•Poll v3.1: 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 … 5

6

7 … 33 34 end

rbranan
Offline
Image Upload: On

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

"The Japanese tend to suck at complex software that doesn't have clear and discreet success criteria. We may criticize Windows, but there are reasons we're not running Rindows. (I kid, but I love our Japanese friends )"

interesting comment. btw i have no problems with my III and my in focus pictures show up in SI on a regular basis....and I have worked with lots of very smart japanese engineers that can write some great software...so much for generalizations

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 23, 2007 at 07:30 PM

Edward Kelsey
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.6 #2 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Seems pretty clear now that the Nikon D300 and D3 have been announced that Canon rushed this model to market to beat the Nikon announcement. Surely that is the reason the focus issue even exists.

It really leaves a bad taste in my mouth as I was considering the 1DsIII but now may go with a Nikon D3 instead.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 12:54 AM

Nill Toulme
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.6 #3 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

dcmiller wrote:
...I think it's s software problem without significant sample variation. I think there is no quick fix. I think with dual digic, and a lot of additional process space, they wrote new algorithms and got lost. But I'm guessing. From my experience with design complexity this is more likely than some percent of cameras having bad hardware, Remember the first released firmware was 1.0.8. They went through seven release candidates before we got the camera.
...

You may prove to be right. But I think it's difficult to reconcile that view with the sort of good to bad experience Jeff encountered, much less with one like this.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 01:26 AM

Nill Toulme
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.6 #4 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Thursday night snapshot:

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 01:32 AM

Garylv
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.6 #5 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Nill Toulme wrote:
You may prove to be right. But I think it's difficult to reconcile that view with the sort of good to bad experience Jeff encountered, much less with one like this.

His post does make you want to request an exchange with the dealer, although I didn't buy mine from a local dealer I know, it was from B&H, and a long time ago now.

He did not go into details about the type of lenses he used or the conditions he tested in. Also, perhaps he really did have a camera with one or more defective parts, and his new one is now like the rest of ours, where the trouble is mostly noticeable in bright sunny conditions using faster telephoto lenses, tracking a moving subject in a somewhat narrow dof.

I did ask him to clarify further in another thread but he didn't respond yet.

Remember too this excerpt from RG:
"two EOS-1D Mark III bodies, as well as EF 300mm f/2.8L IS and EF 500mm f/4L IS lenses, were all checked and calibrated by Canon USA service technicians before they were shipped here, so that they could definitively rule out equipment miscalibration or some other malfunction as the cause of the autofocus problems we've been reporting"

Hey, if it's a defective part Canon should have been able to clarify that and get the service centers up to speed by now so we can take in our cameras for the repair. But they are still silent on this issue.

I'd even like to try another unit, but they're not easy to come by. Wish Canon would hurry up and give us something official on this.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 02:50 AM

Nill Toulme
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

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

Me too, so I could go ahead and buy one. ;-)

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 03:06 AM

ben_is_in
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.6 #7 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Nill Toulme wrote:
Me too, so I could go ahead and buy one. ;-)

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Don't do it, Nill. If you get a lemon I'll be forced to send you links to tutorials and Canon documentation describing how those incomprehensible custom functions work. You'll be forced to test your camera by shooting sports like soccer and moving trains.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 03:18 AM

Nill Toulme
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.6 #8 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

You think you're kidding. It was finally realizing that's exactly what would happen that convinced me to hold off. :-(

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 03:20 AM

apdieb
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.6 #9 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

And we all know that if Canon acknowledges it and fixes it, that everyone will be still going through the motions of testing to death.. Not that this is a bad thing.. but it is a certainty after the fiasco that is this AF "problem".

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 03:26 AM

ben_is_in
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.6 #10 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Nill Toulme wrote:
You think you're kidding. It was finally realizing that's exactly what would happen that convinced me to hold off. :-(

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

You would only need 10 minutes at one of your daytime soccer matches with my camera to understand what I'm talking about. It's truly depressing.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 03:26 AM

Valerie S
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.6 #11 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

dcmiller wrote:
... but Canon's concern at this point is the guys shooting the world series in eight weeks. This is a good thing for us regular owners.

