EF 300mm won't focus for Space Shuttle shoot

G

groveChuck

U-matic Member
It focuses, manual and auto, on the Canon body.

Put it on the AF, it's a manual blurry mess. I tried auto on the Canon body then taking it off like the DOF preview for iris, but no go, a blurry mess.

Frustrating as I was taking it to shoot the penultimate Space Shuttle launch tomorrow...

Will have to make do with 70-200 2.8L + a 2x from 6 miles... sigh...

This is the first time I've been happy about the 2x effect.

We'll have to fix it in post... :kali:
 
It's just the Fotodiox adapter, but all the other EF lenses work fine (no issues or complaints at all).
It has a window where you can see the focus setting on the barrel, it turns when on the Canon body, but not when off the Canon or on the AF.

It's an old 300, I think there might be a problem with it, might need to be sent in. Great timing to discover the problem :^(
 
The 85/1.2, 50/1.0, and the 300 (and a few others) have an encoder on the focus barrel that is used to drive the motors for manual focusing. There is no mechanical linkage between the focus barrel and the mechanism. The canon camera bodies, and the Birger adapters both do some special things to make this work... There is nothing wrong with your lens.
 
Birger said:
The 85/1.2, 50/1.0, and the 300 (and a few others) have an encoder on the focus barrel that is used to drive the motors for manual focusing. There is no mechanical linkage between the focus barrel and the mechanism. The canon camera bodies, and the Birger adapters both do some special things to make this work... There is nothing wrong with your lens.
Click to expand...

The current 85mm 1.2 and that out-of-production 50mm 1.0 your talking about I know about. But on the 300mm are you talking about the current version or an older one? I thought the only currently in production Canon L series lens that was focus by wire was the 85mm 1.2. Or are you talking about something different?

Regards,

G.
 
So that's why using the 85 1.2 with a follow focus sucked so much. That makes sense. I kept losing my marks between takes, so I guess that's why. I didn't know any canon lenses were focus-by-wire. Good to know
 
My 2c: I've used about a dozen different Ls from the 400 2.8 L IS on down, with a cheap $15 eBay adapter, with no focusing issues.
 
Two minor suggestions that might be worth a shot: taking out the UV filter; stopping down on an EOS body and seeing that it looks like on the AF100. Got nothing to lose by trying anyways...
 
Birger said:
The 85/1.2, 50/1.0, and the 300 (and a few others) have an encoder on the focus barrel that is used to drive the motors for manual focusing. There is no mechanical linkage between the focus barrel and the mechanism. The canon camera bodies, and the Birger adapters both do some special things to make this work... There is nothing wrong with your lens.
Click to expand...

Just back from the scrubbed launch- it was a hazy, blown-out-sky-mess anyway...

Erik, thanks for the info- are you saying that even when manually focusing on an EOS body, it's not actually a physical connection? And would this be the case on a 10+ year old 300? (thanks for the news that the lens is OK!).

Also, do you think you can get me a prototype/early production Birger adapter for the next (4th!) attempt to launch Endeavor? (Monday at the soonest) Maybe I could even get you on the launch site! :happy: :thumbsup:

mkfotos.com said:
Two minor suggestions that might be worth a shot: taking out the UV filter; stopping down on an EOS body and seeing that it looks like on the AF100. Got nothing to lose by trying anyways...
Click to expand...

The internal UV filter by the rear element? Not a factor on this focusing problem, but thanks.
And I did stop down the 300 with the EOS DOF preview, it works fine. It sounds like Erik knows this lens well.

Birger comes to NASA???
 
Last edited:
Aw crap, so it's servo driven like the 85 1.2? Great, what were they smoking that day. My 400 2.8 is mechanical, and I'm pretty sure my 500 4 was as well. Seriously Canon, why?
 
mkfotos.com said:
Aw crap, so it's servo driven like the 85 1.2? Great, what were they smoking that day. My 400 2.8 is mechanical, and I'm pretty sure my 500 4 was as well. Seriously Canon, why?
Click to expand...

The EOS AF was revolutionary in it's time, & led to a sea of white lenses at any sporting event. But technology advanced, so they've updated virtually every lens in their line-up, sometimes more than once.

I believe only the 85/1.2 is still fly-by-wire. The 85/1.2 II is mostly a re-release, after the original was popularized by the exceptional photography of Mark Tucker.

Best,
Bern
 
Not just that, but they are about to install the same fly-by-wire system in the Shuttle to match the lense, just in case Birger can not deliver the adapter in time. This is all being coordinated by HAL 9000.
 
Shooter said:
WOW I am amazed that they have delayed the launch of the shuttle until you get this sorted.
Click to expand...

I have connections... in very high places. If I tell you more, I'll have to...

chervas said:
Not just that, but they are about to install the same fly-by-wire system in the Shuttle to match the lense, just in case Birger can not deliver the adapter in time.
This is all being coordinated by HAL 9000.
Click to expand...

Submitted for your approval... Picture this-

Shooter, dressed in black against a white background in a Black & White image
Canon lens- White lens with black trim against a white background
Rod Serling- Black suit in a Black & White image

Coincidence? Or a visit to the Twilight Zone???



twilight%2Bzone.jpg


Also submitted for your approval-
HAL and RED. Coincidence? I think not.
Or evidence of a Conspiracy against Canon???


 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top