Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       4              26       27       end
  
Does your MkIII have AF issues?
Yes, it absolutely has a focusing problem PollPollPoll 122 7%
No, it seems to work fine (similar to previous 1-Series bodies) PollPollPoll 126 7%
I'm not sure yet PollPollPoll 52 3%
[I just want to see the results...] PollPollPoll 1454 83%
Total Votes 1754 100%

Archive 2007 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?
  
 
Studio58
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


Dauv,

you will be happy indeed. I have the MK3 as well as the 1DS2 & I am knocked out by the quality of the images straight out of the MK3. This will be the biggest selling pro dslr to date.
(my sources inform me btw that there have been zero complaints coming out of Australia)
Cheers,

Paul



Jul 03, 2007 at 03:17 AM
Hrow
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


In terms of the Servo AF tracking, so far, so good with mine. Did a lot of non-strenous shooting this weekend and the results were dead on. Followed that up with some testing today of bikes, cars and other stuff that moves after reading Jeff's post and didn't see the same problems that he did. Most shots were on and those that weren't I would have to take the blame for.

The one thing I did notice when looking at the AF points after the fact was that there wasn't much room for error. If you slide off the main subject and there is something for it to latch on to it will, and it will do it quickly. Sometimes it is the background and others it is an object close to the main subject. One could argue that it is too sensitive but one could also argue that it is doing its job.

I have noticed a problem with vibrations but that seems limited to my 300mm when mounted on the tripod. Very strange in that it completely goes away when hand held.

Other things that may be of interest to those thinking about an M3.

1. I am glad I got it as the image quality is simply superb. The files have a smoothness to them that is unlike anything that I have seen before. Particularly nice are skin tones so don't be falsely led to believe that this is a sports / PJ camera only.

2. Handling, including the AF system, is stellar.

3. The small round port cover does fall off just like everyone has said. Mine seemed tight, was never removed and just disapeared on Saturday. Not a clue what happened to it. Terrible design as are the covers for the cable release et al. That Canon is charging people for replacements makes me madder than the AF problem. That problem is at least based on sophisticated technology. The cover problem is simply a sh*@ty design.

4. The LCD looks very nice until you zoom in to try to check focus on it. Don't bother. When they upped the size they made a major mistake but not upping the res of the screen.

For me (and this is only for me) the potential problem in Servo is not enough of a problem to forego the benefits of the M3 for the summer shooting season. That said, I remain a bit nervous but having great fun with the camera.




Jul 03, 2007 at 04:03 AM
Steve A
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


My MK3 is now 5 weeks young and I can't say enough about how pleased I am with my copy.
The camera is a dream come true for me, the ISO performance blows anything out there out of the water, the AF system on my camera works flawlesly, it maybe a little hyperactive, as long as I do my job the camera performs like a dream.

ISO, at 3200 on the MK3 would be very similar in noise levels to my 30D at 400 ISO, very useable.

I have found that CFn 3 -2, 3-4 and 3-8 effect my camera more than any other settings, after I finally got these figured out I was a happy camper.

On my camera CFn3-2 is set in the middle, CFn3-4 is set on 1, CFn3-8-2 with center point selected, I can't explain why these settings work for me, they just do.

I would also like to mention that I cranked the sharpness up and the contrast up a bit in picture styles, this made a lot of difference in my image quality.

I'm not much of a techno type so I just kept tinkering and changing settings until the camera worked across the board for me.

The above setting capture flying birds in all backgrounds, out of a ten round burst I may get one slightly off, when I look in zoom browser I can clearly see that I came off of the target.

The ergonomics and button placement are very well thought out, especilally if you have mits the size of mine, I find this camera a dream to hold and operate.

I have to agree that if there was any major gripes for me on my camera it would be that the remote port cover on the left side of the camera is the poorest design I have seen, I lost my cover the 1st time I removed it and replaced it, got home and that sucker was gone, I orderd a 1/2 dozen of them, they are out of stock right now.

My personal opinion of the LCD on my camera is that it does not give a true picture of what this camera captures, the image appears dark in the shaddows even when cranked up, mine also appears to be soft looking, so I stopped using it to judge my images, the histogram however always tells the truth.

If you would like to see some images captured with my camera you can go to this link http://froggy.smugmug.com/gallery/1833053, I have a bunch of new images that I will be adding in the next couple of days,

This is strictly my opinion of my camera, I am thrilled as thrilled can be with it, I hope and pray that those who's cameras are not up to par with mine get them fixed soon, when they do I'm sure that they will be as happy as I am.

Steve




Jul 03, 2007 at 02:03 PM
R Longenbach
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


Dauv McNeely wrote:
I don't think it is any coincidence that they are back ordered everywhere, I think canon stopped shipping them in light of the "issue(s)".



