•Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

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 … 30

32 33 34 end

Alistair Watson
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.31 #1 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

5hit, it is 08:15 and I just read all this! Enough indeed!

Some people really need to learn to chill out!

Sure, the 1D Mark 3 isn't perfect in AI-Servo for what I shoot and like everyone on here I am eagerly awaiting a modified firmware in the hope that it will improve things because in every other way I could not be happier with this camera.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 07:18 AM

deadeyedick
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.31 #2 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

I couldn't agree more Alistair. It also seems that patience is not a virtue we all share equally.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 07:41 AM

apdieb
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.31 #3 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Guys.. This is a FORUM not a CHAT ROOM. What is up with all the 1 sentence messages. I would suggest taking a breath, get your thoughts together and post one or 2 paragraphs instead.

FWIW.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 07:43 AM

Alistair Watson
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.31 #4 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

A large mug of coffee worked for me!

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 07:44 AM

apdieb
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.31 #5 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Alistair Watson wrote:
A large mug of coffee worked for me!

So what time is it over there? I gotta get some sleep! Nearly 3am here..

Uh oh.. I am a hypocrite...I forgot about my "chat room" comment.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 07:46 AM

Alistair Watson
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.31 #6 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

9:15 in the AM! 3am over there? You must be one of those hard core FM'ers I keep hearing about!

This weekend is going to be a busy one, shooting a rugby match on Saturday and then a hillclimb on Sunday. I am planning to shoot my 1D2N as a primary, the Mark 3 going along just for backup.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 08:14 AM

Kier
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.31 #7 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Alistair Watson wrote:
I am planning to shoot my 1D2N as a primary, the Mark 3 going along just for backup.

That's the kind of comment Canon Inc. needs to hear. For many of us, the 1D Mark III is a lemon where autofocus is concerned, inferior to previous models due to inconsistency and the inability of photographers to rely on the camera to do the job for which it is designed.

Sure the rest of the camera is amazing but with broken AF it's all for nothing. If the forthcoming firmware release does not put these issue to rest, I for one will be approaching this issue from a far more anti-Canon standpoint.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 10:06 AM

UA935
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.31 #8 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Kier wrote:

Sure the rest of the camera is amazing but with broken AF it's all for nothing. If the forthcoming firmware release does not put these issue to rest, I for one will be approaching this issue from a far more anti-Canon standpoint.

Totally agree Kier.

If the new firmware is not a resolution of the issues Canon need to be made to comment on the issues.

There is no doubt in my mind that the camera has issues although it is not present in all conditions. Light is a big factor here I think not temperature.

Canon cannot bury their heads any further when people are buying a camera which costs such a large amount of money and is billed as the ultimate action camera.

People I think have been very patient to this point but I do not see it continuing.

Normally companies provide better customer service to people who buy their flagship models such as in the motor industry etc but it does not seem to be the case with Canon.

Regards

Simon

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 10:13 AM

deadeyedick
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.31 #9 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 2:47 pm Post subject: My first crack at 1D3 AF issue

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One of our members was kind enough to send me his EOS 1D3 that he has been struggling with AF on even with the firmware updates. This camera has 1.1.0.

After taking the profiling shots for ACR, I took it outdoors with a 300 f/2.8 to see what the AF issue is all about. Fortunately it's a partially cloudy afternoon so I could test in both conditions without having to wait very long. It was immediately obvious what the camera is doing to my eyes. In AI Servo, if you just move the camera around, focus travel is very fast but I did notice a bit of settling time with an initial overshoot followed by a settling over the next quarter second or so that is noticeably more pronounced with this camera than the 1D2n I was using right next to it. Then taking it to moving objects this settling time became a big issue. What the camera is doing is overreacting to movement. With a subject coming toward the camera, the predictive tracking is overcompensating resulting in the camera focus being in front of the subject. Then it realizes it missed and tries to catch up but by then the subject has moved resulting in a feedback loop that only leaves shots critically focused when the lens happens to be traveling through the plane of critical focus - about half the shots are within the DOF at f/5.6 using this method. It's like the camera thinks a 20MPH subject is going 30MPH, then realizes it isn't and thinks it's only going 15. It's not a focus calibration issue because in one shot or when the subject is still, once the focus settles, it is right on the money with no calibration required for my lens. This is very repeatable and is definitely more pronounced when the sun is out compared to when the sun is behind clouds. The 1D2n had no problem with this test using the identical lens and even though focus movement is a bit slower on this body, it is more accurate by the time the shutter actually drops. Some may question my ability to see this difference but to me its apparent. I can also see a CRT monitor's screen turning on and off at 70Hz refresh like someone is using a strobe light - I am extremely sensitive to this (it is one of my migraine triggers). Note that the misfocus is not gross but certainly enough to cause trouble for serious action shooting.

