If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

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

3 end

stiksandstones
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.2 #1 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

I spoke with a guy I know the other day to see if he had any gear for sale, I always check in with him from time to time to see what he is getting rid of. He is the staff photographer for a pro NFL team and has always shot canon-his email to me the other day said the following;

"MarkIII is not worth $4500 or $4000 for that matter, hence the reason I have been shooting with my mkII and mkIIn still, I never thought I would say it, but I might goto nikon"

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 27, 2007 at 08:32 PM

Mariner
Offline
[ X ]

p.2 #2 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

Human nature is indeed funny. Apparently many of the current Mark 3 owners want others to make the same mistake they did. How disappointing. I cannot recall another photographic product that has received such an overwhelmingly bad reception and later turned out not to be faulty in design or construction. My guess is that a year from now (hopefully sooner) the Mark 3 will be replaced by the Mark 3N.
John

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 27, 2007 at 09:10 PM

chez
Online
Image Upload: On

p.2 #3 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

Photographers can expect an exceptional degree of performance and reliability exceeding any film camera they've ever used. Speedy shooting is achieved with an entirely new, lightning-fast 45-point AF system, sophisticated tracking and predictive AF technology combined with precise, instant metering, no matter the setting.

This is why people should complain and keep complaining until Canon fixes the problem. Many people bought the camera specifically for the "lighning-fast 45 point AF system, sophisticated tracking and predictive AF technology" to cover action photography. The camera was developed with the sports photographer in mind and this is where it fails. Keeping quiet will not get this problem resolved. Everyone needs to let Canon know they have stumbled and that we are all expecting them to do the right thing and fix their mistakes. I don't even have an interest in this camera, but I surely still do have an interest in holding Canon accountable for thier mistakes. If not, maybe the next mistake they make and shrug off will have a direct effect on me.

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 27, 2007 at 09:17 PM

Valerie S
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #4 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

Steve A wrote:
It's going to be interesting to see what 1.1.1 has to offer, what's scary to me right now is the feedback from 1.1.1 users, does not look promising with all of the ER99 issues with 1.1.1.

That's why it's still in beta.

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 27, 2007 at 09:35 PM

XsigmaSD
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #5 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

Mariner wrote:
Human nature is indeed funny. Apparently many of the current Mark 3 owners want others to make the same mistake they did. How disappointing. I cannot recall another photographic product that has received such an overwhelmingly bad reception and later turned out not to be faulty in design or construction. My guess is that a year from now (hopefully sooner) the Mark 3 will be replaced by the Mark 3N.
John

This is getting crazy.
Yea, we lay awake at night trying and trying to figure out how to screw you. Got news for you... I didn't make a mistake. My MkIII works as advertised. Why is that so hard for some people to understand? Why does every thread about this camera have to devolved into a hate fest? Every thread devolves along the line of "oh yea, I've read a lot about it, and a bunch of other non-owners are repeating it too, so it must be true..." OR "well, if you say it works you must not be using it right, I read if you use these settings, with this subject matter, it doesn't work." OR "I read where even if you believe it works, it won't for very long."
The other group is the people who write that they have purchased it, and having never shot a single frame at a sporting event or a single BIF, pronounce the camera broken because they can't get 50 out of 50 shots perfect. Kind of an insult to the folks that have spent their lives shooting such events, that all you needed to do was buy a camera and you are supposed to shoot like a pro, no experience needed.

The other day, someone posted in another thread that he has had 1.1.1 installed for a while, and it doesn't fix the focus problem and that now it gives continuous err99 reports. Someone else asked how long hes had the firmware and where he got it... no reply. BUT that thread gets quoted, so it must be true right?

Its funny, that not one positive post ever gets quoted by a non-owner. You won't read in this thread, someone posting that they READ where there are people actually using a MkIII and making money with it.

Now for the usual disclaimer, I totally believe that there are some broken cameras out there. I feel bad for the people that own them currently, you should be upset with Canon. Hopefully it will be sorted out, or your cameras replaced soon.

