arashm wrote:
I really don't understand why the poeple who don't have this camera or have never used one are the ones who are so dead bent on trying to prove that there is nothing wrong with it?
It personally took me a while to be able to isolate the issue and shooting conditions and identify the issue! of witch by this time I was over my return period.
sheesh!
Most of the people in this thread that own the camera also say the camera works good.
Sep 17, 2007 at 02:19 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
arashm wrote:
Hi
I sent all my lenses in with my Mark 3 and had to pay $58 canadian dollars per lens.
and nothing has changed.
I also don't want to get into Micro adjustment and things like that, honestly that's the last thing I want to do... start thinkering with an already ill camera.
allister please let us know what the outcome is for you and if indeed there is any improvement.
(I hope so)
am
Nothing has changed, well I think I'v heard that before!
Paying so much for the lenses, and still the problem is there...
Well not that this means a whole lot but it is under the for what it is worth category. I just had coffee with a good friend of mine who I have not seen since the end of our soccer season this spring. He is the sports editor for the paper here in Seattle and asked me what I thought of the body. Told him my troubles and he just laughed. I asked if they bought any of the 3's and he said no way they were going to get any until this shakes out. He said they were lucky because they had to put in for budgeting so that delayed the purchase and since all his photogs are not wanting to jump. He said I should just take mine (2nd) back and just get my money until they figure it out.
I would be curious the medtech that was on the UW sideline last weekend saying they mostly using the M3 which paper or who they were shooting for?
72chevelle454 wrote:
We micro adjusted all of our lens for the 1D3, all of the same lenses that worked just fine on our 1D2's
My brother and I both had to adjust just about every lens we had (except for my 500mm f4) to some degree.. some back and some forward adjustments were needed as much as + or - 12 on the scale. seems real weird to me that the camera can not achieve a consistent focus point at the same target, that for one tells me there is something going on. I'm on my 3rd 1D3 body and yes I had to micro adjust all three cameras for my lens arsenal.. I noticed the same thing with all three camera bodies when micro adjusting them, the camera was somewhat sporadicly focusing on the focus point.
Side note that I would like to put out there is the 70-200mm f2.8 IS lenses seem to work the best for tracking subject in servo mode.. Don't know why, but they do.
I belive people are using that micro-adjustment too much. Just because they got a new toy with their new camera they have to use it. They have used their lenses for years with many cameras and suddenly they must adjust every lens
I was the medical provider who saw a bunch of mark iii's on the sideline of the UW-OSU game. My interactions with the photo crew were limited, as they were all busy shooting. I came to notice the neck straps of the 1dIII, which is what drew my attention to them in the first place, and then began looking more closely. Like I said before, roughly 2/3 of those shooting were using 1DMkIII's (rough estimate, but I was actaully suprised, given all of the talk out there about all of the AF issues and limited use of this camera in other venues). The game did receive a lot of national coverage, but there's no way to distinguish who's who on the sideline (local vs national coverage).
Ash, just thought it was funny when I talked with my friend from the paper and none of his guys have or want the M3. I know his guys were there in force so maybe they were the 1/3.. lol
Lasse Eriksson wrote:
I belive people are using that micro-adjustment too much. Just because they got a new toy with their new camera they have to use it. They have used their lenses for years with many cameras and suddenly they must adjust every lens
The problem is that due to the random/unreliable/Inconsistent behavior of the AF system of the Mk III that are defective (even for static subjects), the micro-adjustment is a painful procedure and not accurate, so someone can introduce or bias more AF error/drift for that specific lens without knowing it ... so now the snow ball is growing up & up ....
Juan55 wrote:
The problem is that due to the random/unreliable/Inconsistent behavior of the AF system of the Mk III that are defective (even for static subjects), the micro-adjustment is a painful procedure and not accurate, so someone can introduce or bias more AF error/drift for that specific lens without knowing it ... so now the snow ball is growing up & up ....
Just to second this -
Due to the inconsistent nature of the AF in AI Servo and One Shot modes, it is of vital importance that you do not rely upon a single test shot at each micro adjustment level. Take at least ten shots at each adjustment level, allowing the camera to refocus between each shot, before deciding which series of images on average is the best focused.
Alistair - good luck with your epic calibration. I can't help thinking it will make sweet FA difference, but I hope I'm wrong. I'll be sending my MkIII and all 20 of my lenses into CPS for calibration after the AF inconsistency is resolved - before then I believe there is the distinct possibility that lenses could be sent badly out of calibration with other bodies by attempting to match them to the all-over-the-place focusing of the MkIII. Just a warning.
Kier wrote:
Alistair - good luck with your epic calibration. I can't help thinking it will make sweet FA difference, but I hope I'm wrong. I'll be sending my MkIII and all my 20 of my lenses into CPS for calibration after the AF inconsistency is resolved - before then I believe there is the distinct possibility that lenses could be sent badly out of calibration with other bodies by attempting to match them to the all-over-the-place focusing of the MkIII. Just a warning.
Hi Kier, in theory everything should return matched, 2 bodies, 9 lenses, all matched to each other. If AF inconsistency is the problem then I can't imagine it will make much of a difference but certainly on my 300 and 500 the Mark 3 does appear to be back focussing. Sweet FA difference or not, I will certainly let you know!
Fingers crossed for you! I'll look forward to hearing how it turns out. Hopefully it will be for the better.
For my part, I have had my third MkIII for about three weeks now and I am very seriously considering calling it a day with this camera and returning it for a refund. If I were to do that, I would certainly go back and buy another one when I start seeing reports that Canon have issued a working fix, or that the problem has been identified and rectified in newly shipping units. It's a shame, because the MkIII makes SUCH nice images when they are in focus.
Lasse Eriksson wrote:
I belive people are using that micro-adjustment too much. Just because they got a new toy with their new camera they have to use it. They have used their lenses for years with many cameras and suddenly they must adjust every lens
People have shot film without a LCD screen on the back for many years too..
A new poll is up to Jeff, but in the meantime you can give me your changed or additional-unit votes and I'll include them in the periodic results snapshots I've been posting.
Hey, maybe we could start a new poll after firmware 1.1.1 is among the masses. We could ask if it seemed to fix the widely known Servo focus issue. Of course one choice in the poll could still be "I had no problems to begin with!"
Sam, out of curiosity, what were you going to vote now?
Not sure I'm ready to vote yet. I shot my first sports event this weekend, but I haven't gone through all the photos yet. I'm about 1/3rd the way through (in the portion that was in direct sunlight) and the focus looks dead on so far. I have a 529xxx.
Well, the focus was "off" in some photos, but when shooting sports I don't expect every photo to be in focus. When shooting Roller Derby I'm literally running while shooting so it's hard to know if its the camera's fault or mine. After getting through culling I will know what my keeper ratio was in comparison to other events shot with the Mark II in the same venue, with the same lenses.
The place I shoot gets late afternoon sun through some very large windows, and I end up shooting backlit for a lot of shots:
I use the 24-70/2.8 and the 85/1.8 for most of the work, typically between f/2 and about f/4.5.
?
