Nikon 16-35 f4 Manual Focus override wins - best calibration?

[NRandall]

My new lens arrived today and I did a few test shots.
The two images are 100% crops a few minutes apart, and although the exposure is a little different the improvement when manually overriding AF is clear.
I'll be setting some time aside after Christmas to calibrate the AF on my lenses, and have been doing some reading.
The internet is full of sometimes conflicting opinions so I will be interested in some experiences of people here on the best approach.
The slightly darker image was with manual adjustment.


DSC_2493_0045 by randaldinga, on Flickr

DSC_2488 copy_0042 by randaldinga, on Flickr

[NRandall]

I think what I mean is AF Fine Tune, not calibration. As it is now, left to its own devices it is about the same IQ wise as the 20-35mm I just sold to pay for this.
Manually focusing takes it to another level, to my middle aged eyes anyway.

[Lance B]

16-24?

[NRandall]

16-24?

16-35 - sorry I don't know where that number came from . . . .
Can this be repaired by a Moderator or Admin person? - I cannot edit what I have done.

[Mary Anne]

16-35 Fixed.

[ricktas]

? when you did your test shots how did you do them ?

The fact there is an exposure difference between the two tells me you are not doing the test correctly. If these two are really 100% crops, then the second photo was take closer to the subject than the first one, because the flowers are bigger in the second shot.

Tripod is a must, remote shutter release too. Mirror lock-up as well. Use manual, and set your ISO, Aperture and Shutter speed and do not change them between shots.

I suspect your testing methods at present are flawed.

Also Flickr is known for 'tweaking' files stored on its service and a reduction in quality when linked is often observed, so that could come into play with what we see here too. Flickr tweak them by making the files slightly smaller than what you uploaded. Only by about 5% - 10% so most do not even notice, but I suspect it is done as a cost saving measure for storage and bandwidth costs. Being able to save between 5% and 10% on costs for a site the size of flickr is going to amount to a generous saving to their business.

http://www.ausphotography.net.au/for...us+test+charts

[arthurking83]

without exif data, it's harder to assist in determining any reason(s) as to why they came out a bit different.

One word of caution tho .. while AF fine tune is handy to have access too, it does come with associated downsides.
You may find issues in using fine tune with zoom lenses.