RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues? - FM Forums

Register · Software · Search · Image Upload · Buy & Sell · Reviews · Hosting

Moderated by: guardian

Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell
FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums | Canon-mount SLRs | Join Image Upload
1 2 3

4

5 … 20 21 end

John Mahan
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #1 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

Fraga,

You're welcome. My Mark III was beyond my expectations in every other respect. When Canon resolves the focus issue for those of us that are plagued with it, I think this will be the best all--around use camera available at any price point. The live view feature with magnification has already been a tremendous help when shooting Tilt/Shift shots for stitching together for one of our Calendars. Short of the focussing issue, the MarkIII gives the best image quality (including for large prints) I have yet experienced.

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 04, 2007 at 07:21 PM

mill4570
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #2 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

John,

Are you saying the camera focus would move even in single shot AF when a burst was triggered? Could you explain the single shot focus shifting, I'm not folowing that one.

Richard K.

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 04, 2007 at 11:41 PM

John Mahan
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #3 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

Richard,

The focus moved in single shot non--Servo mode and in 10 FPS Servo bursts. In single shot, non--Servo mode, if I defocussed the lens then refocussed with AF (center point and no expansion), the focus would shift on the majority of shots, often dramatically. These tests were done carefully with a monster Gitzo 'pod and not altered/moved between exposures. On one hand this flabbergasted me, on the other hand I was relieved because it confirmed what I was seeing in the field, and I had not completley lost my mind and/or photographic ability.

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 05, 2007 at 12:11 AM

mill4570
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #4 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

John,

Sounds like you have one of bad 50%.

Richard K.

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 05, 2007 at 12:18 AM

John Mahan
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #5 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

Richard,

Yep, I have proved to my satisfaction that at least some of the AF problems being reported are very real. What makes this so maddening is that the camera is so outstanding in every other respect that I don't want to be without it. The sum of its abilities and superb image quality is greater than a simple recitation of its improvements. I find myself being more adult about this than I would have expected--so far. I'm waiting (brieifly), hoping that Canon CPS resolves this quickly.

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 05, 2007 at 12:31 AM

JON VAN DAAL
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #6 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

I am still waiting for my body. I rang my pro shop yesterday and they have just been told by Canon that 10 bodies come in so they expect to get one. This will be No 4 and I am way down at No. 10. I asked him - have any come back and he said yes one of the three came back yesterday with "focusing issues" and that Canon will more than likely replace the whjole camera.

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 05, 2007 at 03:32 AM

kevin Coppalot
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.4 #7 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

Has anyone been able to exchange a bad copy of the MK III and get a good copy as a replacement?
What are people doing with the bad copies?
waiting for a official Canon fix?
getting a cash refund?
sending to Canon for repair?
taking prozac and having a good lie down?
I put my purchase on hold, - according to the poll here 38% are bad copies.

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 05, 2007 at 08:17 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.4 #8 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

kevin Coppalot wrote:
What are people doing with the bad copies?
waiting for a official Canon fix?
getting a cash refund?
sending to Canon for repair?
taking prozac and having a good lie down?

Avoiding Servo?

kevin Coppalot wrote:
I put my purchase on hold, - according to the poll here 38% are bad copies.

Me too. Many are.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 05, 2007 at 08:21 AM

bshamilton
Online
Image Upload: On

p.4 #9 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

Good info, guys. I've wondered about mine, and went out yesterday for a test run. All single shot, setting up on tripod, mlu, cable release, same un-changed scene, each frame might have different AF focus points, and few in focus, to boot! Is this a problem?? Normal??

Also, the AF-on button doesn't seem to lock focus unless it's held during exposure; is that right?? It seemed on my llN, it would lock focus so I could re-compose for metering. Now if I hit the AF-on button, release it, when I punch the cable release for mlu, it re-focusses!
I've gone through the manual numerous times trying to figure that out. Can somebody advise on cfn settings to lock focus, and then be able to re-compose for metering??