I don't put much weight in that. If their particular Mk III body doesn't cut it for them, then they use another body or backup. The point is, they'll still be using their big white lenses, if it's with a Mk III, MkIIn or whichever. There isn't the incentive to get it straight for that.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 03:28 AM

ben_is_in
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.6 #12 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

apdieb wrote:
And we all know that if Canon acknowledges it and fixes it, that everyone will be still going through the motions of testing to death.. Not that this is a bad thing.. but it is a certainty after the fiasco that is this AF "problem".

Not me. I haven't run the first test. I just go out and do it for real, and that's how I determine what's working and what isn't. I don't care how many in focus shots I get of some guy running through a parking lot. That's not my typical subject. I want the touchdown catch to be sharp.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 03:30 AM

apdieb
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.6 #13 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

ben_is_in wrote:
apdieb wrote:
And we all know that if Canon acknowledges it and fixes it, that everyone will be still going through the motions of testing to death.. Not that this is a bad thing.. but it is a certainty after the fiasco that is this AF "problem".

Not me. I haven't run the first test. I just go out and do it for real, and that's how I determine what's working and what isn't. I don't care how many in focus shots I get of some guy running through a parking lot. That's not my typical subject. I want the touchdown catch to be sharp.

Yep.. Me too.. I am quite happy with my Mark III. I probably should have said "A Lot of people"... Not "everyone".

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 03:33 AM

Garylv
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.6 #14 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

apdieb wrote:
Yep.. Me too.. I am quite happy with my Mark III. I probably should have said "A Lot of people"... Not "everyone".

Can you elaborate just a little bit? Are you shooting much in Servo focus? Lenses used? Common shooting subjects and conditions?

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 03:36 AM

ben_is_in
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.6 #15 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

apdieb wrote:
ben_is_in wrote:
apdieb wrote:
And we all know that if Canon acknowledges it and fixes it, that everyone will be still going through the motions of testing to death.. Not that this is a bad thing.. but it is a certainty after the fiasco that is this AF "problem".

Not me. I haven't run the first test. I just go out and do it for real, and that's how I determine what's working and what isn't. I don't care how many in focus shots I get of some guy running through a parking lot. That's not my typical subject. I want the touchdown catch to be sharp.

Yep.. Me too.. I am quite happy with my Mark III. I probably should have said "A Lot of people"... Not "everyone".

I do realize that lots of people get paranoid when they think their cameras might have a problem and testing often ensues. I happened to notice my problem before I knew anyone else was having problems.

I'll admit that after finding the problem I shot certain things at actual events I normally don't shoot...like 17 pictures of a kid running to first base. I guess that qualifies as a test. But get that kid out in the parking lot and my camera is going back in the bag.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 03:38 AM

apdieb
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.6 #16 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Garylv wrote:
apdieb wrote:
Yep.. Me too.. I am quite happy with my Mark III. I probably should have said "A Lot of people"... Not "everyone".

Can you elaborate just a little bit? Are you shooting much in Servo focus? Lenses used? Common shooting subjects and conditions?

I have posted images here before.. I believe in this thread.. So far, I have been happy with the Servo performance with my Mark III. I will say this.. I am not shooting with a 300mm+ F2.8 lens though. Longest I have is a 70-200L IS F2.8 with a 1.4X extender.

My latest tests just involved my son at a water park on various water slides...fast motion, F4 at around 100mm in BRIGHT sun and 101 degree temperature. My sequences were not shot at 10FPS... 5 I believe..I was very happy with the results. I believe one of the crops is posted here a couple of pages back.

So.. (for me) and my subject matter (I am mainly a wedding and concert shooter...would like to get into sports more eventually, The body is working admirably. Who knows if I slap on a 400 F2.8 and shoot soccer if I'll be singing the same tune though.