This reignites, in my mind, my initial theory, that in the servo or AF loop, there is an underdamped circuit - in other words an RC time constant that is just slightly off which could easily be the result of a component that is not speced correctly or a component tolerance that is speced to wide. This is what such a system would do (note I have spent a considerable part of my life dealing with RC circuits). I'm going to play with it some more but that is my one afternoon conclusion.
_________________
E.J. Peiker
Sr. Technical Editor, NatureScapes.net
www.EJPhoto.com

Here's another opinion regarding the AF problem

Edited by Jeff on Sep 21, 2007 at 07:32 AM GMT (Reason: gave quoted text proper html tag)

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 11:31 AM

Alistair Watson
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.31 #10 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Thanks for the post! It seems very similar to what a number of people have mentioned here, just in a different way, it certainly does make sense to me though and I can identify with what he has written.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 12:20 PM

UA935
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.31 #11 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Come on Canon, speak up on this issue, you must be looking at this board.

Simon

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 01:12 PM

Sam Bennett
Online
Buy and Sell: On

p.31 #12 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Well, after going through last weekend's shots, I can't honestly say I detect any problem with my Mark III's AI Servo performance with the 24-70/2.8 or the 85/1.8. The 85/1.8 was as usual a little less accurate, but this is something that I've noticed with my Mark II as well. My shot ratio was actually a bit better with this last event. The 24-70/2.8 shots are perfectly in focus and just ridiculously sharp even at f/2.8.

Very happy with the camera. Wish I could comiserate - lord knows I've had problems with Canon gear in the past - but I simply can't at this point.

A few of my favorites from the weekend:

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 01:28 PM

mill4570
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.31 #13 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Wow,

All the extra pages in only 12 hours.

Just a couple of quick facts;
1) Canon knows there is a problem with the AF on the MKIII. The primary purpose of the 1.1.1 firmware is to resolve AF issues.
2) Canon's apparent slow response is the Japanese way of handling these type issues. They are not in denial, they want to be right this time.
3) RG has been using the 1.1.1 firmware for sometime and is waiting for Canon to remove the "Beta" and make it an official release.
4) Looking at images from someone else's camera will not answer questiions about your MKIII. Each MKIII owner will have to evaluate if the firmware does the trick or not. If it doesn't, the camera should go back to Canon.
5) If Canon can not fix the AF issues with firmware, and hardware is required, they will recall the cameras.

Richard K.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 01:56 PM

mill4570
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.31 #14 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Jeff,

Yes, number 5 may be questionable, but I believe it to be fact based on my use of Canon Equipment for over 30 years. Despite what many believe, Canon is a reputable company.

The "fact" that Canon has not acknowledged this in a letter or press release, is of little importance as I see it. They have placed a beta firmware in the hands of some including RG, sent engineers to monitor and assist RG tests, and loaded new firmware at Osaka during a major sporting event. What other acknowledgement do you need? This is the Japanese way, pure and simple.

The last few pages of this thread have gotten even more emotional than when the thread was started. My intent was just to remind everyone that Canon is serious about the AF issue and are actively working on it and they will not leave MKIII owners out in the cold.

If I have touched anyone's buttons, allow me to apology.

Richard K.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 03:33 PM

UA935
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.31 #15 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Great post Richard

It is just getting frustrating given the length of time which has elapsed from initial ownership to now.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 04:03 PM

mill4570
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.31 #16 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

UA935 wrote:
Great post Richard

It is just getting frustrating given the length of time which has elapsed from initial ownership to now.

UA935,
Thanks and I agree totally about the frustration levels, but the best post I have read on this issue was Jeff's back on page 92 of this thread. I believe it is the best summary of where we stand on the MKIII AF issue. I would recommend a deep breath and a reread of that post, and maybe a cup of coffee, or a big drink, right Alistair

.

Richard K.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 04:45 PM

Alistair Watson
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.31 #17 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

A big drink indeed Richard! 6pm here and I have just opened a lovely bottle of Cote de Rhone red, the weekend has begun, and a busy weekend for shooting!

