['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

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 … 56 57 end

pixelpix
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #1 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

Jeff wrote:

Note in the screen grab below that virtually every time the MkIII has an out-of-focus image, it almost ALWAYS exhibits some sort of secondary 'ghost' image, suggestive of some sort of movement (which at 1/8000th, I'd think is unlikely on RG's part). This is very clearly and consistently exhibited on the 'Brooks' logo the runner's blue shirt, since it has a high-contrast area (dark background with white lettering). With the camera in the vertical orientation, the 'Brooks' logo has a ghosted image above it, indicating some sort of movement somewhere in the system (side-to-side in relation to a landscape orientation). This would obviously contribute to an image's overall softness regardless of the actual focal plane, though it appears to me to be consistenly manifested mostly when the camera ALSO has focused either slightly in front of (or more typically) slightly behind the subject. Note that the MkIIn's OOF images do not exhibit this odd characteristic (at least that I could find), suggesting the lens has nothing to do with it.

Whether the cause of this apparent 'movement' in the system is also causing the focus errors becomes the question in my mind (there is also a chicken-and-egg component here). I suppose there is always the slight chance that it could be lens/IS related, but I would doubt that he was using IS for such sequences, and one would expect it would have been duplicated in the MkIIn images. I have no idea what component in the system could be moving, whether it is a result of the new anti-dust mechanism, due to the sensor moving (which seems unlikely), or some sort of overall 'looseness' in the parts of the camera that is exacerbated by the MkIII's extremely fast shooting rate.

Like I said, I have noticed these 'ghosted' secondary images in several of my OOF MkIII images, and as you all have probably seen, there is a fair amount of internet chatter about overall image softness (not the all-over OOF 'misses' that we've seen so much of), though image softness can often be attributable to user error of a variety of sorts.

Hi Jeff,

I just mentioned the following in DavidP's thread, but I think it may be valid here too....

The ghosting is something that I have seen before with my 1DS2 and a 16-35 L II. Would you agree that this is a similar effect?....

This image is copyrighted by the owner

At first it looks like motion blur or perhaps a shift in focus, but this was shot AF off, 1/1000 sec, tripod mounted, mirror lockup and shutter delayed. It's not even a corner crop, as it comes from the middle-top of frame.

Now here is a crop from the center of the very same image......

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Not a bit of ghosting to be seen and proves that the ghosting above has NOT been created by camera movement.

I ended up thinking that the lens was a dud, as the cam performs flawlessly with all my other lenses.

What does this mean in relation to RG's images? Probably nothing, but it is interesting that a VERY similar effect can be seen in an image where AF tracking and IS was not even involved.

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 12, 2007 at 06:13 AM

Marcel Knaapen
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #2 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

pixelpix,
were you trying to manual focus during the exposure?

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 12, 2007 at 10:05 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.4 #3 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

My plans to buy the 1D Mk III have been postponed again. I am getting desperate. Will this saga never end?

Canon, a fix is needed ASAP or there will be more black lenses in Beijing that white ones….

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 12, 2007 at 10:56 AM

pixelpix
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #4 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

Hi Marcel,

No.... the focus was set using AF and switched off to MF on the lens. The camera was not touched during the exposure, as it was tripod mounted and used MLU and 2 second timer release.

Remember that the above 100% crops are from the very same image, so any bump or knock (which there was none) would effect the whole image.

Rusty

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 12, 2007 at 11:12 AM

Jeff
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.4 #5 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

Hmm... Interesting, it does look very similar. Do you have any images shot at the same time that does not exhibit this phenomenon? i.e., is it random? If not, I might expect this to be some sort of more typical optical quirk (similar to the 'longitudinal spherochromatic aberration' that someone referred to earlier in this thread). Does it move around the image, or is it never shown in the center?

Interesting, though...

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 12, 2007 at 02:05 PM

Marcel Knaapen
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #6 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

My further guess....

Could it be 'longitudinal spherochromatic aberration', caused by the AF kicking in too quickly at high shutter speed.
While the glit is still sliding over the sensor, AF is getting more and more away from the in focus pont. Just maybe AF alogritm assumes exposure is ready in 1/8000 second, wheras in reality the sthutter travels in about 1/250 sec accross the sensor (and 1/8000 behind that, the 2nd blade closes)

on 2nd tought... would the direction of tis blur than 90 degrees from what we see now.. not sure

Could this also happen with another cam if put to MF and turn focus ring while making an exposure? Due to lack of time during daylight, I cannot test myself.
any valonteers to test?

