Any chance of resetting the custom functions and camera setting. Just a shot in the dark incase the ( af custom function ) may have something to do with it. If not, Then Yes we can go back to 1.04 as long as that was in this camera previous.
At this time I can not send you the 104 version as we have not yet recieved it today from headquarters. After we recieve it, I do not know if it could be e-mailed. I will update you when I get more information. Sorry about the delay.
Jonesy wrote:
Got this response back from CPS concerning 1.04.
Any chance of resetting the custom functions and camera setting. Just a shot in the dark incase the ( af custom function ) may have something to do with it. If not, Then Yes we can go back to 1.04 as long as that was in this camera previous.
At this time I can not send you the 104 version as we have not yet recieved it today from headquarters. After we recieve it, I do not know if it could be e-mailed. I will update you when I get more information. Sorry about the delay. ...Show more →
Will you be able to share it when you get it?
Thanks,
Matt.
Jonesy wrote:
Got this response back from CPS concerning 1.04.
Any chance of resetting the custom functions and camera setting. Just a shot in the dark incase the ( af custom function ) may have something to do with it. If not, Then Yes we can go back to 1.04 as long as that was in this camera previous.
At this time I can not send you the 104 version as we have not yet recieved it today from headquarters. After we recieve it, I do not know if it could be e-mailed. I will update you when I get more information. Sorry about the delay. ...Show more →
That's a very confusing statement It sounds like a joke !
I doubt you will never get the 1.0.4 from Canon by email, if there's really a problem with 1.0.6, a new FW will be issued soon.
I have now taken the mk4 into the mountains to shoot military jets low level and then Red Kites. I can confirm that whatever issue I had with the AF has disappeared completely. I've had a Mk11, MK11n, MK111 and a DsMk11 and DsMK111, I have never experienced what I did after the firmware upgrade on the MK4, but for whatever reason (and I'm not technically gifted to understand why) it cleared the issue.
I have now taken the mk4 into the mountains to shoot military jets low level and then Red Kites. I can confirm that whatever issue I had with the AF has disappeared completely. I've had a Mk11, MK11n, MK111 and a DsMk11 and DsMK111, I have never experienced what I did after the firmware upgrade on the MK4, but for whatever reason (and I'm not technically gifted to understand why) it cleared the issue.
Cheers
Garry
Glade to know "issue" gone away.
Can you offer some AF comparison between 1DsMIII and 1DIV for jets in flight shot? Thx
I finally got a chance to do a bunch more testing with my MKIV (with factory-installed 1.0.6 firmware) today. Initial tests last week had me a bit concerned.
I took several hundred shots of our dogs running in the park, and jumping into the pond. They ran toward me, away from me, slowly and at top speed. They also ran across my view. I shot in manual mode, with a variety of apertures, and shutter speed at 1/1250, and let the camera auto-set the ISO. I also shot in both RAW and JPEG mode.
I used both my 70-200 f/2.8 IS and my 300 f/2.8 IS lenses.
Overall results were quite good, with a remarkably high keeper rate on sharpness. As I expected, the 300 did a better job of maintaining sharp focus than the 70-200, but both were very good. I kept the aperture around f5.0 or higher, which gave me very good sharpness, but still provided a nice bokeh. AF tracking was extremely impressive.
I'm feeling much more comfortable now, after the initial concern (okay, panic) last week. The camera is awesome!
mdbassman wrote:
Brian, wonderful images and you are definitely not in Maryland or the Mid-Atlantic!!!
Good work!
Dan
Thanks! Haha, yeah, I heard it's pretty deep back there! Here in Idaho yesterday it was in the mid-40's (balmy!). I wouldn't have jumped in that pond, but the dogs didn't seem to mind.
Nikon just released a firmware update for the D3s. There must be something wrong! Oh my!
Nikon has released a firmware update for the D3S professional DSLR that fixes a series of bugs. Firmware v1.01 rectifies errors pertaining to movie recording, exposure preview, live view and the 'CHA' error message displayed while using some CF cards. It also revises the simplified Chinese menu. The firmware is available for immediate download from Nikon's website.
Can confirm the experience described above with the pre-installed 1.06 FW. I could only test my mk4 in very poor light & misty conditions (normally conditions where so bad I would stay at home, but a bit worried because of this discussion I wanted to make some tests). Shot some pictures with a large variation of settings from birds who could barely be seen but the AF of the MK4 with use of the 500MM + 1.4TC was spot on. My friend who is using a D3X with 500MM without converter had more issues and his lens was hunting a lot more. For the time being i’m confident ....
Hello from Portugal and you are not alone on this,
after updating to 1.0.6 from the working 1.0.4 I started to have the same issues as mentioned on the first and initial post. I think that people who do not have it for the first time will be more prune not to detect this but me, well I can tell you that is VERY NOTICEABLE. On 2 Football matches I had several issues with servo not getting the correct guy and also moving to the background too fast and having difficulties on returning to main object of focus. This never happened before with 1.0.4.
