05-26-2017, 04:45 PM
I never compared Canon to Nikon results. I also have to say: My lens calculations were not delivered to their database from a certain moment on, because FoCal's business model is:
Buy the software (in my case the Pro-version, although limited to a low number of bodies)
one year access to database (also to cross-reference my results)
after that year they open up their hand again, if I want to access the database. And of course also for a main update
I'm judging this pretty greedy. I already paid more, but they don't pay me for my time and results I delivered to their database? A little bit too one-sided for my taste. I switched off the upload to their server.
As to the Nikon results: Seem credible to me. With regular Nikon lenses and three different bodies I had also a wide range of results. That could be explained with a less good quality control. But also the reliability of Nikon's AF has a wider range than I would wish for.
Okay, blurred shots I also can provoke with mirrorless. I just need to switch to AF-C on Fuji, hahahaha.
Buy the software (in my case the Pro-version, although limited to a low number of bodies)
one year access to database (also to cross-reference my results)
after that year they open up their hand again, if I want to access the database. And of course also for a main update
I'm judging this pretty greedy. I already paid more, but they don't pay me for my time and results I delivered to their database? A little bit too one-sided for my taste. I switched off the upload to their server.
As to the Nikon results: Seem credible to me. With regular Nikon lenses and three different bodies I had also a wide range of results. That could be explained with a less good quality control. But also the reliability of Nikon's AF has a wider range than I would wish for.
Okay, blurred shots I also can provoke with mirrorless. I just need to switch to AF-C on Fuji, hahahaha.