Well we have an intelligent audience here, so they can make up their own minds I'm sure.

Are you really arguing that it doesn't matter if you don't do the job properly?

You clearly won't be buying it then Mr S....

It does in one sense JAK, but probably not quite how you mean it. We need to be more logical in approach here. That is a thread on a forum, no more or less repsected that anything else because it's the observations of individuals.

It is not a scientific approach to try a product, as one writer does, but to say "but I didn't quite use the procedure laid down by the designer". This makes it instantly invalid as a fair test.

Also "I suppose, etc.," is not a test result. It's a wild guess. I suppose he's wrong. That's also a guess. Somebody should find out.

In any event, a little knowledge is still dangerous as the checking distance for lens testing is already well defined by manufacturers. You don't check a lens at macro distances for an overall correction. If you're trying something out for general purposes, probaly best to start with a general purpose lens anyway, to test the waters.

The issue isn't the software in this thread. The issue is, if you want to test the AF and adjust it then please follow the procedures carefully if you want a valid and repeatable result. I don't mind, but I wouldn't like to think of anyone being misled into making their focusing worse.

JAK, dangerous in the sense that the end user becomes capable of rendering all his or her lenses out of collimation. Obviously they can be put back as easily, they are not going to explode. Dangerous in the sense of "a little knowledge is dangerous".

Would I recommend the software? My opinion is that it is a useful idea, and looks as though it offers a sensible approach to AF calibration. I have used similar software concepts to test lenses and it works well. If I was of a mind to calibrate everything I would probably go that route and buy the software. As it happens, I don't feel the need to calibrate my lenses.

If I was using a test chart I would be very careful and precise, fixing the chart firmly in position and also using a solid tripod.

I think we've got the idea of how I would approach it by now!

You need to decide if you are selling and what your prices are for this to be a Classified Ad. Are you ready to sell?

There was one as I recall who had an axe to grind.

That is not what this thread is saying at all, so it's a somewhat spurious argument really. You speak of two quite different things, the exposure control of a camera and the actual technical setting up of the hardware.

My feeling is that although a valid thing to include, the ability to change the AF calibration of a camera does open the opportunity for the end user to do some pretty dangerous messing. If you don't take a thoughtful and precise approach to the procedure the results may well be worse than not bothering at all.

I also agree with Ken, please don't make such bold remarks without some explanation for all our benefit. It doesn't help at all....:

Very impressive Ken.

You can say bug if you want to, but probably more of an inevitable consequence.

At least pentax use proper in-between aperture values that photographers can recognise. Some makes don't do that and a "f/5.6 and a half" I find quite quite irritating. It doesn't cost any time to say "f/6.3"!