Gear cleaned, packed and charged. 1D3 coming along but unless something happens to my 1D2N (god forbid because I would be really screwed then!) it won't get a shot off.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 05:08 PM

mill4570
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.31 #18 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Mine works a little better than that, but the IIN is never far away.

Richard K.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 05:45 PM

Sam Bennett
Online
Buy and Sell: On

p.31 #19 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

A recall? Yeah right. Canon still hasn't done anything about the 50/1.2L, has it? That lens is so obviously fundamentally flawed that if anything would get recalled, that would be it. If there's something physically wrong with the design, they'll fix it in later production runs of the camera and leave current owners high and dry - especially considering the minority of users who actually experience the problem.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 07:15 PM

Wickedfn4u
Online
Buy and Sell: On

p.31 #20 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Wow that seems a little chicken little? No offense intended. I just think if it cannont be firmwareed then thet have to recall or they set themselves up for a huge class action for selling something that cannont be used for the intended purpose. I just don't see canon letting it go that long. The 50 might be a poor comparison as I would guess the # produced or sold are far less.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 08:37 PM

Paul B
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.31 #21 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

mill4570 wrote:
Jeff,

Yes, number 5 may be questionable, but I believe it to be fact based on my use of Canon Equipment for over 30 years. Despite what many believe, Canon is a reputable company.
Richard K.

I'd agree Canon is a reputable company and that this is going to get fixed one way or another. If it's a hardware fix, though, they wouldn't necessarily need to do a formal, total recall, particularly if it's just some portion of the bodies (let's say 40-50%) that need the new hardware immediately. As long as they notify owners that they can send in MKIIIs (free of charge, of course) with problems, that's answering the mail, in my view (and also protecting them, I would think, from a lawsuit.) Then they can decide how (or whether) it's necessary to deal with bodies that aren't currently having issues. This would probably be a faster way of resolving the problem than having twice as many bodies coming in as is necessary. Whatever happens, though, they need to take care of this and they will, I'm sure (just a question of how, and how fast, it happens given all the complexities.)

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 08:53 PM

Lasse Eriksson
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.31 #22 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Sam Bennett wrote:
A recall? Yeah right. Canon still hasn't done anything about the 50/1.2L, has it? That lens is so obviously fundamentally flawed that if anything would get recalled, that would be it. If there's something physically wrong with the design, they'll fix it in later production runs of the camera and leave current owners high and dry - especially considering the minority of users who actually experience the problem.

I agree, Canon will not recall the already sold mk3:s. If they where tinking about that, they would not keep on selling thosends of them every month.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 09:08 PM

mill4570
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.31 #23 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Paul,

I agree, but the end result is the same. I believe Canon will issue a firmware release deisgned to fix AF issues. Each individual owner will have to decide if his or her camera now works properly. If it doesn't, Canon will recommend sending it to a service center.

Some believe Canon is more interested in avoiding a law suit than fixing the problem. I am not in that number. I believe this is a difference between cultural approaches to problem solving more than anything else.

Richard K.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 09:20 PM

Curator
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.31 #24 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Lasse Eriksson wrote:
Sam Bennett wrote:
A recall? Yeah right. Canon still hasn't done anything about the 50/1.2L, has it? That lens is so obviously fundamentally flawed that if anything would get recalled, that would be it. If there's something physically wrong with the design, they'll fix it in later production runs of the camera and leave current owners high and dry - especially considering the minority of users who actually experience the problem.

I agree, Canon will not recall the already sold mk3:s. If they where tinking about that, they would not keep on selling thosends of them every month.

Wasn't there a recall on the 24-105 for the lens flare issue? It seems to me if there is an issue and they identify and fix it, they will fix any previously sold cameras. If there is anyone that doesn't believe this, they really should be looking at a different camera manufacturer!

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 09:39 PM

mill4570
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.31 #25 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Lasse,

I believe Canon continuing to sell the camera is a sign the AF can be fixed with firmware. However, the different behaviors of the camera leads me to believe many will have to go back for service. The EJ Pecker borrowed camera for example on Naturescape. I can tell you my MKIII has never behaved in that manner.

You can call it a recall, or a service center upgrade or a replacement, one way or another Canon will make this right.

Richard K.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Sep 21, 2007 at 09:45 PM


FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Image Upload 1 2 3 … 30 31 32 33 34 end