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 12, 2007 at 03:39 PM

SoundHound
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.4 #7 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

I predict 2nd party "Paint your Mk III White" services or white "Camera Skin."

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 12, 2007 at 05:10 PM

Iberian
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #8 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

What is crazy is that some of RG's mk III shots are sharp. Why does the blurring only occuring some of the time?

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 12, 2007 at 05:20 PM

aaronlam
Online
Buy and Sell: On

p.4 #9 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

Okay... I am a bit confused on how the AF fails...

Does the OOF shots typically only happen when shooting sequences in AI-Servo with a long lens? Or is it just using AI Servo in general? What if I am using AI-Servo with a wide lens?

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 12, 2007 at 05:37 PM

scowl
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #10 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

aaronlam wrote:
Does the OOF shots typically only happen when shooting sequences in AI-Servo with a long lens? Or is it just using AI Servo in general?
Mine fares no better with an 85mm f1.8 which works perfectly on my Mark IIn so the problem is certainly not limited to very long lenses.

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 12, 2007 at 06:16 PM

pixelpix
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #11 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

Jeff wrote:
Hmm... Interesting, it does look very similar. Do you have any images shot at the same time that does not exhibit this phenomenon? i.e., is it random? If not, I might expect this to be some sort of more typical optical quirk (similar to the 'longitudinal spherochromatic aberration' that someone referred to earlier in this thread). Does it move around the image, or is it never shown in the center?

Interesting, though...

Yes there were others that day that did not show this effect with this lens, plus there were more with it. I was doing a pre-purchase test of this lens to compare with my 17-40.... so the FL was was being varied and this could explain the with and withouts.

I did do some more test shots the day after these (and after noticing the effect) to double check and I could reproduce the results quite easily.

With AF and IS out of the picture and the fact that this happens with no other lens (so the body is OK), it really only leaves an optical issue or an iris problem

?

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 12, 2007 at 07:28 PM

pixelpix
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #12 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

Oh! I forgot....

It always presented itself in the same part of the image (middle top) and never in the center.

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 12, 2007 at 07:36 PM

DavidP
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.4 #13 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

That's just bizarre. Never seen that before in any of my shots.

And you can't even blame it on auto-focus (or the 1D3, either).

pixelpix wrote:
The ghosting is something that I have seen before with my 1DS2 and a 16-35 L II. Would you agree that this is a similar effect?....

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Dec 12, 2007 at 08:12 PM

Jeff
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.4 #14 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

Jammy Straub wrote:
Hopefully Jeff will contact RG with his analysis of the photos Rob posted. I'd say there's no reason to believe RG's coverage of this is over. He knows there's still a problem, and if someone presents the problem in a well thought out manor, he has no reason to not bring it to the public eye.

So yeah.. um anyone got Rob's number for Jeff?

I've heard back from neither RG nor CW, though it's only been 24 hours since I e-mailed them. I can't say that I expect to hear back from Chuck, but I'd certainly expect Rob to respond.

-Jeff

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 12, 2007 at 09:55 PM

DavidP
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.4 #15 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

Jeff, a guy over at DPR (Pix-something) has stated that he sees this weird "ghosting" even in the 1D2 shots on RobG's site.

Have you looked for them there, and if so, have you seen them?

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 12, 2007 at 10:55 PM

apdieb
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.4 #16 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

Yakim Peled wrote:
My plans to buy the 1D Mk III have been postponed again. I am getting desperate. Will this saga never end?

Canon, a fix is needed ASAP or there will be more black lenses in Beijing that white ones….

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

- I think you'll probably just see more MarkIIn's instead.

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 12, 2007 at 10:56 PM

Jeff
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.4 #17 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

DavidP wrote:
Jeff, a guy over at DPR (Pix-something) has stated that he sees this weird "ghosting" even in the 1D2 shots on RobG's site.

Have you looked for them there, and if so, have you seen them?

I did look in one of the MkIIn's 'fast' series, and did not see them. DPR has a similar thread going on about the 'ghosting' issue? I'd be curious to see a link if you have one..

PS: Maybe it's the "pix-something" who posted the brick pictures above?

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 13, 2007 at 12:07 AM

Jammy Straub
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.4 #18 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

pixelpix wrote:
What does this mean in relation to RG's images? Probably nothing, but it is interesting that a VERY similar effect can be seen in an image where AF tracking and IS was not even involved.