Thanks,

Barry

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 05, 2007 at 12:48 PM

kazman442
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.4 #10 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

Barry, CFIV-1 we use setting number 2, Ron

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 05, 2007 at 12:53 PM

bshamilton
Online
Image Upload: On

p.4 #11 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

Thanks, Ron! I just found the pdf that confirms that

Barry

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 05, 2007 at 01:04 PM

kazman442
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.4 #12 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

Anyone else notice a slow down in H burst mode when IS is on? I have a 300mm f4 IS lens and while shooting a dock dog event yesterday I had the camera slow way down in bursts with this lens on so I switched to my 70-200 2.8 IS and had the IS off and it would take the 10FPS it seemed. Now today I tried the 300 again and noticed a difference with just turning the IS off or on with the burst rate. Anyone else see this? Also the burst rate seems faster with the 70-200 2.8 then with the 300 f4 anyway. Ron

Edit: Tried the 70-200 2.8IS with the IS on or off and the rate seemed the same. Must be a 300mm f4 problem with my lens or the f4 just to slow.

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 05, 2007 at 01:13 PM

French Peter
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #13 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

I just picked up one in France, serial 520xxx, seems to work perfect, very hard to get them here as the press asked for 500 of them, and then changed to 600. was told by the retailer that the original shipments to the USA, that is first distribution had defective units.
since the firmware is still the same as original, that is same for all, I would think it is logical that the problem is hardware, as being the variable.

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 05, 2007 at 04:09 PM

fraga
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #14 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

I received mine two days ago and didn't have much time to play with it yet.

So far, I have noticed that:
- AF in low light is MUCH improved over previous 1DM2n. Much faster.
- IQ is also a big improvment. Exposure seems better as well.
- High iso also a step forward, but everyone knows this by now!

- My copy in single shot mode has no problems whatsoever with AF. AF is dead on everytime.

Finally, I only did one test yet regarding AI-Servo.
Today I selected 8FPS and the other settings were just "out of the box", didn't change any of them. Used a 70-200 f4IS.
The test was done shooting 3 motorcycles going down the street, as they rode in my direction. They were moving slowly, btw.
In each sequence, there was just one or two pictures that were slightly OOF.
Not much, just a tiny bit. In fact, they looked more lke soft pictures rather than OOF. I guess the result resembles a comparison between a really good L with a low-end cheap lens. They are in fact OOF of course, not soft, but you get the idea...

What is my conclusion?
If I didn't own a 1DM2n previously, I would say that my camera is faulty, since the results seem to be somewhat mimic RG's report.
However, I must say that I wouldn't expect much better results from my previous camera. I can't say that EVERY shot taken with it was perfect in terms of focus.
With my 1DM2n, in every sequence I got usually one or two OOF pics, sometimes more. At the time I atributed it to user error, not the camera's fault.
Wish I still had it, to be able to do a direct comparison.
Next Sunday I will shoot a motocross event and will be able to test it properly.

From what I've seen today, my 1DM3 seems slightly better in AI-servo.
The problem is the results are rather similar to RG's report, even if slighty better (only one or two OOF in a full sequence), and that makes me wonder if my 1DM2n was in need of a calibration or if I dind't have it set up properly...

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 05, 2007 at 05:58 PM

72chevelle454
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #15 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

I noticed you tested at 8fps, I feel the problem is more noticeable at 10fps (anyone else?).

At 10fps it doesn't seem to give the camera enough time to calculate the subjects progression of speed. (I'm sure theres a technical term for this).

We shot some dogs jumping into water (dock dogs) again yesterday (Both M3's set at 10fps and had a very bad keeper rate, around 100 out of 600+ shots, most all back focused.

As Ron pointed out earlier in this post, the 300mm f4 lenses gave us trouble on both cameras, with two different lenses.

The keepers
Chad

fraga wrote:
I received mine two days ago and didn't have much time to play with it yet.

So far, I have noticed that:
- AF in low light is MUCH improved over previous 1DM2n. Much faster.
- IQ is also a big improvment. Exposure seems better as well.
- High iso also a step forward, but everyone knows this by now!

- My copy in single shot mode has no problems whatsoever with AF. AF is dead on everytime.

