Ditto on what lidesun said, also try tracking a bird in flight against a woodsy background, it is almost impossible to achieve proper focus... I would go out on a limb and say most of my one shot images are relativity accurate in focus, the problem lies in the AI servo mode.
72chevelle454 wrote:
Ditto on what lidesun said, also try tracking a bird in flight against a woodsy background, it is almost impossible to achieve proper focus... I would go out on a limb and say most of my one shot images are relativity accurate in focus, the problem lies in the AI servo mode.
Lidsum had been refering to One shot and his problems with it. I am just showing him that i have had no problems with One shot. Servo mode is still up in the air.
Bruce Sawle wrote:
I dont have the original as I am at work. Working hard as you can see.
I can send you a couple of the original files when i get home.
Bruce,
Thanks for the explaination, no need to send the original files, i have tons of sharp images at one shot with the 1D Mark III, but i trust my other 1D bodies most....1D Mark III has its AF problem for sure, but still fantastic camera, just need Canon coming out and say & do something about the situation.
For not imapotant shots i enjoy the 1D Mark III, for paid important shots, i put my 1D Mark III in the bag as backup, using the 1D Mark II N to do the job
Any way, congratulation if you got the trouble free Mark III.
Just like we said, there are some bad apples, and of course some good ones, and you are the lucky one, lol.. enjoy it while we are still waitting for solutions from Canon.
Thanks for the explaination, no need to send the original files, i have tons of sharp images at one shot with the 1D Mark III, but i trust my other 1D bodies most....1D Mark III has its AF problem for sure, but still fantastic camera, just need Canon coming out and say & do something about the situation.
For not imapotant shots i enjoy the 1D Mark III, for paid important shots, i put my 1D Mark III in the bag as backup, using the 1D Mark II N to do the job
Any way, congratulation if you got the trouble free Mark III.
Just like we said, there are some bad apples, and of course some good ones, and you are the lucky one, lol.. enjoy it while we are still waitting for solutions from Canon.
I agree with what you have said. When money is on the line you need to be able to count on your equipment. For many of the season sports and bird shooters I can understand the frustration. For me I am shooting mainly kids so my needs and the conditions I shoot in can be some what controlled and the clients there parents are not as stringent as many of us here as to the quality of our work. I to want Canon to announce something or at best fix it with firm ware so we can all get on with out passion and stop spending so much time in this thread. It’s gotten to the point where I evaluate every inch of every image trying to make sure the camera focused on spot where I put the point. I hate having to think about this every time I download my pictures.
I came from a 30D and 5D so my prior experience with a 1 series is from renting or borrowing friends. I would be interested in knowing who with ample 1D experience does and does not have issue.
An interesting Poll would be this..
Yes I have focus issues and I owned a previous 1D
Yes I have focus issue and I did not own a previous 1D
No I do not have focus issue and I owned a previous 1D
No I do not have focus issues and I did not own a previous 1 D
My current 1D Mark 3 is my 5th owned 1D series body and I do have AF issues but to be clear, only under some situations.
During the last 4 months of 1D Mark 3 ownership I take both out on shoots and always take the 1D2N out for the key shots, because I trust it, because it has never failed me, it is totally reliable. The Mark 3 appears when the shots don't count and on the 2nd 2 1/2 month old body I have taken about 12K shots. For motorsport I will reach for it, for people sports I won't.
Still, this weekend I am shooting more rugby. This evening I returned all the CFn's to factory default and set the camera up from scratch with yet another and probably my last attempt at finding a working config. I am shooting this Saturday as a backup only so I don't mind to use the Mark 3 as a primary and see what happens.
It's a while since I've used a MkII and my memory is a little hazy, but with the MkIIN the camera does indeed quit firing when it can't get a decent focus. This manifests itself usually as a slight slow-down of the usual 8fps clatter, just as is the case with the MkIII.
The MkIIN would still get some frames out of focus, usually because the subject is moving erratically and the predicted focus position is actually incorrect (or changed at the last moment) or because the camera or subject suddenly changed speed or direction. It just seems that the number of frames OOF with my MkIII is orders of magnitude more than with my MkIIN, and I suspect that the problems of inconsistency in one-shot mode are closely related to the servo problems.
