Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 3 4 … 18 19 end

Archive 2009 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

chez
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #1 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

musclepics wrote:
Emile Gregoire wrote:
Listen, I'm in the "totally happy with my new 1D3" camp. It's better than my previous one in so many ways, I could write a book about it. But that doesn't mean I can now all of a sudden discount what RG says. He has images to download that prove what he says, so what's there to debate about? Doesn't mean my camera isn't great for what I do with it...

See this doesn't make sense. People give online reviewers way to much credit, when the answer they want is right before them. You admit you are happy with the huge improvement with the 1D Mark III after the fix. You've seen it with your own eyes. Then you have this guy who, from what I've heard, is not very good at what he does, telling you that there was NO improvement with this last fix. So who are you going to believe? Him or yourself? Because that's what RG is saying.. not that there is a vast improvement, but still some problems. He's saying there is NO improvement with this last recall fix, and you and I both know that's completely wrong. RG's initials SHOULD be BS as far as I'm concerned.

And tell me why you have more credibility than Rob? Rob has backed up his findings with detailing his test and showing the results. What have you backed up your findings with other than a lot of hot air.

May 30, 2009 at 04:08 PM

globalkiwi
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #2 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

In a way the furore surrounding this camera has become a little like a religious debate - some people are convinced their cameras have improved & see RG's intractability as heresy, others (& many who don't own the camera) see this as a vindication of their conviction (not to believe). Both sides are arguing over what constitutes the basis for faith.

As for me, I just bought the camera & am very happy with it so far - & not particularly concerned with comparisons to a camera I've never used & likely never will. How it compares to the Mk IV - now that's a debate I'll be interested in.

May 30, 2009 at 04:12 PM

chez
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #3 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

Nello Milanese wrote:
I swear if I read RG's name again my head is gonna explode. I'm sure he's a great guy and all and have nothing against him but over these last 2 years or so I got so fed up of people just dying and drooling waiting for him to write a few lines like he's the God almighty or something!

Well if it wasn't for Rob taking his stance and making his findings public...maybe Canon would not have tried so hard to fix the problems. I remember when the issue 1st focused ( PUN intended ), we had the majority of people on this forum saying Rob was full of it. Time proved Rob right and even Canon reluctantly caved in.

Once again Rob makes his statement and we again here those same people putting down Rob because they got a few good focused shots. History has a way of repeating itself and I would put my money with Rob as I have read his fully scientific focus test and his way of evaluating the results and that provides a lot more creditability than someone on a forum saying my camera is fixed...so Rob is full of it.

May 30, 2009 at 04:15 PM

chez
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #4 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

keithreeder wrote:
Garylv wrote:
Just because a number of people don't SEE the trouble themselves, that doesn't mean it's not there for the rest of us. It's there and it's been demonstrated well.

The exact opposite works too: Just because RG has a problem, doesn't mean that it isn't down to him rather than the camera - I for one have long doubted his testing regimen...

And why do you suppose Canon spent maybe millions of dollars recalling the cameras and coming out with numerous fixes if Rob was just a hack? Keith, I really don't follow your logic.

May 30, 2009 at 04:21 PM

dolina
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #5 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

Just to play safe why not wait for the 1D3 and 1Ds3 replacement?

May 30, 2009 at 04:25 PM

jonbrach
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #6 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

I truly believe that the markIII has become a "mind game" to many people...if the camera was fixed perfectly and performed perfectly many people would still find issues because all cameras have problems and issues and this one is no different....at this point it is a waste of time to continue to debate the merits of the camera....the markIII has so many improvements over the markII that it is literally not worth comparison as far as i am concerned....if you get good results with it as i do then it is fixed...if you do not then it isnt....what more can be said about the camera anymore?

May 30, 2009 at 05:37 PM

SoundHound
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #7 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

Well no tool is perfect. But it is to RG's and Canon's credit that they continue to test and fix. If RG had nothing to offer then Canon would not have piggybacked on his testing. The real outcome may well be that the Mk IV will be delayed until Canon is sure that RG (and the rest of us) will be able to use a much more advanced AF system.

