We might need another poll now, "Are you cancelling your pre-orders?"
You know what would really make these polls become crazy, is if Canon now says "We can't reproduce the reported problems under any of our test procedures, therefore we believe there is no problem with the AF system"
Look out!
That's the only thing that worries me, no official acknowledgement from Canon that the problem actually exists. At least in some cameras. I don't know what will happen then.
Exactly. Canon is out there merrily marketing the 50 1.2L despite amazingly well documented (and serious) problems. That's a $1450 lens. Why not market a $4500 body with some focusing problems too.
If this keeps up, I'll be looking for something else to shoot with. The reputation of this brand is sinking daily.
cactusclay wrote:
Geeze, I hope so. It's been about seven months and they haven't said anything on the new 50L.
Julius wrote:
I cancelled my preorder and although I have been very exited about this camera I do not even want to think about purchasing one until I can verify from reliable sources that the autofocus problem is completely solved by Canon.
Sadly, I've also canceled my order. For this amount of money I want reliability and consistency of results. I will most definitely buy a MK III once I see Canon's response/fix to the issue. I was concerned with RG's initial report but this latest RG article makes me take a wait and see approach. Hope the issue is resolved quickly for all who currently own the camera.
Why would you cancel now? Most people will not see their order filled in a long while yet, and in the mean time Canon may fix the problem. All you achieve is losing your place in the line. If you do get the call before the issue is resolved couldn't you just decide then whether to buy or decline?
I've had the Mark III on order since the day it was announced but the Rob Galbraith report on the AF issues will force me to cancel my order.
Who'd buy a camera for sports shooting with a defective AF?
The conditions that the report describes as giving the poorest results are the ones that I shoot in the most at horse shows and rodeos....super-fast action with changing speeds of the subjects, in bright sunshine with high temperatures.
I sure don't want clients viewing the images on-location and have an entire sequence out-of-focus....which is what seems to occur at times according to that very, non-biased and complete report.
I had planned on using the Mark III for an ice skating competition in July but just can't take a chance and will rely on my Mark II's and may just pick up a new N for now...maybe next year the AF problems on the III will be fixed.
The Mark I and II's have served me well for the last two years and will continue to do so until Canon can address this very apparent AF flaw.
I've tried some out and haven't had the problems people seem to be reporting.
If anything I'd say it's almost IMPOSSIBLE NOT to get stellar results with the MK III.
Some people will obviously try and find fault with any piece of gear. 99% of shooters on this board will have NO problems using the AF perfectly on the MK III.
Reminds me of a story when I was working in Cape Town. A woman complained to the Police that Nude Bathers were spoiling the view from her appartment.
When the Police came to check it out (in those pre- Mandela days Nude Bathing was absolutely forbidden on any public beach in South Africa and strict penalties were dished out to offenders) they said they couldn't see any nude bathers and the view from her appartment was just great.
The woman then said "Officers if you put this chair on top of this piece of furniture and then stand on the chair" ....... and so on.
The AF problem with the MK III is really not that serious and I'm sure for the early serial numbers some firmware fix will inevitably be released.
From what I've seen of the MK III this really IS camera heaven. I didn't think it was possible to improve on the MK II but they've really done it.
If you've ordered a MK III there is absolutely NO reason to cancel.
In any case Rob G's board wasn't the best source for info --especially since they became subscription based.
Cheers
-K
Edited by Kyle Yates on Jun 20, 2007 at 02:59 PM GMT
Kyle Yates wrote:
I've tried some out and haven't had the problems people seem to be reporting.
If anything I'd say it's almost IMPOSSIBLE NOT to get stellar results with the MK III.
Some people will obviously try and find fault with any piece of gear. 99% of shooters on this board will have NO problems using the AF perfectly on the MK III.
Reminds me of a story when I was working in Cape Town. A woman complained to the Police that Nude Bathers were spoiling the view from her appartment.
When the Police came they also said they couldn't see any nude bathers and the view from the apprtment was great.
The woman then said "Officers if you put this chair on top of this piece of furniture and then stand on the chair" ....... and so on.
The AF problem with the MK III is really not that serious and I'm sure for the early serial numbers some firmware fix will inevitably be released.
From what I've seen of the MK III this really IS camera heaven. I didn't think it was possible to improve on the MK II but they've really done it.
Just try these out in any camera store which has them in stock.
You'll have a problem replicating his results. -- Of course these days with production being done in factories across the globe QC isn't always done with the same rigour that it we used to do it in the West when we still actually had some manufacturing capability left.