That may have been true, but they shipped a whole bunch last week. I was #6 on my dealer's list and I got mine on Sunday (it arrived Friday morning).



Jul 03, 2007 at 02:20 PM
Hrow
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


R Longenbach wrote:
That may have been true, but they shipped a whole bunch last week. I was #6 on my dealer's list and I got mine on Sunday (it arrived Friday morning).



A bunch of people here got theirs last week. Other than the expected short supply, I don't see where Canon has been holding back.



Jul 03, 2007 at 02:27 PM
Nill Toulme
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


Well as of this posting it's split right down the middle, with 40% of voting owners saying their cameras definitely have AF problems, 40% saying theirs definitely do not, and 20% still unsure.

What I'd really like to see is a few owners in the "definitely problems" camp getting together with a few from the "definitely OK" crowd and exchanging cameras for a shooting session or two. Has anybody seen any indication that anything like that has occurred anywhere? The closest I've seen to anything like it is a post from somebody saying they exchanged their first body for another one and the second body was a lot better.

I'd just like to know what a (preferably knowledgeable and competent) owner of a "bad" unit makes of a "good" one, and vice versa.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net



Jul 03, 2007 at 03:37 PM
R Longenbach
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


Well, as soon as the weather clears here in Austin (it's pouring again right this moment) maybe I can do more testing with mine.

FWIW: Chuck Westfall will have more info on the AF issues for the August issue of the Digital Journalist. (he answers one question re: BIF with the MkIII)

http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0707/tech-tips.html



Jul 03, 2007 at 03:39 PM
arashm
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?




FWIW: Chuck Westfall will have more info on the AF issues for the August issue of the Digital Journalist. (he answers one question re: BIF with the MkIII)

Oh boy... August
I know such issue's can't go away over night but August seems like such a long time from now... (3 weeks I know)...
still...
am



Jul 03, 2007 at 04:18 PM
Bruce Sawle
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


Robs Galbraith updated testing on July 2nd

http://robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-8740-9006



Jul 03, 2007 at 05:23 PM
Tom_W
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


Nill Toulme wrote:
What I'd really like to see is a few owners in the "definitely problems" camp getting together with a few from the "definitely OK" crowd and exchanging cameras for a shooting session or two.
~~
www.toulme.net


That's a very good idea. I'd like to see the results too! If you don't mind, I'd like to push this suggestion over to the folks on photography-on-the.net as well. They have a similar discussion going on there.



Jul 03, 2007 at 05:32 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Nill Toulme
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


Please do. I'd very much like to see Pekka get his hands on Rob's cameras, and vice versa, and then to sit in on a discussion between them. ;-)

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net



Jul 03, 2007 at 05:40 PM
Tom_W
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


Nill Toulme wrote:
Please do. I'd very much like to see Pekka get his hands on Rob's cameras, and vice versa, and then to sit in on a discussion between them. ;-)

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net


Me too!

For the record, while there are a few throwing barbs at one another there, but for the most part, the discussion is rational and is similar to this one. Several camera owners, some with problems, some without. And a lot of us bystanders waiting for some resolution before making any kind of buying decision.

I'm watching both forums (forii?).



Jul 03, 2007 at 07:31 PM
Nill Toulme
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


Well there are at least a few barbs flying on every forum addressing this issue because the level of frustration is high. It's extremely tempting for those who are not experiencing problems to believe that those who are are doing something wrong, and equally tempting for those with problems to think that those who say their cameras are fine are shooting under different conditions or worse yet don't know a sharp shot when they see one. And when either of those sentiments gets even slightly hinted at, people understandably get their backs up.

Reminds me of the way I more and more frequently find myself feeling on the interstate everybody going slower than me is a moron, and everybody going faster is a maniac. ;-)

Personally I'm still holding out the hope that there really is some significant sample variation at work here truly some good units and some bad units. That's the only thing I can think of that would readily explain the very different results that people are seeing, and if it's the case, it means it can indeed be fixed, and probably very easily.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net



Jul 03, 2007 at 08:36 PM
Hrow
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


I think some of the difference may be attributable to experience and expectations. For example, as part of my testing I shot a worker in a local park on a tractor moving at a decent clip on a curved path. I focused on his chest as an easy target and got good results except when I slipped off slightly and then the camera focused on the more brightly colored and contrasty fire extinghiser that was a couple of feet behind him on the rollbar and partially visible in the open area between is his chest and is arm.

My expectation is that if I move off the target that the camera is going to find something else to focus on. To me the camera is working as I would expect but my experience in shooting moving objects is somewhat limited so perhaps I am wrong in accepting it moving off the acquired target so quickly.



