orangefirefish
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.5 #19 · Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved | |
In my opinion, the bottom line is that threads like this indicate that there is still a great deal of uncertainty with the Mark III. For many this uncertainty will certainly sway them away from the camera and continue to use something proven such as the mark II N or mark II. The reality is that you just won't know if the camera you purchase will function properly or not- which is not something that a working professional should have to worry about, especially with expensive equipment like this. It certainly seems that it is functioning properly for some people, and it also seems like it is working rather poorly.
In my own experience the mark III malfunctioned erratically- and that is why I moved away from it. When it worked, it worked really well, with great images. But many people can't deal with these variances, especially when their paycheck depends on it.
I shot with a D3 and D700 alongside a 5D mark II and that was a solid combination. The D3 was very responsive and functioned very, very well. I also used a 1ds3 and that was very much different compared to the 1d mark III- it was much better.
Look, I don't care if the D3 doesn't AF as fast as the 1d3, or silly comparisons like that- all I know is that the D3 works when and where it's supposed to, and the 1d3 has often failed where it is supposed to perform, sometimes, when you least expect it. And that is something that is troublesome, and not worth risking, especially when there are other options that are available today.
It's hard to imagine how much time Canon's engineers can dedicate to the mark IV while still cleaning up the issues from the mark III. We'll see.
|
