the BF issue or do we need an upgrade to at least 1.03?
And more interestingly, are there any cameras which are being bought now that do not need any BF adjustments? If so, do they have the FW 1.05 or better? |
|
|
|
|
March 30th, 2008, 08:38 AM
|
#63 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Northampton, UK
Posts: 259
|
Quote:
1. The Auto FB procedure should have been run at the factory as part of the manufacturing process, but was forgotten, or 2. A standard set of focus look-up tables, which it was assumed would work for all lenses, was part of the firmware. The Auto FB procedure was only intended to be used at repair shops for cameras with backfocus problems. I would assume the latter. It seems from the vignetting issue that Sony mistakenly thought that lenses could just be taken out of the Fujinon box, be fixed onto the camera and would work. Thinking that a default backfocus table would also work for all cameras is part of the same thought process. Nick |
|
|
|
|
|
March 30th, 2008, 10:59 AM
|
#64 |
|
Trustee
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 1,684
|
What is "A standard set of focus look-up tables"?
It seems to me that the verdict is still not in on the backfocus issue but I am definitely not certain that my original post was correct that you need the 1.05 firmware. That's what Sony told me and I repeated it. I am inclined to expect that it should make some difference in how the camera back-focuses, but who knows at this point. Pretty weird really. |
|
|
|
|
March 30th, 2008, 11:44 AM
|
#65 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Austria
Posts: 122
|
I have heard some rumors from a Sony source that a new FW is in the works which should fix all problems.
I do not know how trustworthy this is - so please take it with a grain of salt. |
|
|
|
|
March 30th, 2008, 11:49 AM
|
#66 |
|
Trustee
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 1,896
|
It's possible that the camera's firmware was updated at the last minute which and for some reason, over wrote the BF lookup table. This could of happened when the cameras may have left the factory with version 1.01, but then was upgraded to a later version...
Of course, this is just a WILD guess. Well, it appears at least versions 1.03 and up, if the procedure is done correctly, whatever that may be, it should work. Or, maybe Sony has a new firmware version to relieve this misery. It's possible you want the target/s to fill a certain amount of field of view when wide, but not to much. All cameras, especially at full wide, have a slight difference in center to edge focus, curvature, or TFD (total focus deviation). During the setup, when zoomed in, you filled the field of view with the target. (Wow, that was a tongue twister.. LOL). You manually adjust focus on the siemens star. At full wide, because the field of view is different for the target, the camera may find focus a bit different then where it would of if you were able to manually override the calibration when it went wide. Hmm... That may be a great user option to have in a firmware upgrade and offer it in a regular menu location. I have a feeling it's just dang senitive to the setup. Adam Wilt just reported he was able to get his EX1 camera BF decent by using a large target and setting all three ND settings. Great news! We will eventually figure this out. We are almost there, if not there already. What we really need is Sony to drop in and set us straight about this issue and what the firmware versions entail. Maybe a new version??? |
|
|
|
|
March 30th, 2008, 11:50 AM
|
#67 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Northampton, UK
Posts: 259
|
Quote:
I'm guessing that to control costs, Sony want cameras which are put together on an assembly line and come off the end (a) identical and (b) ready for end users without the need for any calibration. This is how Handycams (up to and including the Z1) are built, and it seems to work. All of the variables in the software control, such as exposure, translating zoom and focus inputs to the movement of glass, are the same from one camera to the next, partly because their Zeiss lenses (which are designed with help from but not built by Zeiss) have build consistency absolutely nailed. It seems with the EX1 that they wanted to do the same. Unfortunately, a combination of very fine tolerances and some variation between Fujinon lenses (after all, their other products all get individually calibrated) meant that this approach did not work. My guess is that they built prototypes and calibrated them, then lifted all the calibration data including the lens control tables into the production firmware. As we are seeing, with a significant number of cameras this approach results in less than perfect operation. Nick |
|
|
|
|
|
March 30th, 2008, 11:59 AM
|
#68 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 206
|
Quote:
Do you guys really think that a firmware update is going to fix the backfocus issue automatically without any adjustment? |
|
|
|
|
|
March 30th, 2008, 12:06 PM
|
#69 | |
|
Trustee
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 1,896
|
Quote:
we can ONLY hope they PLEASE offer the upgrade via download and a USB flash at our own risk. I'm praying this is the case. It's going to be way to much burden to have them deal with this issue. The vignetting is large enough. Again, I'm hoping they offer us the procedure and USB software and add the disclaimer to try this at your own risk. |
|
|
|
|
|
March 30th, 2008, 12:08 PM
|
#70 | |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Austria
Posts: 122
|
Quote:
From what this source said - there even might be a recall for some cameras (he is not sure about this) - even for the new FW it will be necessary to send the camera in to Sony. I do not know how trustworthy this source is - he says he worked for Sony and still has some good contacts there. Its only speculation... Last edited by Gerald Loidl; March 30th, 2008 at 12:11 PM. Reason: added some info |
|
|
|
|
|
March 30th, 2008, 12:12 PM
|
#71 | |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 206
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 30th, 2008, 12:16 PM
|
#72 |
|
Obstreperous Rex
|
There is a risk, because it's possible to brick a camera during a firmware upgrade if the procedure isn't done properly. A botched upgrade procedure performed by the manufacturer's service center is their fault -- but if you do it yourself and botch it, then it's your fault. Thus the disclaimer as Steven Thomas rightfully suggests (and it's a standard warning from any manufacturer).
|
|
|
|
|
March 30th, 2008, 12:26 PM
|
#73 | |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Austria
Posts: 122
|
Quote:
Looks like my method really works! A large enough target and doing the calibration for each ND setting seems to be the way to fix it. Adams technique to use a huge monitor displaying a Siemens star is an excellent idea! |
|
|
|
|
|
March 30th, 2008, 12:38 PM
|
#74 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Cardiff, Wales, UK
Posts: 410
|
Can someone please point me towards Adam's report. AS I posted elsewere Gerald's suggestion solved my backfocus problem.
|
|
|
|
|
March 30th, 2008, 12:43 PM
|
#75 |
|
Trustee
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 1,896
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
