Tim Larson wrote:
EXACTLY!
The same thing happened to me while doing the paintball stuff. Not front or back focussed. The entire frame was out of focus. Strange as heck. Strange enough to make me wonder about my lens.
Frustrating.


It is not likely to be the lens. I have been speaking to CPS during the week and I confirmed that with my 2 most used lenses (300/2.8 L IS and 500/4 L IS) both work perfectly on my 1D2N in single shot and servo mode, and critically, both generate superb images on my Mark 3 in one shot focus mode. This rules out any calibration issue and CPS agree. Just as soon as you engage Servo focussing and high speed drive mode, this problem occurs, for me at least.

fabiolad wrote:
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.

But you sold your Mark II ?

SteveS wrote:
fabiolad wrote:
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.

But you sold your Mark II ?

No, I still have it

fabiolad wrote:
DavidP wrote:
fabiolad wrote:
DavidP, are you in Miami?

Nope, Houston.


OK, we have a Pitman in Kendall, it counfused me

Thanks!

Yep, that's the one David means.

Having almost 50% of the camera's out there with errors is not a good thing. Several things could have happened, first Canon could have got a bad batch of parts, second they could have assembled them wrong (don't laugh this happens alot in industry), and lastly it could be a firmware error (this is the best case senario). My vote is for 1 or 2, you can be sure that canon would of tested this in the alpha and beta stages, the with the first set that went out to the super users ie SI and the big newspaper outfits so this type of error would of been found and fixed.

I strongly recommend that everybody test their camera, hopefully you haven't sold the old one yet. If it's 1 or 2 you are going need to send the camera to canon for servicing.

Good luck,
Gerry

fabiolad wrote:
OK, we have a Pitman in Kendall, it counfused me

Thanks!

You're not confused. That's the Pitman that I ordered from.

I got both my 1D-II's, there, too.

Alistair101 wrote:
What is not at all clear is why so many frames are unfocussed, ever so slightly but enough to make the images useless. They are not front focussed or back focussed, no point in the image is focussed.

Alistair

That's what's bothering me with the 400 f5.6L, static shots in one shot AF are sharp where anything moving in aiservo looks as you describe. I've gone as high as 1/6400th on the shutter and nothing seems to help.

As someone above already noted, Rob Galbraith updated his article on the focus issues.

the skinny: He's sticking by his well-reasoned conclusion that the Id3 has a design defect in the AF and further notes that he has received a mountain of email from 1d3 owners concurring that they too have found the problem.

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-8740-9006#june21

Mine seems to be working just fine. Just after I got it, I put it through the usual paces, tracking birds and such, but I'm really not using it as a sports or wildlife (well - not the 4 legged variety) camera, so its possible there could be an issue I haven't discovered.

What's really important to me is the camera's extraordinary ability to lock on to focus in low available light (in single shot mode) and deliver very satisfying IQ that my clients really like.

I knew what I was getting into by being near the front of the line and have no regrets. I remember clearly that I had to send my then-new D2X back to Nikon for a circuit board replacement to solve an image corruption problem. The D2X was even more money than the 1D3.

I don't even want to talk about my experience with the Leica M8!!!

I have confidence that Canon will sort things out. Meantime I use the camera productively nearly every day and no way/no how would I return it.

Returning it is excactly what canon has told me to do if I was having focus troubles. Look's like for right now thats the standard reply if you tell them you have trouble with the focus

But does that count as THE ONE time you can return it for free under warranty (like lenses?) or will they fix it this time and any other issues that arrise in the warranty?

Thanks
Ryan

I originally voted I don’t know but since I have had the opportunity to test the camera servo mode I wanted to provide an update on my cameras performance. I am in NY with my family and was able to shoot some softball with and 70-200 2.8L IS out of the 50 some pictures I took in servo mode (default Setting) at 5 frames a second. I only had to delete 5 of them all due to my focusing errors confirmed by image browser. The shots I took were all taken at midday 75+ degrees and many had front light and side light. I was amazed at the accuracy and the responsiveness of the focus. I will continue to shoot and confirm this and I will post these pictures once my wife gives me more than 10 minutes on the computer. One of my suspicions when this focus issue first came up is maybe 10 frames a second is just to fast so i backed off and shot at 5 frames a second tomorrow I will try 8and then 10 to see if there is any difference in the keeper rate.


Bruce

Bottom of pg 20 in the Mark 3 White Paper.......
"During low-speed continuous shooting, the subject distance can change significantly between shots. The slower the continuous shooting speed, the more the lens is driven between shots to detect the subject. Thus, subject tracking is more precise."
Could 10fps be too fast for the hardware

realmunseen wrote:
Bottom of pg 20 in the Mark 3 White Paper.......
"During low-speed continuous shooting, the subject distance can change significantly between shots. The slower the continuous shooting speed, the more the lens is driven between shots to detect the subject. Thus, subject tracking is more precise."
Could 10fps be too fast for the hardware

Perhaps those having AF issues could do a test. Change the "L" or "H" continuous shooting speed to ~8fps in "C.Fn III -16".
Try again and check the number of oof shots.
Also, make sure to have AI Servo 1st/2nd image priority set to "0" (Tracking priority) - "C.Fn III -3".