Jul 03, 2007 at 09:07 PM
mill4570
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #15 · p.3 #15 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


Hrow,

That is actually a function of tracking sensitivity. If it is set to slow, the AF will not jump to another point as quickly. If set to fast, I will move very quickly. Canon describes the AF sensitivity in terms of something moving into the active focus point, but the reverse is also true. If you move the AF focus point off the intended target the result is the same. Here is a simple test of what I am saying.

1) Use a fast focusing lens; 300f2.8, 400f2.8, 70-200f2.8, etc. Some primes do not focus as fast as these. At any rate use your fastest focusing lens and IS off.

2) Set the camera for center point focus only, no expansion and AI Servo focus mode.

3) Set up a scene with a fairly large object, a person, a sign, something easy to hold the center AF point about 30 to 50 feet in front of you, and a house, treeline, or bigger sign about 30 to 50 feet behind the first object.

4) Set the AF tracking sensetivity to Slow.

5) Focus on the closer target using the center AF point only. The focus should be steady with no hunting.

6) Move the camera quickly to the the distant target without releasing the half shutter or AF Start button. Note the time delay before the camera refocuses on the distant subject.

7) Repeat with the AF tracking set to Fast, and note the difference.

I have a MK IIN, but my MK III has not yet arrived so I only have a feel for the II. I am curious to see the difference.


Richard K.




Jul 04, 2007 at 01:34 AM
Hrow
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #16 · p.3 #16 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


Thank you Richard, I do need to play more with the settings and that is a good way of seeing the differences. Currently I am set to Fast as this was the recommended setting by a very talented wildlife shooter who was having good success with the M3 while others were having focusing problems. It seems to work as long as my skill level is up to par, which it isn't most of the time. Lots of practicing to do and hopefully I'll get a chance this weekend with some polo ponies.


Jul 04, 2007 at 02:44 AM
redman
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #17 · p.3 #17 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


Nill Toulme wrote:
Well there are at least a few barbs flying on every forum addressing this issue because the level of frustration is high. It's extremely tempting for those who are not experiencing problems to believe that those who are are doing something wrong, and equally tempting for those with problems to think that those who say their cameras are fine are shooting under different conditions or worse yet don't know a sharp shot when they see one. And when either of those sentiments gets even slightly hinted at, people understandably get their backs up.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net


You've hit the nail on the head here Nill. I would like to believe that I know a sharp photo and an accurately focusing camera when I see one. My MKIII is a stud! But, I also have great respect for some of the photogs who are experiencing great frustrations with their MKIII's. My theory is that the bad cams came from a single source and that they will be eventually culled out.

My big fear is that Canon will have a blanket firmware fix and my MKIII will start screwing up after installing it.....

Bob



Jul 04, 2007 at 02:53 AM
rwalkernm
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #18 · p.3 #18 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


Hrow wrote:
I think some of the difference may be attributable to experience and expectations. ...


OK, so where am I? I can use some advice. As I alluded to earlier in this thread, I have amassed a respectable collection of boring pictures of my wife trying not to run me down with the family car, and indeed I can see many of the poor&jumpy-focus issues that are similar to RG's reviews.

Three possibilities I consider:

(1) Coming from a 10D to the MkIII (504xxx), I am clueless how to set the camera up to make it work to its potential.

(2) The camera itself is not operating within Canon's expected envelope.

(3) What I am seeing is as good as it gets, and my expectations are too high.

How realistic is the car-coming-at-you scenario anyway? Well, it is as close as I can currently manufacture to shooting soccer next fall, where I often want action that's coming directly toward me at wide open apertures. So my test are with a 135F2 at F2.0....

Now it's possible the problem is (1) or (2) or (3), or even worse, maybe some combination of (1) AND (2) AND (3).

What can I do to figure it out?

So far, the best answers I come up with are (a) wait it out and see what everyone figures out, and (b) go out and shoot something that really matters under realistic conditions.

If anyone here has a better plan, what are you doing?

Thanks,
Bob Walker



Jul 04, 2007 at 02:56 AM
DavidP
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #19 · p.3 #19 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


Nill Toulme wrote:
Reminds me of the way I more and more frequently find myself feeling on the interstate everybody going slower than me is a moron, and everybody going faster is a maniac. ;-)



You and I must drive the same speed.



Jul 04, 2007 at 03:56 AM
wtlloyd
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #20 · p.3 #20 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?


I'm starting to wonder if the problem is in the lense AF circuit chip, and cannot be fixed in camera firmware, or even AF sensor redesign/replacement....

Wouldn't that be a bummer.....

Really, you'd think Canon would be all over this and already have issued the firmware fix, if it were possible.




Jul 04, 2007 at 09:20 AM
1       2      
3
       4              26       27       end






FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       4              26       27       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password