musclepics
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.4 #3 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved | |
mark fadely wrote:
Hi Randy,
My MKIII is working very nicely shooting a 300 2.8 wide open for soccer and BIF etc. RG's original test showed very poor accuracy with the MKIII when the DOF field was small. Now mine is more accurate than my MKIIn. The MKIIn is fantastic so that is quite an accomplishment for the MKIII.
I have followed and responded to many threads on the MKIII focusing over the last 2 years. Mine was manufactured in Feb '08 and originally only had an in-focus rate equal to 70% of my MKIIn. I kept the camera even though I was never really satisfied with it. Now after the latest fix it is spot on with all the critical narrow DOF shooting I do.
There is a lot of confusion out there right now with all the various fixes for the 1DMKIII and the 1DsMKIII respectively. If people don't own the camera they comment on it only is clouding concensus and interested readers are no doubt dumbfounded as to what is really going on.
Just to confuse things further it seems that users are getting inconsistent results after fixes to either model. One person cannot say that their experience will hold true for everyone else (including RGs findings).
I have been amazed with my MKIII ever since this last fix and I just hope that all the other owners could enjoy the results I'm getting with it now.
Randy Wright wrote:
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
++1
Your post mirrors my experience, and the experience of the vast majority of MK III users out there. RG can say his cameras aren't working properly, and that's about it. For him to say there is a problem still across the board shows how wrong he really is. RG is part of the tiny, but vocal minority.
Randy, you and I represent the vast majority whose MK III's are better now than any other camera out there when it comes to AF. I can point to 2 polls in this forum alone that show a 70-85% satisfaction rate with the AF of the MK III, especially after the recall, with most saying it now trumps the MK II in daylight action.
Oh and when I asked my friend in Calgary (a Nikon shooter btw) today why RG is so miffed at Canon... was it just because of the AF issue? He said "no, it's actually about $$$... if you notice Rob Galbraith's page used to be littered with Canon adverts, and now they are nowhere to be seen. He's pissed that they will no longer advertised on his site, and is probably seeking retribution with these MK III articles".
Again, remember the 4 words....
Rob Galbraith is wrong.
Oh, and at the last marathon I shot, all the local media were using Canon, mainly MK III's, and there was one lonely dude using a Nikon (not sure which one). I talked to a few photogs from the local papers and they all said their MK III's are incredible since the recall fix, and they have now upgraded most of their MK II's. So it's a myth to think all media has switched over.
|
! Yes, I was afraid to even pick mine up today and turn it on, after reading RG's latest!