The MkIII doesn't seem to be able to make up its mind exactly where a subject is in both servo and one shot modes, which results in the bizarre situations of one-shot focus jumping around, and would also account for the servo wierdness.
This is a re-post of information I posted to dpreview.com back in July:
This evening (July 12th 2007) I've been trying (again) to get my lenses properly calibrated with the 1D3's micro adjustments system and I found that just taking one shot at each adjustment level is not enough, because the point at which the camera focuses changes from shot to shot.
Of course, this is expected to some degree, but I did the same test with my 1D2N and found that the degree of 'wobble' was far, far less.
I've uploaded a zip containing crops of two sets of images that demonstrate the wobble. You can download it here:
Here are a few images from the sequence. You can see the focal plane shifting backwards and forwards but to really see it happening you need to extract the images from the zip and then flick through them quickly with an application like ACDSee or PhotoMechanic. Notice the way the focus target changes and how the 10s on the scale drift in and out of focus.
http://public.vbulletin.com/eos-1d3/IMG_0008.jpg
http://public.vbulletin.com/eos-1d3/IMG_0009.jpg
http://public.vbulletin.com/eos-1d3/IMG_0011.jpg
Each of these images were shot one after the other with the camera tripod mounted and fired using a cable release.
This sequence was from my EF 24-70mm f/2.8L - I'll post a similar sequence using my EF 50mm f/1.4 shortly.
Here's a similar sequence from my EF 50mm f/1.4.
I know this lens doesn't have the best reputation for its focusing capabilities but mounted on my 1D2N it has no problems to speak of.
For the sake of illustration of the inconsistent nature of the problem, here are two additional sequences shot in exactly the same way with identical settings but using two different Canon cameras. It's clear to see that the lenses need calibration for slight backfocus issues, but it's the fact that every shot is consistent that makes the difference from the 1D3 sequences.
I still shoot a MKIIN and the Mark III. I use a 300 f2.8 on the MK III and a 70-200 f2.8 on the N for very low light HS football. Both are set for focus priority and both are set for center af plus expansion. When shooting bursts, both cameras will hesitate from time to time during the burst. Both will still miss focus from time to time and both may have multiple images OOF on occassion. The difference is the III focuses much quicker and delivers a higher keeper rate than the II under these conditions. During day time events, the II and the III hit rate is about the same.
I am not sure if either camera is running at it's maximum frame rate, but I do notice the III is slightly faster.
I still shoot a MKIIN and the Mark III. I use a 300 f2.8 on the MK III and a 70-200 f2.8 on the N for very low light HS football. Both are set for focus priority and both are set for center af plus expansion. When shooting bursts, both cameras will hesitate from time to time during the burst. Both will still miss focus from time to time and both may have multiple images OOF on occassion. The difference is the III focuses much quicker and delivers a higher keeper rate than the II under these conditions. During day time events, the II and the III hit rate is about the same.
I am not sure if either camera is running at it's maximum frame rate, but I do notice the III is slightly faster.
Hi Richard, I'm finding the same sort of thing and have the same settings that you mention above. I've only had the camera for 3 days, though, but it's nice to hear from some of the success stories and I appreciate you comparing to your Mark II N as I have been doing my best to compare with the efficiency of the Mark II I've had for years. Unfortunately, it is presently in for calibration so I can't compare the two cameras side by side, which makes it nice that you offer this piece of information.
Please, a question, if you don't mind? What do you have your tracking sensitivity set to? Some claim to have better results with maximum speed. Mine is presently set to default as I really don't see a whole lot of difference even though there may well be in certain circumstances.
The tracking sensitivity is set to the default most of the time. For football, I will set it one notch toward slow on occasion. I can see the difference in how fast the camera changes subjects when I make adjustments, but in actual shooting, I haven't noticed much difference in keeper rates. With the camera set to fast, the focus seems to be unstable when a running back hits the line where many bodies are present. It is annoying to see in the view finder so I don't use fast for football.