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 27, 2007 at 10:23 PM

Hrow
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.2 #6 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

bcaslis wrote:
Steve Ickes wrote:

But why would anyone take the risk of spending that much money to possibly get a defective item? Are you suggesting that the poster spend the $4500+ just so she can qualify to have an opinion? That logic is a bit off don't you think?

No, but there's a difference between "it doesn't focus right" and "I've heard it doesn't focus right and therefore I think it doesn't focus right". To be honest, if you don't have first hand experience you shouldn't make blanket statements about problems. That's like saying "the handling on a Ferrari isn't any better than my Ford" when you've never driven a Ferrari.

baslis has an excellent point. That's why hearsay isn't allowed in the courts. Hopefully we learned a lesson after what happened in Salem.

PS. Mine has problems and I am not a happy camper. Yes, I have gotten images I would not have gotten if I had stayed with my 20D over the summer but I do feel that Canon's behavior is now bordering on criminal if they are contunuing to sell a defective product. If the product is no longer defective it means that they have found the solution and have chosen not fix the defective bodies unless forced to.

To those who may argue that they may not know what caused the problem because they may have gotten a bad part(s) in the initial runs and now have good parts I respectfully say Bull Sh*t. There are only X parts involved and if they can't do a compare and figure out which one is defective then none of us should be buying anything from them as these advanced products are way over their heads.

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 04:13 AM

deadeyedick
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #7 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

Its funny, that not one positive post ever gets quoted by a non-owner. You won't read in this thread, someone posting that they READ where there are people actually using a MkIII and making money with it.

How true....of course my belief is that non owners should pull their heads in, and not comment at all about the performance of a camera they don't own, or have not even handled in some cases.

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 04:35 AM

MSC
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.2 #8 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

I think people that don't own a camera can comment on it. But it depends on what they are speaking to. For example, you can comment on how Canon is reacting, or a review they read, or about issues they may have if they want to buy one, etc. They cannot speak with authority on things like real-world shooting situations beyond general comments, but they can comment on specs and tech details.

We all comment on things we have not done all the time. Having a baby, or the economics of tax policy of people not in our fiancial situation...the examples are endless. So I would not say people that don't own the camera cannot comment on it...but is would not have the same value as someone that does own AND use one.

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 04:46 AM

Ron Hew
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.2 #9 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

deadeyedick wrote:
Its funny, that not one positive post ever gets quoted by a non-owner. You won't read in this thread, someone posting that they READ where there are people actually using a MkIII and making money with it.

How true....of course my belief is that non owners should pull their heads in, and not comment at all about the performance of a camera they don't own, or have not even handled in some cases.

Ditto!

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 04:59 AM

cwphoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #10 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

Curator wrote:
Monique wrote:
But still there are people that will not admit they have a lemon.
Even in one shot the AF is not working as it should. And if you talk to Canon, then they give you the feeling that you are a worse photographer.

Are you trying to claim that all Mark III's have a problem focusing in one-shot? The posters from the following thread would probably disagree with you:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/565572

If you are having problems with your camera in one-shot, send it in to Canon for repair/replacement.

Plenty of people have problems with One Shot - it ain't just AI Servo.

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 12:58 PM

Mariner
Offline
[ X ]

p.2 #11 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

It may not be until November, when the 1Ds is released that we learn if the autfocus issue has been identified. Canon claims to (by their own press release) use the same autofocus system in both series 1 bodies. If the 1Ds is free of autofocus issues, then 1D owners need to return their cameras and insist on the fix. If Canon claims a modified autofocus system in the 1Ds, then we can assume the problem was recognized and Canon will have to make good on the 1D repairs. In the U.S. when a product is sold it is expected to be "suitable for its intended or advertised purpose". A camera that will not focus is certainly NOT suitable. Canon needs to be concerned not only with irrate and frustrated consumers but with owners who have lost income from malfunctioning cameras. Just my two cents but perhaps someone from Canon reads these posts?