I'd guess your issue is indeed entirely un-related. My basis for that guess is that it's only seen in an isolated area of the frame with only one lens on a different camera body. Perhaps it's some flaw in the manufacturing of your specific lens, a bubble in the glass or some such thing.

I'd send the lens in for service with example prints of the problem. Cheers.

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 13, 2007 at 12:19 AM

Jammy Straub
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.4 #19 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

Jeff wrote:
Jammy Straub wrote:
Hopefully Jeff will contact RG with his analysis of the photos Rob posted. I'd say there's no reason to believe RG's coverage of this is over. He knows there's still a problem, and if someone presents the problem in a well thought out manor, he has no reason to not bring it to the public eye.

So yeah.. um anyone got Rob's number for Jeff?

It's appreciated.

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 13, 2007 at 12:20 AM

MarkHaertl
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #20 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

My Mark 3 too often produces fuzzy ghost images.

Some people mentioned the Antidust thing as a possible cause for the problem. I noticed the same soft images effect on a 400D I used for a few weeks.

Edit: Now that I've compared several of RG's series I wonder, is the DOF smaller with the Mark 3?

When the Mk3 focuses properly on the shirt the face is OOF - not so with the N, with which both face and shirt are in focus.

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 13, 2007 at 12:33 AM

pixelpix
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #21 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

Jeff wrote:
DavidP wrote:
Jeff, a guy over at DPR (Pix-something) has stated that he sees this weird "ghosting" even in the 1D2 shots on RobG's site.

Have you looked for them there, and if so, have you seen them?

I did look in one of the MkIIn's 'fast' series, and did not see them. DPR has a similar thread going on about the 'ghosting' issue? I'd be curious to see a link if you have one..

PS: Maybe it's the "pix-something" who posted the brick pictures above?

Nope not me.... I think it may have been "PIXmantra".
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=25984267

Did you get the full res pic Jeff? I am not in the office now, so dunno if you have sent an email response.

Edited by pixelpix on Dec 13, 2007 at 10:49 AM GMT (Reason: Added link to PIXmantra comment)

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 13, 2007 at 12:43 AM

pixelpix
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.4 #22 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

Jammy Straub wrote:
pixelpix wrote:
What does this mean in relation to RG's images? Probably nothing, but it is interesting that a VERY similar effect can be seen in an image where AF tracking and IS was not even involved.

I'd guess your issue is indeed entirely un-related. My basis for that guess is that it's only seen in an isolated area of the frame with only one lens on a different camera body. Perhaps it's some flaw in the manufacturing of your specific lens, a bubble in the glass or some such thing.

I'd send the lens in for service with example prints of the problem. Cheers.

Luckily it was not my lens... it was on loan from CPS for evaluation purposes. I was considering upgrading the 17-40 and there were about 6 members on my site considering buying one also.... needless to say that Canon got no sales from us.

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 13, 2007 at 12:46 AM

Jeff
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.4 #23 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

I'm still in the 'office', so I don't know. Thanks, though!

-Jeff

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 13, 2007 at 12:48 AM

Numfar
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.4 #24 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

Steve Perry wrote:
Jeff - I know you're on to something here!

I was in yellowstone a couple weeks this september. I have several series of coyote where I was shooting at 1/2000th, F7.1, on a tripod where nothing in the photo is sharp. After looking at the ghosting, I can say for sure my camera is exhibiting this problem. It was not "hot" out, but bright and sunny when I took the photos in question. Despite f7.1, not a single item in the frame is sharp. Looking at some of the grass blades at 100%, I see the same ghosting effect.

I do use IS, I wonder if higher speeds with IS are causing the problem? Very strange.

Steve

I had exactly the same issue in Alaska in July shooting otters on overcast days at moderate/slow shutter speeds (1/500 -1/2000). Some shots of large floats at f4 or f/5.6, there is nothing in focus at all.

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 13, 2007 at 02:50 AM

DavidP
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.4 #25 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken

Jeff wrote:
I did look in one of the MkIIn's 'fast' series, and did not see them. DPR has a similar thread going on about the 'ghosting' issue? I'd be curious to see a link if you have one..

This is the post to which I refer:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=25984267

As to the "ghosting" issue, I don't think there's a THREAD about it at DPR . . but, I've seen it mentioned several times. Doing a search on that term would probably bring up the posts.

Edited on Dec 22, 2007 at 07:47 AM

Dec 13, 2007 at 03:08 AM


FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Image Upload 1 2 3 4 5 … 56 57 end