I too have been in the position of finding discrepancies in expensive professional equipment and in reporting them took a lot of flack. It took a lot of time and money to document what I had learned in, exhaustive, use of the product.

Later the manufacture, and other associated companies, used my testing and research to improve their products and use modalities. But I was left with the reputation of, at best, a troublemaker. So I want to thank RG for doing what, seemingly, no one else would do (and for nothing)-so all of us could benefit.

May 30, 2009 at 06:52 PM

Jim Victory
Online
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #8 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

jonbrach wrote:
I truly believe that the markIII has become a "mind game" to many people...if the camera was fixed perfectly and performed perfectly many people would still find issues because all cameras have problems and issues and this one is no different....at this point it is a waste of time to continue to debate the merits of the camera....the markIII has so many improvements over the markII that it is literally not worth comparison as far as i am concerned....if you get good results with it as i do then it is fixed...if you do not then it isnt....what more can be said about the camera anymore?

+1

I have owned a total of 4 MKIIs and MKIINs and 3 MKIIIs. I have owned and used every 1 series camera manufactured by Canon, except the 1DsMKIII, from their inception.

The first 2 copies of the MKIII I had were problematic and the latest copy has been better than any of the MKIIs I have owned. I did see an improvement in focus accuracy after the recent AF adjustment. Most of my lens don't need any MA anymore.

I also shoot sports as well as wildlife and my MKIII has performed flawlessly compared to previous MKIIs. Any OOF shot is usually my fault. I really don't know what you could ask for more given the other improvements of the MKIII over the MKII.

I don't know RG and I wouldn't begin to question his ability or testing paradign because his results don't matter to me. What matters to me is the results I get with the MKIII because I'm the one it has to please.

Jim

May 30, 2009 at 07:09 PM

globalkiwi
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #9 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

Yeah, there is an element of shooting the messenger here & that certainly isn't fair. But reasonable people should be able to disagree. There are many people who feel RG's testing doesn't replicate their own experience & they should be entitled to voice that feeling without being told they don't know what they are talking about.

May 30, 2009 at 07:13 PM

mark fadely
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #10 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

let's see if I can simplify my results:

MKIII before latest fix = BAD
MKIII after latest fix = GOOD

Look at my BIF galleries and see if it looks like I know how to shoot moving objects

I do believe some people's cameras are still not performing up to spec (maybe RG is one of those), but mine certainly is working very well

May 30, 2009 at 07:20 PM

jamesf99
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #11 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

mark fadely wrote:
let's see if I can simplify my results:

MKIII before latest fix = BAD
MKIII after latest fix = GOOD

Look at my BIF galleries and see if it looks like I know how to shoot moving objects

I do believe some people's cameras are still not performing up to spec (maybe RG is one of those), but mine certainly is working very well

It's always good news to hear that people are satisfied. There were lots of things I liked about the 1D3 from the start so if it works, it's great.

Unfortunately, there are some here (on FM) that just can't get it through their thick skulls that some people MAY be having problems even after the fix.There was even a recent poll a couple of weeks ago and the person running the poll got very upset at anyone that suggested there might still be problems.

I've learned the hard way that it's possible to get a lemon, or ever several in a row, and I respect the right of others to say they're having trouble. Trouble with a 1D3 is an old saga however, and I'd really like to put the whole thing behind me for good.

May 30, 2009 at 07:48 PM

Eldor
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #12 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

musclepics wrote:
All the MKIII owners I know personally also have this same experience. I think it's RG that is broken, not the camera

Well, you don't know me personally, but...

Having moved from two of the original 1D bodies to the Mk II and then to the Mk III, I was really really disappointed with the Mark III's. In the studio or for landscapes, etc. it was wonderful and indeed low-light focusing was fairly good, but for shooting fast-moving sports (I shot a lot of bicycle races) or birds in flight, it was really poor.

I hung in there with the bodies, going through various fixes (and both bodies were the "blue dot" bodies which had the hardware fix done at the factory) but the percentage of out-of-focus shots I was getting was just not acceptable to me. RG's findings only confirm my own experience with the Mark III and I'm glad I sold the bodies when I did. Canon really disappointed me with that one.