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 02:56 PM

Jack White
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.2 #12 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

I am definitely not rich. I am a hobbyist and thought the MKIII would be the sole dSLR I would use for the next 3 years or more. It is investment but the build quality is so good that it could last for a long time so thinking long-term the value of this camera is not so over-priced. However, I split the time with my Nikon F6 and I sometimes think I would have kept the 5D if it was a tad bit faster. 3fps is a little slow for action. 5-8 fps and I probably would have kept it. I may eventually sell my 1D if I need cash as I'd rather have film for landscape and pick up a 40D or D300. Net result = $2000-2300 in the bank for X-mas/travel.

Madmax, you could right! Put the MKIII in the hands of RG and maybe the bad AF problems reach 75%. I've made my share of comments about AF accuracy and I may be eating my words soon. Maybe not. After reading in a little more detail RG review of the AF issues I am definitely not testing my camera the same way he is. Why? I don't have a super tele and I live in Seattle so it is usually cool here. Additionally the Sun is intermittent or rare for about 6-9 months out of the year. When I did use it on a 500mm f/4.5 over the Summer the images were in focus but the air temp was around 70 F.

Seems like the best testing will require bright light, warm temp, large aperture lenses, and shutter speeds over 1/2000. Living in Seattle the next time this will occur will be in July 2008.

I have used Static or AI Servo w/ and w/out flash with Canon 50mm and 180mm macro with no issues. Light was good but not super bright nor were the subjects moving erradically. I got my 300mm yesterday so this weekend I will try some more difficult subjects.

Maybe the MKIII is the perfect camera for a Seattle shooter! To be honest I may never push the camera to that of RG so I may never experience the same issues. However, at $4500 should there be AF issues? Not really.

The release of the D3 is going to be good for us MKIII owners! When Canon officially addresses this issue they will have to deal with us in a respectful manner (recall?). Why? Pros backed by companies will choose the newest and best equipment and if it is Nikon bodies then they will go. Even if the issue isn't seen in consumer/prosumer bodies the name Canon gets associated with "problems". This is already occuring.

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 03:24 PM

brainiac
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.2 #13 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

...tad bit

Tad means bit. Tad bit means means means bit bit.

I raise my hats to the complainers. If anyone is calling Canon about this, can you please mention that the joystick can't be set up to move AF points, and there is no persistent and comprehensive settings memory like C-mode. In fact if you get someone at Canon to listen, even if it doesn't affect you personally, to help others, please mention anything from the list of 1D3 shortcomings on this thread: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/569705

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 03:44 PM

brainiac
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.2 #14 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

For UK based 1D3 users, a Canon rep suggested the best way to complain is to write to

Marketing Dept
Canon UK Head Office
Woodhatch
Reigate
Surrey
RH2 8BF

If you are so inclined, you may want to include a copy of the 1D3 AF poll using the 'print post' button, and this thread about non-AF shortcomings: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/569705

Print small and save paper.

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 04:00 PM

Mariner
Offline
[ X ]

p.2 #15 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

How foolish are the Mark III owners who wish to silence the non owners. It will be the lack of buying any new Series 1 bodies that will one day force Canon to deal with your problems, and deal with them in a fair way. If anything, you should trying to enlist non owner support. This is like a bad comedy. Do you think Ralph Nader owned a Corvair?
John

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 04:14 PM

XsigmaSD
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #16 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

Mariner wrote:
How foolish are the Mark III owners who wish to silence the non owners. It will be the lack of buying any new Series 1 bodies that will one day force Canon to deal with your problems, and deal with them in a fair way. If anything, you should trying to enlist non owner support. This is like a bad comedy. Do you think Ralph Nader owned a Corvair?
John

AGAIN, you are making a very erroneous assumption here. The majority of MkIII owners ARE NOT having problems. Canon has been VERY fair with me, I gave them a bunch of cash, they gave me an absolutely awesome camera. I get on here and talk about it, and get told by a bunch of people that have never held one, that I am wrong and that they know it is broken and that I am lying to them about it. Who looks foolish here?

No, Ralph Nader probably never owned a Corvair, but he did drive one, tested it, took it apart, got to know it before proclaiming it "unsafe at any speed." That has absolutely nothing to do with you reading about a camera on the internet and then telling me mine is broken.