Finally, I only did one test yet regarding AI-Servo.
Today I selected 8FPS and the other settings were just "out of the box", didn't change any of them. Used a 70-200 f4IS.
The test was done shooting 3 motorcycles going down the street, as they rode in my direction. They were moving slowly, btw.
In each sequence, there was just one or two pictures that were slightly OOF.
Not much, just a tiny bit. In fact, they looked more lke soft pictures rather than OOF. I guess the result resembles a comparison between a really good L with a low-end cheap lens. They are in fact OOF of course, not soft, but you get the idea...

What is my conclusion?
If I didn't own a 1DM2n previously, I would say that my camera is faulty, since the results seem to be somewhat mimic RG's report.
However, I must say that I wouldn't expect much better results from my previous camera. I can't say that EVERY shot taken with it was perfect in terms of focus.
With my 1DM2n, in every sequence I got usually one or two OOF pics, sometimes more. At the time I atributed it to user error, not the camera's fault.
Wish I still had it, to be able to do a direct comparison.
Next Sunday I will shoot a motocross event and will be able to test it properly.

From what I've seen today, my 1DM3 seems slightly better in AI-servo.
The problem is the results are rather similar to RG's report, even if slighty better (only one or two OOF in a full sequence), and that makes me wonder if my 1DM2n was in need of a calibration or if I dind't have it set up properly...

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 05, 2007 at 06:49 PM

pcho
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #16 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

Ok I got my 1dmkIII a week ago and I did some test with one of my son's Uni freind and he is a very fast runner. It was a dull winters day and I accidentally set ISO 1000 but I think iso 640 or 800 would have been sufficient. I use 300F2.8 IS Lens, hand held and shutter speed varied between 1/6400 and 1/8000. I shot 23-24 continuous shots in Raw and AV mode. I focused on the runners tea shirt using centre focus point. I personally don't think I can do it any better and it looks pretty sharp to me and none of the pictures were out of focus. I performed the test twice and on both sets of pictures were all reasonably sharp. I don't think my mkII could have done it any better and I have done this test before on the mkII. All the pictures were as shot, no sharpening or alteration to anything. One more thing, I did not use or played with any of the custom menus, I guess default is what Canon considers the best settings.

Here are 3 large size file for downlaod if you want to view uncompressed file for the web. Please note the file size is about 2.8mb to 3mb and I randomly picked 3 out as they all show the same sharpness. Feel free to PM me if you require any more images.

[url]http://www.thepatienteye.com/albums/webforum/run107c.jpg

[url]http://www.thepatienteye.com/albums/webforum/run112c.jpg

[url]http://www.thepatienteye.com/albums/webforum/run117c.jpg

here are my sample shots

Perry

This image is copyrighted by the owner

This image is copyrighted by the owner

This image is copyrighted by the owner

This image is copyrighted by the owner

This image is copyrighted by the owner

This image is copyrighted by the owner

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 05, 2007 at 10:01 PM

Hrow
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.4 #17 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

Well pcho, since yours seems to be working just fine it must be broken. I would suggest returning it immediately before it takes any more in focus pictures.

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 05, 2007 at 11:36 PM

pcho
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #18 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

Hrow wrote:
Well pcho, since yours seems to be working just fine it must be broken. I would suggest returning it immediately before it takes any more in focus pictures.

Ha Ha, no way I am keeping mine. I have not done all those test that others are doing, taking birds coming right a the camera and it is winter here so we don't get hot sunny days at the moment to carry out all those variables.

This does not mean my camera does not exhibit some of the errors mentioned above but I will keep my fingers crossed

Perry

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 05, 2007 at 11:50 PM

lidesun
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.4 #19 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

I got my second 1D Mark III this Tuesday, and returned my first copy of 1D Mark III due to the err99 problem.

Did some quick test shots, this copy is perfect, works as what canon said in the Whitepaper

I don't think it's necessary to post the shots of the static subject, they are just as sharp as or sharoer than what i have seen with all my other bodies 5Ds, 1D Mark II [N] and 1Ds Mark II...