I got myself two 5D Mark II bodies as a temporary measure until Canon comes out with a vastly improved pro body to replace the 1D Mark III. I can't wait to get back into a pro body, but in the meantime I'm fairly satisified with the 5DII's. Indeed, I might keep these for studio and landscape work even if I get pro bodies for other work. But if the next pro body does what the Mark III should have done AND offers what the 5DII does, well, I'll probably switch without keeping the 5DII's.

I'm sure RG's going to take a lot of heat for his report (again!) but I think he's bang on the money with his findings.

May 30, 2009 at 08:06 PM

mark fadely
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #13 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

Eldor - too bad you didn't keep the MKIIIs for just a bit longer until this latest fix. The last fix is the one that really made the camera work.

May 30, 2009 at 08:14 PM

jannis
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #14 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

Wow:-)) Great gallery and beautiful action shots! Lovely pics !
/Jannis
www.jannisnet.com

May 30, 2009 at 08:24 PM

RobertLynn
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #15 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

I just want to say that I hope the 1dmk4 comes out soon, so the used 1dmk3 goes down in price...oh and I hope that the 1dmk3 fixes are great, because I hope to get a used one :P

May 30, 2009 at 08:30 PM

Hrow
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #16 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

mark fadely wrote:
Eldor - too bad you didn't keep the MKIIIs for just a bit longer until this latest fix. The last fix is the one that really made the camera work.

For some, perhaps most, but not all. Mine is going back in because the latest fix has taken a well functioning 1DsMkIII and made it erratic. Although the possibility exists that I forgot how to focus in the four days it was gone, I prefer to think that there might be another cause for the greatly increased number of OOF shots.

In my case, I can see that the camera is having a lot of trouble on low contrast subjects - much more than it ever had before. It will hunt and often lose focus much more than it did before. This doesn't mean it can't be fixed but if RG's camera is like mine I am not surprised that he is unimpressed.

May 30, 2009 at 08:43 PM

leewoolery
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #17 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

I didn't realize how bad the focus on my Mark III was until I tried a D3 for a couple of weeks in March.

Right out of the box, I was getting an entire series of basketball shots in focus. something that I could never do with a Mark III.

After mine is sent in for the fix...and if it greatly improves...I may just shoot with two brands.

Much success,

Lee Woolery
Speedshot Photo

May 30, 2009 at 08:44 PM

Tony B
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #18 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

May 30, 2009 at 09:15 PM

Randy Wright
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #19 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

Hi fellow Mark III owners,
I would be curious to see the newest results -(after the last fix/update)- we each were to acheive if we each tested our longest telephoto's lens at their widest aperature with a runner coming towards us on a bright sunny day, such as what RG did in his original test...
I know my early model June '07 Mark III has had all the fixes and updates, been to Canon Irvine a few times, and I use it all the time, but I wonder how she would fare testing like RG's original test? Have many of you folks tried testing that way? It's been May gray here at the L.A. beaches alot, but I am curious to try mine out soon...
Randy
LAsurfpix.com

May 30, 2009 at 10:04 PM

mark fadely
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #20 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved

Hi Henry,

I have heard of some 1DsMK3 users had poor results with their fix. I was referring to the 1DMK3. For some reason results between the two models have been quite different throughout the recalls. I thought RG was using a MK3 as well and not a 1DsMK3? I hope you get your problem fixed with yours.

Hrow wrote:
mark fadely wrote:
Eldor - too bad you didn't keep the MKIIIs for just a bit longer until this latest fix. The last fix is the one that really made the camera work.

For some, perhaps most, but not all. Mine is going back in because the latest fix has taken a well functioning 1DsMkIII and made it erratic. Although the possibility exists that I forgot how to focus in the four days it was gone, I prefer to think that there might be another cause for the greatly increased number of OOF shots.

In my case, I can see that the camera is having a lot of trouble on low contrast subjects - much more than it ever had before. It will hunt and often lose focus much more than it did before. This doesn't mean it can't be fixed but if RG's camera is like mine I am not surprised that he is unimpressed.

May 30, 2009 at 10:21 PM

1 2 3 4 … 18 19 end
FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 … 18 19 end