Due to all the rampant speculation that is rapidly flowing about the internet, I thought a simple poll was in order to evaluate the extent of the autofocus problems with the new 1D MkIII. The previous poll led to rather ambiguous suppositions about what is currently going on out there. Whether someone is returning their MkIII does not necessarily indicate that there is a problem. I'd hate to see a whole slew of people return perfectly good cameras if they don't have problems.

It's very simple, if you own it, you can respond above. I would avoid using the "I'm not sure" option if you have NOT tested it, or cannot completely verify if your body has problems (for example, if you are new to the 1-Series, and don't have prior experience with its 45-point AI Servo). If anything, wait to vote until you have tested your body and are fairly sure. Having 80% "I'm not sure yet" replies won't help too much.

Regards,

Jeff
FM.com Moderator

Edited by Fred Miranda on Jun 21, 2007 at 02:17 PM GMT

Edited by Jeff on Jun 22, 2007 at 09:56 PM GMT (Reason: typo)

How about giving us periodic updates on the voting? Mine hasn't come in yet, so I don't want to squander my vote on "just the results." ;-)

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

My experience is identical to RG's: great acquisition in almost zero light; not that hot in servo mode outdoors. Tried with the 135L and 70-200/2.8LIS, with same results: my 1Ds2 tracks better.

Unlike some, I am not getting an ulcer because of it I am sure it will be all good.

Nill Toulme wrote:
How about giving us periodic updates on the voting? Mine hasn't come in yet, so I don't want to squander my vote on "just the results." ;-)
Nill

These numbers are shocking!!! Just teasing you!

Dang, now I'm going to have to peek... :-(

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Mine *absolutely* has focusing problems, though I don't think they're the same as the ones RG described, and won't know if they hold any weight for me until the body comes back focusing properly even in One Shot with *any* lens.

A professional pollster would say, "as of 11:00 PM EST, things are not looking good for the new kid on the block." Even though the sample is small, those are some bad numbers.

Here is what I've run into on some of my sequences. In this one the first 3 frames are good and the fourth goes Oof (which ruins a sequence like this if that's what I'm after). Notice the back/side lighting and it was a warm day, about 90 degrees F, when those were shot. I did have many though where all the shots were in focus, usually when front lit. Not sure this is a huge problem for me personally but I think it does show what RG was talking about.

I have been shooting the1D-III for show jumping and dance without problems. However Rob Galbraith's excellent observations cause me to re-evaluate the performance of the 1d-III. Tomorrow I will shoot another show jumping competition in motor drive mode at high frame rate and will shoot another dance production "with more care" for problems.


The show jumping I did a couple of weeks ago were shot in single shot mode - AF-Servo but only shooting one shot (unless there is a fall then I keep my finger down). I do NOT shoot in spray and pray mode. So far, I have excellent results (as predicted by Rob). Others at the same competition at Spruce Meadows were shooting 3-4 frame bursts and did report problems.

Here are some images (previously posted):

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/543345/0

Shooting a Polish traditional dance production yielded excellent images. The relatively low light provided no problems for the 1D-III - as suggested by Rob Galbraith's observations. Any softness in the full size images seem to be associated with motion blur - not focus issues. Here are a few samples (for what you can tell from small images :-)

I am having problems with objects coming directly at me and when shooting pitchers from behind the backstop with them coming at me. It is worse if the subject is backlit. Also most all of my shots are a little soft, Not bad but not what I would expect form this camera. My IIn is much better.

I don't know how the sports market works, but I assume that the main culling from the 10fps from multiple cameras through hours of shooting is done by photo editors at games and not the photographers themselves. Ergo if there is an issue they will be noticing it and I very much doubt that they will be ignoring it. If several big agencies pull the plug on the camera then Canon will have to react and fast. Canon built it's pro reputation on the back of sports photographers, they cannot afford to screw up with this camera, especially as the 1Ds mkIII will no doubt have the same AF module...

Nill Toulme wrote:
How about giving us periodic updates on the voting? Mine hasn't come in yet, so I don't want to squander my vote on "just the results." ;-)

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Good idea...

Yes, it absolutely has a focusing problem = 31 12%
No, it seems to work fine = 15 6%
I'm not sure yet = 16 6%
[I just want to see the results...] = 195 76%
Total Votes = 257 100%

Doesn't look too good.

Is it just unrealistic expectations of 100% success rate from otherwise a perfect camera? I mean, when I had a 1MkIIN it was the same thing - I would get one misfocused shot out of a series of AF-Servo shots. So what, big deal...But I don't recall a mass hysteria of this scale.

gfiksel wrote:
Is it just unrealistic expectations of 100% success rate from otherwise a perfect camera? I mean, when I had a 1MkIIN it was the same thing - I would get one misfocused shot out of a series of AF-Servo shots. So what, big deal...But I don't recall a mass hysteria of this scale.

That's a reasonable question in response to all the concerns, but Rob is indicating the Mk III really struggles to match the performance of the Mk II N in certain conditions.

Here's a quote from his article when comparing the two:

"In all cases, the EOS-1D Mark II N performed as it always does. Which means it has a bit of trouble predicting focus when the runner is accelerating, but after that it gets most frames in focus. By comparison, the EOS-1D Mark III under warm, bright conditions struggles to get more than a handful of frames properly focused."

That's what has everyone concerned.


Gary

Well, for the (current) record, I haven't seen any problems in my 1D-3 . . yet.

BUT, I haven't tried it in sunny or backlit conditions yet, either.