The follow image show the AI SERVO 10Frame/Sec, ISO800, 200mm- f/2.8 with IS on of the 70-200/2.8L IS lens. 1/3200sec shutter speed. The car is about 40 mph..

C.Fn III 3-8-2.

I am happy with the results

The images show each frames with 100% cropped plates where the focus points supposed to be ......

Only 2,3,19,20,21 look a little soft at 100% view, but if USP applied, the images should be ok. and all others look sharp to me...
let me know what do you think ?

PS: Shot RAW, C1 pro coverted to jpg..no any other editting, like USM etc.....

This image is copyrighted by the owner

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 06, 2007 at 12:24 AM

Jim Victory
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.4 #20 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

pcho wrote:
Hrow wrote:
Well pcho, since yours seems to be working just fine it must be broken. I would suggest returning it immediately before it takes any more in focus pictures.

Ha Ha, no way I am keeping mine. I have not done all those test that others are doing, taking birds coming right a the camera and it is winter here so we don't get hot sunny days at the moment to carry out all those variables.

This does not mean my camera does not exhibit some of the errors mentioned above but I will keep my fingers crossed

Perry

Welcome to the club Perry!

I have had mine a little over a month now and it has been great. Works in all conditions and situations just fine. Your going to love it!

Jim

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 06, 2007 at 12:56 AM

Charles Clark
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #21 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

Great test only # 20 out of whack which is a very except able ratio , The focus problem I encounter is everything is going well than I point at something different and bingo no focus anywhere, everything is out of focus, I have never owned a 2 series so I really don't know what to truly expect.

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 06, 2007 at 01:01 AM

72chevelle454
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #22 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

lidesun, I'm not doubting your test but it appears to me the car you photographed has only traveled about 2 car lengths in about 3 seconds time, that is if you shot at 10 frames per second. I would think at 40mph it would have traveled a greater distance. plus the 100% crops don't look much different in size.

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 06, 2007 at 01:05 AM

lidesun
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.4 #23 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

72chevelle454 wrote:
lidesun, I'm not doubting your test but it appears to me the car you photographed has only traveled about 2 car lengths in about 3 seconds time, that is if you shot at 10 frames per second. I would think at 40mph it would have traveled a greater distance. plus the 100% crops don't look much different in size.

40mph is only my roughly estimate....and i don't think it's slower than 30mph... and the 25 frames took 2.5 sec. not 3

And this is not a scientific test, just only to see how the camera performance, and i am satisfied with it, that's enough.....

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 06, 2007 at 01:10 AM

pcho
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #24 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

Jim Victory wrote:
pcho wrote:
Hrow wrote:
Well pcho, since yours seems to be working just fine it must be broken. I would suggest returning it immediately before it takes any more in focus pictures.

Ha Ha, no way I am keeping mine. I have not done all those test that others are doing, taking birds coming right a the camera and it is winter here so we don't get hot sunny days at the moment to carry out all those variables.

This does not mean my camera does not exhibit some of the errors mentioned above but I will keep my fingers crossed

Perry

Welcome to the club Perry!

I have had mine a little over a month now and it has been great. Works in all conditions and situations just fine. Your going to love it!

Jim

Thanks Jim. I was nervous when I got a call last week to tell me my camera has arrived. I nearly and nearly cancelled the order. It was only because I sold both my 1dmk2 and 1dsmk2 and I was cameraless that made me take the mk3 delivery. I am glad I did

Perry

Edited by pcho on Jul 06, 2007 at 11:47 AM GMT

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 06, 2007 at 01:17 AM

Tom_W
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.4 #25 · RE-POLL: MkIII have AF issues?

Thanks for the test, Lidesun.

Other than 20 and 21, the shots are all sharp. Pretty similar to what I've gotten with the 5D (except that I'd have about 8 frames instead of 25). It will be interesting to see how well it tracks a smaller target (the "bird-in-flight" shot is what comes to mind).

Edited on Sep 02, 2007 at 09:50 PM

Jul 06, 2007 at 01:33 AM


FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Image Upload 1 2 3 4 5 … 20 21 end