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 05:08 PM

Jack White
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.2 #17 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

I haven't heard of any Mark III owners silencing non-owners.

Each person gives his/her personal experience and though subjective I like to think they are honest opinions. As we are given more context/experience/empirical data then one's opinion may change. Myself, I have yet to see one AF problem but I do recognize I may not be pushing my camera to its limits and part of that is free time and partly shooting style and pure luck of getting a good one. If a problem occurs I will not be quiet but a problem may never occur.

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 05:33 PM

bcaslis
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.2 #18 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

Mariner wrote:
How foolish are the Mark III owners who wish to silence the non owners. It will be the lack of buying any new Series 1 bodies that will one day force Canon to deal with your problems, and deal with them in a fair way. If anything, you should trying to enlist non owner support. This is like a bad comedy. Do you think Ralph Nader owned a Corvair?
John

No one is asking for non-owners to be silenced. It's asking for them not to post information that sounds like they have first hand knowledge of problems when they don't. Nobody here has any knowledge of how many units have problems or don't. Unless we know what the issue is, it's unclear where it really affects them all or not. But some of the most vocal about the problems (on other forums too, not just here) are people who have never touched a 1D3.

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 07:58 PM

Steve A
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #19 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

QUIT BITCHING AND CALL, JEEEEEEEEZ, I'm so sick of all this crap, makes me want to puke listening to people defend Canon on this issue.

If you have a good MK3 we're all happy for you, if you don't have a good working camera call, it's really simple, the more calls the better.

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 08:02 PM

Steve A
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #20 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

Sep 28, 2007 at 08:03 PM

Steve A
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #21 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

Sep 28, 2007 at 08:03 PM

apdieb
Online
Image Upload: On

p.2 #22 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

Steve A wrote:
QUIT BITCHING AND CALL, JEEEEEEEEZ, I'm so sick of all this crap, makes me want to puke listening to people defend Canon on this issue.

If you have a good MK3 we're all happy for you, if you don't have a good working camera call, it's really simple, the more calls the better.

I just wanted to post this for a 4th time so that we were sure what to do...

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 08:47 PM

Mariner
Offline
[ X ]

p.2 #23 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

Actually Ralph Nader never drove, or took a Corvair apart. Sorry to upset you with the facts

What Ralph did was to examine the accident statistics of the car. Sort of like looking at the reported frequency of difficulties with the Mark III

Keep on trucking baby.
John

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 09:06 PM

bcaslis
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.2 #24 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

There is one difference there. It's a pretty hard fact on whether there's an accident or not. Reports of focusing problems spread on internet boards have no way of being verified or not. Not saying that there aren't problems out there. But it's absolutely impossible to know how many. It could be 0.1%, 1%, 99% or anywhere in between. Anyone who claims to really know is kidding themselves and others.

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 09:19 PM

XsigmaSD
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.2 #25 · If your unhappy with your MK3 read this

Mariner wrote:
Actually Ralph Nader never drove, or took a Corvair apart. Sorry to upset you with the facts

What Ralph did was to examine the accident statistics of the car. Sort of like looking at the reported frequency of difficulties with the Mark III

Keep on trucking baby.
John

Heres some reading for you since you are so fond of quoting stuff you read on the internet.

http://www.calconnect.com/cars/nader_affair/nader_affair.htm

The best part of the article is a couple paragraphs from the end...

"The most telling comment of the whole Nader Affair, can be found in the Advisory Panel's musings on why this all happened. They stated:

In the opinion of the panel, Ralph Nader, et al sensed there was a difference between the Corvair and contemporary American cars of the 1960-through-1963 period. He expressed his feelings in terms that the Corvair handled in an unstable manner and also had a propensity to overturn.

In other words, the Corvair was unjustly persecuted because of Nader’s feelings, not engineering logic. Ironically, Nader usually celebrates diversity as a hallmark of his political movements. The Corvair’s only fault was that it was different."[i/]

hmmm...

And no, I don't drive a truck

Edited on Oct 01, 2007 at 02:06 AM

Sep 28, 2007 at 09:29 PM


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