Caveat: No, the camera wasn't perfect at the (indoor) rodeo last weekend. However, neither was my 1D-II or 1D.

Garylv wrote:
"In all cases, the EOS-1D Mark II N performed as it always does. Which means it has a bit of trouble predicting focus when the runner is accelerating, but after that it gets most frames in focus. By comparison, the EOS-1D Mark III under warm, bright conditions struggles to get more than a handful of frames properly focused."


You know, they should compare the two cameras under DARK conditions. I think the 1D-III will be better there.

I really think this boils down to a "color temperature" issue. I've always maintained that previous Canon bodies had an issue with front-focusing under lighting that was below 3000K. Canon denies this. BUT, notice that they DO realize that the focus for infrared photos needs to be adjusted. Why is that?

I maintain that the focus IS a function of the wavelength of the light. And we all know that 2500K light has a different wavelength than 5500K light.

It's not going to surprise me if it turns out that the 1D-III was "tuned" under 3000K, while previous bodies were "tuned" under 6000K, and THAT'S a large part of the reason for the issue we're seeing.

So far the IQ i have gotten from my markIII is extraordinary....lens forcus speed is faster than my 5d and my old markII....low light performance is exemplary.....the little servo shooting i have done has been fine but I have yet to test it out in all kinds of harsh conditions as described by others....the combination of the new layout...the better battery life.....and all of the new features makes this for me a dream camera.....if the servo problem is dealt with or of it turns out to be user error or a firmware fix or just random bad cameras then this is the best camera out there bar none...

for what it is worth this thread points out that a lot of people are seeing no problems with the camera

http://www.sportsshooter.com/message_display.html?tid=25364

Current state: Of the 23% Mk III owners which posted (77% just want to see the results), half (11%) chose the "Yes, it absolutely has a focusing problem" option. I think this is alarming.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

To Jeff and Fred,

Is it possible to update the polls so that the "I just want to view the results" option will not be counted in the poll statistics?

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

I was the one who started the thread at Naturescapes.

I shoot BIF 3 to 4 times a week, come from a Mark II and YES, it does have problems, noticed them inmediatly.

I have gotten very satisfactory images with the Mark III, but have missed many that would have been a piece of cake for the older body.

My website:

www.avianscapes.com

The 2 images in intro were taken with the Mark III, with iso 800 and 1000

Yakim Peled wrote:
To Jeff and Fred,

Is it possible to update the polls so that the "I just want to view the results" option will not be counted in the poll statistics?

Happy shooting,
Yakim.


WHY? I think the poll shows some interesting facts as is, afterall you can just ignore the "I just want to view the results" if you want. I think the "I just want to view the results" category perhaps shows the people that may be interested in purchasing the MKIII and are just doing some due diligence prior to making a decision. If I were a Canon rep I might consider this group in one of two ways, as potential customers or potential customers lost.

fabiolad wrote:
I shoot BIF 3 to 4 times a week, come from a Mark II and YES, it does have problems, noticed them inmediatly.

I have gotten very satisfactory images with the Mark III, but have missed many that would have been a piece of cake for the older body.
...

Are the Mark III problems such that you would rather be using a Mark II for BIF?

JackCnd wrote:
fabiolad wrote:
I shoot BIF 3 to 4 times a week, come from a Mark II and YES, it does have problems, noticed them inmediatly.

I have gotten very satisfactory images with the Mark III, but have missed many that would have been a piece of cake for the older body.
...

Are the Mark III problems such that you would rather be using a Mark II for BIF?

Trying to be fair and clear, the image quality of the Mark III and the high iso capabilty rocks.
But to me the Autofocus is not acceptable at $4500.00

The old saying: If it ain't broke, don't fix it, applies to the previous AF system.
I have an important trip next week and will be takoing both cameras, after I come back, will probably send the III back for service.

fabiolad wrote:


The old saying: If it ain't broke, don't fix it, applies to the previous AF system.
I have an important trip next week and will be takoing both cameras, after I come back, will probably send the III back for service.

I have a question for you. My BG is ex 1D/20D/5D/XTi owner who is really using AIservo for the first time. My longest lens is a 400 f5.6L. My BIF shooting experience is slim to none as with the mkIII is the first time I've tried it. (Great fun BTW I can see how one can get hooked)

Anyhow I recently shot a duck flyby against a foliage BG. It was a 20+ frame burst in RAW, f5.6, 1;/2500th, aiservo/10fps/center point, CFNIII-2- med/slow, Cfn III-3/4/5 all 0, CfnIII-8 - 2.

I did a decent job of keeping the center point on the duck at all times, what I see is 3-4 frames where the duck is reasonably sharp (although not quite as sharp as the lens is capable of from static tests) and then a way OoF shot, then 3-4 more in focus, then 1 out etc. like a pattern to the end.

Is this what you're saying is defective AF wise vs the mkIIn? I think some of us just don't know what to expect.

I don't have enough background in the center point to be able to answer your question.

I use the 45 point AI Servo unles I'm forced otherwise by attaching the 2X teleconverter.

My experience with the Mark III's AI Servo AF is very poor, causing me to loose shots by not acquiring initial focus, even when pumping the shutter button half way many time to re-acquire.
Other times, it would miss the first two images, acquire it for a couple, then loose it again.
My 45 point technique has given me great results in the Mark II body. I expected at least equal if not better.

I am a hard core shooter of action, and therefore very demanding when it comes to Autofocus.
I can understand that for other uses, the camera will be just fine.

Ah, for those who keep posting succesful images, I would expect that a $4500 camera could get at least some....I have a few of those too