I have absolutely NO doubt that any problems will be fixed via firmware very soon and for most shooters this isn't an issue.
Kyle Yates wrote:
If you've ordered a MK III there is absolutely NO reason to cancel.
In any case Rob G's board wasn't the best source for info --especially since they became subscription based.
No subscription needed for Robs site. Rob sold the forums. Rob is a professional photographer, and seems to have VERY close high level contacts within Canon. He is the last person who would ever publish a negative report without strong reason.
At the price Canon is asking for the III, I think one should expect the AF/tracking is at least as good at the older model in the opinion of a professional like RG.
Also, the fact that no forthcoming solution is mentioned and that he and a associate returned cameras speak volumes. The problem was known by Canon before release and the same problem exists in production models. Canon needs to be held to higher standards than that?
I'm waiting a couple days for a Canon response, hope for the best.
JackCnd wrote:
The problem was known by Canon before release and the same problem exists in production models. Canon needs to held to higher standards than that?
Absolutely, Canon needs to be held to higher standards.
Canon has also known about the problems with the 50 1.2L for many months, but continues to sell them nonetheless.
Canon seems to be saying to us "We will knowingly release and sell defective equipment because it's more important that we take your money than get it right."
Someone at Canon Japan needs to be fired. I'm serious.
wacomme wrote:
I'm canceling my preorder. I've waited this long, I can wait some more.
Michael
I too have cancelled my preorder. I picked up a 30D to use as a back up in the meantime. I wonder what this means for the other expected EOS cameras everyone is expecting to be introduced this year? Even if Canon is reasonable about the Mark 3 fix or replacements, many of us will be gun shy for the near future. If Canon has any serious strategic planners involved, they will make an announcement quickly, otherwise their bottom line (and stock prices) will suffer. Thank goodness for Rob G.
Well, the banding problem in the 1D was well documented and required hardware changes, yet I don't recall that much gun shyness from people around here when the 1D2 came out... Maybe because it was a bigger improvement over the 1D than the 1D3 is over the 1D2?
Thanks. Mine is still on order at a pro dealer, and I don't know when it will ship, but I wanted to see how others who received theirs were fairing with respect to the reported problems.
Something is amusing to me though. Whenever something new and better hits the market, hardware or software, it is totally picked apart and scrutinized for anything that may be somewhat problematical. Now folks are comparing the "suffering" MkIII to the "outstanding" MkII camera. But I seem to recall that the MkII suffered a host of criticism about a number of issues, (soft focus comes quickly to mind), when it first came on the scene.
I wonder what photogs in the "old days", before the internet, did when a new film model hit the shelves. Geez!! No Worldwide Discussion Abilities about it's Shortcomings! OMG!!!!
P A Valentine wrote:
Thanks. Mine is still on order at a pro dealer, and I don't know when it will ship, but I wanted to see how others who received theirs were fairing with respect to the reported problems.
Something is amusing to me though. Whenever something new and better hits the market, hardware or software, it is totally picked apart and scrutinized for anything that may be somewhat problematical. Now folks are comparing the "suffering" MkIII to the "outstanding" MkII camera. But I seem to recall that the MkII suffered a host of criticism about a number of issues, (soft focus comes quickly to mind), when it first came on the scene.
I wonder what photogs in the "old days", before the internet, did when a new film model hit the shelves. Geez!! No Worldwide Discussion Abilities about it's Shortcomings! OMG!!!! ...Show more →
Soft images due to in-camera processing are one thing...out of focus
images due to AF issues with the camera are something different...and Rob Galbraith isn't making up the story.
I'm glad Rob brought this to light...saved me a bunch of money ( for now ) and some serious headaches....until Canon gets it right.
Kyle Yates wrote:
Just try these out in any camera store which has them in stock.
You'll have a problem replicating his results. -- Of course these days with production being done in factories across the globe QC isn't always done with the same rigour that it we used to do it in the West when we still actually had some manufacturing capability left.
I have absolutely NO doubt that any problems will be fixed via firmware very soon and for most shooters this isn't an issue.
Cheers
-K
So your saying your perfectly happy buying a $4500.00 camera that by all reliable reports has a very good chance of not working properly?..............just so we are all clear on that.......
My MKIII seems to focus fine. AI Servo, hot day, bright and hazy.
www.johnferguson.net/blueangels
Considering the circumstances RG tested (300 F 2.8 wide open), those images aren't really that bad. Doubt the MKII would have a higher perfect focus rate. Print any of the soft ones at 8X10 and you won't be able to see much difference between them and the ones RG considers to be in-perfect-focus shots.