Today after the second match with the 1.0.6 I also noticed that when the players are filling the frame the camera had difficult time recovering from back focus servo. I mainly used the central point with no assist because the assist on this version do not assist at all. Tried today on the first part of the match almost all configuration with no success has on previous 1.0.4.
I also make a lot of concerts and on static singer with servo on center and top focus point the servo hunts like crazy... and the guy is standing still, never happened before on previous version.
I'm a Canon user for several years and since the MarkIII flop I was getting along with my MarkIV up until this firm. Contacted Canon Portugal about it and it was a new thing. I have also another field photographers complaining the same issues but never reported because they thought it was a operator error, but after 4 people having the same thing and now here on the forum I do believe this is real.
Let's hope Canon will make an wake-up call and not let this get into the Olympics as this can ruin their precious MarkIV or as I call it MarkIIIn.
Keep this rolling and leave the Nikon/Canon crap out of it please.
This is a serious business has this cameras are not an around the corner best buy.
Hey Rui - good to hear from you. Was just getting ready to ask if you recommended upgrading from the 1D Mk3, but I guess I will wait. I hope this gets resolved quickly!
Please read the entire thread, there were some reports that this procedure might help:
I received this "how to" from a very reliable source who knows his equipment and Canon.
1) remove both the "watch battery" AND the main battery for at least 45 minutes.
2)check to see that date, time....is all rest to default(not what you set)
3)make sure that all Cfn are as should be ie default no blue settings
4) make sure AF point is working and sharp on a stationary object preferrably with/on a tripod and that assist points are not interferring..
5)try AI Servo tracking w/default settings.
Please try it.
Hope this helps you with your problem.
bwhip62 wrote:
Overall results were quite good, with a remarkably high keeper rate on sharpness. As I expected, the 300 did a better job of maintaining sharp focus than the 70-200, but both were very good. I kept the aperture around f5.0 or higher, which gave me very good sharpness, but still provided a nice bokeh. AF tracking was extremely impressive.
bwhip62, FWIW the picture above is your only posted example with the action coming towards you ... I hope you are aware that it's front focused. The other examples have the target moving perpendicular to the optical axis; these do not represent a big challenge to any AF system provided you are doing a decent job of panning (which you are).
I'm not trying to burst bubbles here ... just a suggestion for you to rethink your test (and of course the results) while your new camera is still within the exchange period.
To test the basics of AI Servo AF I would suggest shooting the family car coming towards you at 25 to 30 MPH (i.e. speed limit in your neighborhood); the car is a repeatable target that you can use to retest AF tracking performance using any/all of your lenses and/or bodies.
jkurkjia wrote:
bwhip62, FWIW the picture above is your only posted example with the action coming towards you ... I hope you are aware that it's front focused. The other examples have the target moving perpendicular to the optical axis; these do not represent a big challenge to any AF system provided you are doing a decent job of panning (which you are).
I'm not trying to burst bubbles here ... just a suggestion for you to rethink your test (and of course the results) while your new camera is still within the exchange period.
To test the basics of AI Servo AF I would suggest shooting the family car coming towards you at 25 to 30 MPH (i.e. speed limit in your neighborhood); the car is a repeatable target that you can use to retest AF tracking performance using any/all of your lenses and/or bodies.
I'm still testing for sure, in a wide variety of different applications and conditions. Because my primary use for the camera will be in shooting motorsports, having outstanding AF tracking is critical.
I took several hundred shots that day, some better than others of course. There are so many different customization options with the camera, that it is difficult and time-consuming to test them all in a controlled and scientific manner. I can look at a shot later, and not be 100% certain whether the lack of focus where I wanted it to be had to do with a CF setting, or something different (aperture, shutter speed, me not holding the camera steady enough, me not tracking the subject properly, etc.). In the limited amount of testing I've done so far, I've also noticed that AF on moving targets works better with some lenses than others. I haven't yet had a chance to do much testing with my 600mm f/4, which is very important as I use it quite a bit in my motorsports work.
In shooting the dogs, sometimes their actions are unpredictable. I'm moving the camera, panning along with their movement, trying to keep the focus on them as their heads move up and down while they run, when suddenly they stop or turn. It's probable when they are running toward me that the focal point is trying to zero in on their head, and then their chest.
I do see a tendency on shot of them running toward me for the camera to front-focus. I picked that photo probably more because I liked it than because it was the best representation of AF. The general results from this particular day's testing were so much better than the previous, that I felt reassured.
Here is a complete sequence of photos of a dog running toward me that came from that session. These are all uncropped, just reduced in size.
I'll definitely keep testing! I sure want this camera to be all that I expect it to be, especially considering the considerable investment involved. Thanks again.
It sounds like a joke !
1.0.6 preloaded and so far no problems. I will test more this week and apply foundings.