FoCal vs LensAlign Pro for autofocus microadjustment on a Canon 7D
Asked 6/15/2012
68 views
2 answers
0
I want to fine-tune autofocus microadjustment on my Canon 7D, especially for a 100-400mm L lens that seems a bit softer than expected. I’m considering FoCal and LensAlign Pro.
FoCal appeals to me because it can automate the testing process on supported bodies, but I’m concerned about its camera-specific licensing. LensAlign Pro is also well regarded, but I’m unclear whether it actually sets the camera’s AF microadjustment automatically or if I still have to enter the value manually.
For those who have used either system: which tends to give better results in practice, and are there any setup pitfalls I should watch for when using LensAlign-style targets?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
14y ago
2 Answers
4
LenAlign is useful and in the right hands can get very good results. Two things are critical when using it.
- The LensAlign unit must be put together perfectly "square".
- The camera's actual AF point must be aimed closely enough to the point indicated by the square in the viewfinder to insure the actual point being focused is on the flat part of the target and not a point (usually on the ruler) that is closer or further than the flat target. If the center focus point on the focus screen does not accurately indicate the exact point aimed at by the focus array this can be problematic. For this reason I prefer to use AF adjustment methods that use a flat target.
Consider the Canon 5DMkII, for example. When shooting in AI Servo AF, if C.Fn III-07 is enabled, there are six small AF Assist Points clustered within the spot metering circle that are active in addition to the Center Focus Point. The location of these six AF Assist Points are not indicated in the viewfinder! Yet the camera may be using one of them pointed at something other than the flat part of the test target when it decides the focus distance. Even cameras that don't have "hidden" focus points may not be very accurate in terms of having the focus array aimed at the exact spot indicated in the viewfinder.
The FoCal method uses a flat target which must be in a parallel plane with the camera's sensor. It has a module that assists you with getting your camera and target aligned. Even if you are not using the FoCal software, to use a flat target it must be aligned. The easiest way to do this is to choose a sturdy, undistorted wall mounted mirror and adjust the camera position until the Center Focus Point is aimed at the center of the camera's lens in the reflection. Then tape your test target to the mirror with the center of the target on the spot your camera is already pointing at.
Both methods have their strengths and weaknesses. Both will improve your AF accuracy if the original body/lens combo is off by more than 3-5 AFMA adjustment points. I think one reason many people like the LensAlign system better is that when a body/lens combo is dialed in the shots of that test target will look very good and the user will feel confident the camera is in adjustment. The flat target methods will reveal every minor flaw. Even when a camera/lens combo is adjusted just as well or even better than with the LensAlign system, minor flaws will be visible in the test pictures of a flat target.
Appendix: Maps of two focus systems with which I am personally very familiar. Other AF systems in modern DSLRs are similar. The area of sensitivity for most focus points in most configurations are much larger than the indicators seen through the viewfinder.
A map of the EOS 5D mark II focus system. The dark black rectangles, along with the spot metering circle, are all that appear in the viewfinder. The larger blue rectangles are the actual coverage area for each of those points. The red rectangles are the AF Assist points active with the center point in AI Servo AF mode if Custom Function III-07 is enabled.

A chart for the Canon EOS 7D showing the position of the focus points in the viewfinder with an identifying number next to each (top), a map of the focus array sensor (middle right), a chart identifying which strip in the array is associated with each focus point in the viewfinder as numbered in the top diagram (middle left), and the actual coverage area of each focus point as seen through the viewfinder (bottom).

Originally by user15871. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user15871
13y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Both can produce good AF microadjustment results, but the community feedback here favors caution with LensAlign-style setups rather than claiming one is universally better.
LensAlign can work very well in skilled hands, but two things are critical:
- The unit must be assembled and aligned perfectly square.
- The camera’s actual AF point must land on the flat target, not accidentally on the ruler or another area closer/farther away.
That second point is important because the AF point shown in the viewfinder may not correspond exactly to the true active focusing area. If focus lands on the ruler instead of the flat target, your result can be misleading. For that reason, some users prefer AF adjustment methods based on a flat target.
Based on the answers provided, there’s no clear evidence that LensAlign automatically writes settings to the camera; assume you may need to enter AFMA values manually unless your software/camera combination specifically supports automation.
So: LensAlign is capable, but setup precision matters a lot. If ease and repeatability are your priority, a flat-target-based method may be less error-prone.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI14y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Can I use my Canon 7D Mark II AF microadjustment settings to program a Sigma 150-600mm Sport with the USB Dock?
Does AF microadjustment affect manual focus accuracy?
Can you calibrate autofocus on a Canon 60D?
How can I reliably test and micro-adjust autofocus for a specific lens on my camera?
In Autopano Giga, should I enter my lens’s actual focal length or the APS-C crop equivalent?