• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / D850 / D850 focus confirmation accuracy

D850 focus confirmation accuracy

November 17, 2017 JimK 1 Comment

This is the 24th post in a series of Nikon D850 tests. The series starts here.

The D850 has what is touted to be improved accuracy of its focus information indicator. That’s the group of three symbols, two arrows and a meatball, at the bottom left of the optical viewfinder (OVF). If you have a Nikon lens, if one of the arrows is lit up, you turn the top of the focusing ring in the direction that the arrow is pointing, until both arrows go out and all you see is the dot/circle/meatball. The focus confirmation indicator uses the same phase detection mechanism used by the phase-detection autofocus (PDAF) system. 

I set up the camera as in the previous post, put a Nikon 200 mm f/2 VR I lens on it and aimed it at this target:

I made a series of 32 exposures using the live view contrast detection autofocus system, triggering the camera with a Nikon intervalometer. 

Then I put the camera in OVF mode, focused until I got a meatball, switched to liveview, waited a few seconds, tripped the shutter with the Nikon remote release, switched back to OVF, checked for the presence of the meatball, and repeated.

I unpacked all the images (but didn’t demosaic them) using dcraw in document mode. Then, using MTF Mapper and Matlab, I measured the MTF50 in cycles per picture height, of a horizontal edge to the right of the zone plate in the target. 

Here’s what I got, for the red raw channel:

  

I’ve plotted the results from the use of focus confirmation on the left, and the ones from using CDAF on the right. The green line is the best sharpness found in the test in the preceding post, which used a combination of manual focusing and the D850’s Focus Shift Shooting feature. The light blue line is the average, or mean, of all the captures. The dark blue line is the worst, and the yellow line is the best. You can see that in both the CDAF and focus confirmation cases, that the too-large step size of the Focus Shift Shooting feature caused it to miss focusing distances that the other two approaches found. 

The gray line is the average plus the standard deviation (aka sigma) and the red one is the average minus the standard deviation. If the data were Gaussian, about two thirds of the values would lie between those two lines. 

Here are the results for the other two channels:

 

 

Since the Nikon 200 mm f/2 has such low longitudinal chromatic aberration (LoCA), the three sets of curves aren’t much different from one another.

You can see that the CDAF and the Focus Shift Shooting both provide more accurate and more consistent ways of focusing than focus confirmation.

 

 

D850

← Nikon 200/2 VRI LoCA D850 vibration with the Nikon 200/2 →

Trackbacks

  1. Improving D850 focus confirmation accuracy says:
    December 22, 2017 at 3:14 pm

    […] while back I wrote this post about the accuracy of manual focusing with the D850 using the “focus confirmation” […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.