Having said this, my son's soccer season is about to start in a week. I'll get out and do some additional testing and report back. There are no shortages of HOT and SUNNY days down here in Texas right now.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 03:51 AM

Garylv
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.6 #17 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Thanks, I remember seeing the photo now, just recently. I would think you could still see some trouble with your 70-200 f2.8, although maybe not quite as much. In fact RG mentioned that lens seemed ok on some tests, until he used it to shoot a soccer game. You'll have to keep us updated ;-)

Based on my experience and reading that of some others, the trouble seems to show even more on longer telephoto lenses. But yet some others report issues with shorter lenses too.

Hot & sunny here in So California too. Lot's of time to shoot in those conditions.

Gary

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 04:05 AM

ben_is_in
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.6 #18 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Here's a series of images that illustrates how my 1DIII performs on a sunny day...

http://www.pbase.com/ben_is_in/1diii_focus

Long bursts, short bursts, predictable movement, erratic movement, still subjects...doesn't really matter. Servo + sunny = crap. In other news, my 1D still works wonderfully.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 04:17 AM

slau
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.6 #19 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

ben_is_in wrote:
Here's a series of images that illustrates how my 1DIII performs on a sunny day...

http://www.pbase.com/ben_is_in/1diii_focus

Long bursts, short bursts, predictable movement, erratic movement, still subjects...doesn't really matter. Servo + sunny = crap. In other news, my 1D still works wonderfully.

Ben,
I have reviewed the whole series of images and they are bad. With the exception of 1 or 2 images, the focus seems to be consistently behind the player by 1-2 ft. I was focusing on looking at the ground than looking at the player.

I assume that your 1D will track the player without any problem. Actually from looking at your series of images, I really have confident that either my 1D or 1Dmk2 will give me very high keeper ratio, as the subject is relative fill frame and not exactly moving at high speed. I still have to try my Mk3 on subject like this yet.

Stephen

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 05:01 AM

ben_is_in
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.6 #20 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

slau wrote:
ben_is_in wrote:
Here's a series of images that illustrates how my 1DIII performs on a sunny day...

http://www.pbase.com/ben_is_in/1diii_focus

Long bursts, short bursts, predictable movement, erratic movement, still subjects...doesn't really matter. Servo + sunny = crap. In other news, my 1D still works wonderfully.

Ben,
I have reviewed the whole series of images and they are bad. With the exception of 1 or 2 images, the focus seems to be consistently behind the player by 1-2 ft. I was focusing on looking at the ground than looking at the player.

I assume that your 1D will track the player without any problem. Actually from looking at your series of images, I really have confident that either my 1D or 1Dmk2 will give me very high keeper ratio, as the subject is relative fill frame and not exactly moving at high speed. I still have to try my Mk3 on subject like this yet.

Stephen

When it's off, it's almost always slightly behind the subject whether the subject is running toward me, laterally, or standing still. And the lens is not in need of a micro adjustment in case anybody is wondering.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 05:18 AM

rwalkernm
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.6 #21 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

ben_is_in wrote:
Here's a series of images that illustrates how my 1DIII performs on a sunny day...

http://www.pbase.com/ben_is_in/1diii_focus

Long bursts, short bursts, predictable movement, erratic movement, still subjects...doesn't really matter. Servo + sunny = crap. In other news, my 1D still works wonderfully.

Ben,

I've been reading enough of these threads to know you're frustrated. I still cannot decide if mine is "working" or not. I've done all the tests -- cars, runners, etc. If I do the runner test (ProPhotoHome.com), I consistently get 20% OOF, which technically makes mine a "good" camera.

But I got a chance to shoot my first soccer scrimmage of the season last weekend, sunny midday, horrible high contrast light, warm. ("good" examples at http://www.pbase.com/rwalkernm/scrim81807). I still wonder if OOF pictures are saying something about me or the camera. I can confirm other reports that it is crucial to get the initial shot in a burst in focus, or you can easily spin off a whole bunch of OOF pictures. Coming from a 10D, I am getting about the same percentage of keepers as before (!!). With erratically moving players, I am not talented enough to ensure the CF point is tracking on the desired target, so I need to allow focus point expansion and hope for the best. With a MkIII, you can make a lot of bad pictures very fast.

