Q:After the reported problems with the autofocus tracking on the 1D Mark III, how have you improved AI Servo reliability with the Mark IV?
A: We built new a AF sensor and algorithm – these are completely new, therefore we believe we have solved this issue.
We don’t say our 1D Mark III had an ‘issue’.
Q:After the reported problems with the autofocus tracking on the 1D Mark III, how have you improved AI Servo reliability with the Mark IV?
A: We built new a AF sensor and algorithm – these are completely new, therefore we believe we have solved this issue.
We don’t say our 1D Mark III had an ‘issue’.
__________________________________
No surprise. These are the same dimwits that said "no one ever complained" about the 5d AF, so they left it alone in the 5d2.
I'm sure the 1D4 AF will be better, but I won't go so far as to say "good". Seriously, they've had over 2 years to understand the problems they created, learn how to fix what they messed up, they've been practicing on people with the 7d for a few months now, and they're still potentially tweaking the firmware as we speak. if they don't get it right this time, I think they need to look for a new line of business.
Q:After the reported problems with the autofocus tracking on the 1D Mark III, how have you improved AI Servo reliability with the Mark IV?
A: We built new a AF sensor and algorithm – these are completely new, therefore we believe we have solved this issue.
We don’t say our 1D Mark III had an ‘issue’.
__________________________________
In the same article, explaining why the new AF system couldn't be supplied as a firmware upgrade for the Mk III, he said this:
MO: I also think the big difference as well is that the Mark III has 19 points for autofocus that are user selectable, which was the limit of technology at that point. Whereas now we have 45 selectable points but 39 of them a cross-type.
Yet the Mk II and the "classic" 1D had 45 selectable points (though with fewer than ten cross-type sensors, so going to 19 of those in the Mk III might have had something to do with the elimination of having all 45 be selectable by user).
That sounds kind of lame from an engineering standpoint. What that guy (whoever he really is) probably meant was that they would essentially have to rip out the MKIII AF algo and put a new one in its place and there may be some hardware limitations due to the MKIII implementation.
But the way it was put, does not make much sense since the previous one did basically deliver the performance from 45 points.
BTW, all of this is pretty much conjecture since we do not have the details of the AF implementation.
-- Vivek
Photon wrote:
In the same article, explaining why the new AF system couldn't be supplied as a firmware upgrade for the Mk III, he said this:
MO: I also think the big difference as well is that the Mark III has 19 points for autofocus that are user selectable, which was the limit of technology at that point. Whereas now we have 45 selectable points but 39 of them a cross-type.
Yet the Mk II and the "classic" 1D had 45 selectable points (though with fewer than ten cross-type sensors, so going to 19 of those in the Mk III might have had something to do with the elimination of having all 45 be selectable by user)....Show more →
, lol.....