Some bursts start in focus, and then drop out -- but since it's not possible to figure out which AF point was being used, I can't tell if I wandered off the target or not. I guess I envy you guys who are sure of what you are shooting at.

If I ever decide, then I'll vote in this thread; but for now, I am effectively still in the "I am clueless" category.

Bob Walker

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 05:34 AM

slau
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.6 #22 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

Jeff,
Looking at your series of cycling with the subject almost fill frame, and the BG is way behind the subject, it makes perfect sense that the HIGH sensitivity and Center AF point will give you more keepers. From my experience with the Mk2, SLOW tracking is used only when there are occasionally undesirable 'things' get in between you and your subject, and/or your subject is relatively close to a background that is in high contrast and distracting.

The only time I will even dream of using 45 AF points and HIGH tracking sensitivity is when shooting BIF with a single good size bird (i.e. eagle or Sandhill Crane) against a white or blue sky background when the AF has no chance to acquire focus on the background.

Frustrating !!

Stephen

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 05:45 AM

slau
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.6 #23 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

ben_is_in wrote:

When it's off, it's almost always slightly behind the subject whether the subject is running toward me, laterally, or standing still. And the lens is not in need of a micro adjustment in case anybody is wondering.

Ben,
It seems like your camera and Gary's (scoccer series) camera are all doing the same thing: focus behind the subject when the focus is out. I wonder do other people's out-of-focus shots also show the "foucs behind the subject"?

No, if your lens is out of spec by that much, I doubt that the micro adjustment will do your any good

. Plus, you must be getting good results with the same lens with the other bodies. I doubt that your lens is the problem.

I will go back and look at RG's series of OOF images closely and see if the focus is also behind the subject.

Stephen

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 06:00 AM

ben_is_in
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.6 #24 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

rwalkernm wrote:
ben_is_in wrote:
Here's a series of images that illustrates how my 1DIII performs on a sunny day...

http://www.pbase.com/ben_is_in/1diii_focus

Long bursts, short bursts, predictable movement, erratic movement, still subjects...doesn't really matter. Servo + sunny = crap. In other news, my 1D still works wonderfully.

Ben,

I've been reading enough of these threads to know you're frustrated. I still cannot decide if mine is "working" or not. I've done all the tests -- cars, runners, etc. If I do the runner test (ProPhotoHome.com), I consistently get 20% OOF, which technically makes mine a "good" camera.

But I got a chance to shoot my first soccer scrimmage of the season last weekend, sunny midday, horrible high contrast light, warm. ("good" examples at http://www.pbase.com/rwalkernm/scrim81807). I still wonder if OOF pictures are saying something about me or the camera. I can confirm other reports that it is crucial to get the initial shot in a burst in focus, or you can easily spin off a whole bunch of OOF pictures. Coming from a 10D, I am getting about the same percentage of keepers as before (!!). With erratically moving players, I am not talented enough to ensure the CF point is tracking on the desired target, so I need to allow focus point expansion and hope for the best. With a MkIII, you can make a lot of bad pictures very fast.

Some bursts start in focus, and then drop out -- but since it's not possible to figure out which AF point was being used, I can't tell if I wandered off the target or not. I guess I envy you guys who are sure of what you are shooting at.

If I ever decide, then I'll vote in this thread; but for now, I am effectively still in the "I am clueless" category.

Bob Walker

I've shot sports with the following cameras:

Sony DSC-S70
Digital Rebel
20D
1D
1DIII

Each time I upgraded there was a huge improvement in AF until I got the 1DIII. The last thing I expected was a step backwards.

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 06:01 AM

Jeff Winters
Online
Image Upload: On

p.6 #25 · •Poll v3.1: MkIII have AF issues?

We continue to see posts from photographers that believed they had a camera without problems that turned out to be problematic. I'm sure we have all noticed the scarcity of new Mark III cameras available. Somethings going on in Japan and hopefully we will hear from them soon.
Jeff

Edited on Oct 29, 2007 at 04:27 PM

Aug 24, 2007 at 12:04 PM


FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Image Upload 1 2 3 … 5 6 7 … 33 34 end