This is what I was also thinking at first but if true ---why is it that (from my understanding of the problem) some of the frames are misfocusing to a degree more than just missing the specific movement that occurred between the time it took to capture two consecutive images. . It seems that at times folks are getting focused images of a moving target in the first few frames, and then back focusing onto "other objects". If the camera AF did not have time to keep up at 10fps, you should only get shots that were slightly oof and relative to the degree of movement that occurred between the time it took to capture the second shot. instead of a more erroneous back focus for example? In addition, if the AF becomes so inaccurate at 10fps why have it as an option. When would you shoot 10 fps on a still object?
Fred Miranda wrote:
realmunseen wrote:
Bottom of pg 20 in the Mark 3 White Paper.......
"During low-speed continuous shooting, the subject distance can change significantly between shots. The slower the continuous shooting speed, the more the lens is driven between shots to detect the subject. Thus, subject tracking is more precise."
Could 10fps be too fast for the hardware

Perhaps those having AF issues could do a test. Change the "L" or "H" continuous shooting speed to ~8fps in "C.Fn III -16".
Try again and check the number of oof shots.
Also, make sure to have AI Servo 1st/2nd image priority set to "0" (Tracking priority) - "C.Fn III -3".

mark1958 wrote:
It seems that at times folks are getting focused images of a moving target in the first few frames, and then back focusing onto "other objects".


The problem I am seeing, and I can replicate it now, is that the first frame is always sharp out of a burst of say 7. Frames 2 to 6 are a mixture of sharp, unfocussed, or focus placement error, the latter being very much my fault but it is easy to see, for example the engine cowling of a race is in focus instead of the drivers head, the AF point viewing confirms this. What I am unhappy about is simply the number of unfocussed shots, not front or back focussed, just nothing in the shot is in focus. This is always in AI Servo and High Speed drive mode (10fps). Single shot drive and AI Servo gives great results, but I can't use the camera in this way for the motorsport photography I do.

I would be very very curious to see what results people get using either low speed drive mode (3 to 5 fps) and reducing the speed of high speed drive mode to say 8fps, all while using AI Servo.

I also agree with the sentiment, that if the camera is working so hard to buffer and write the images generated at 10fps to the card, so much so that focussing operations are interupted, this is indeed a major major problem.

guys you have really broke my heart, i've sold my 1d mark II N , and now i'm cameraless, this topic had stopped me from ordering the 1d mark III, i'm so sure that canon will release a new firmware update to solve this problems, i think if this issue is so serious canon should withdraw the 1d MK III from the market, right. should i order it or wait, please tell me

FWIW........

Mine SEEMS fine, but it is going BACK on Monday. Period. Unless there is a defininitive statement from Canon addressing the focusing problem.

The avalance of problems reported by respected users is making me think my camera COULD have a problem that hasn't shown up yet. With only a 7 day return window, and cloudy conditions here, I don't feel I have the opportunity to adequately test the camera myself. With no response from Canon concerning numerous AF problems, I feel the only sensible thing to do is return the M3 for a refund while I'm still able to do so. I'll keep using my IIn until the dust settles.

I cannot believe that Canon has not had the cahones to step up to the plate and adress this issue.

hfillmore wrote:
FWIW........

Mine SEEMS fine, but it is going BACK on Monday. Period. Unless there is a defininitive statement from Canon addressing the focusing problem.

The avalance of problems reported by respected users is making me think my camera COULD have a problem that hasn't shown up yet. With only a 7 day return window, and cloudy conditions here, I don't feel I have the opportunity to adequately test the camera myself. With no response from Canon concerning numerous AF problems, I feel the only sensible thing to do is return the M3 for a refund while I'm still able to do so. I'll keep using my IIn until the dust settles.

I cannot believe that Canon has not had the cahones to step up to the plate and adress this issue.




You might want to talk with your store, Ours said that the window of return for a pro camera such as these is longer then the 14 days the reciept says, They are aware of the problem some people are having and said don't worry about the return time, I'm hoping thats the case, Ron

Currently (for those who have not yet voted)...

Yes, it absolutely has a focusing problem = 50 / 9% (49%)
No, it seems to work fine = 25 / 4% (25%)
I'm not sure yet = 28 / 5% (27%)
[I just want to see the results...] = 316 / 82%
Total Votes 456 / 100%

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."


I concur with gfiksel about the focusing issue being a problem with earlier 1dmk2 bodies, although it may not be to the extent that the mk3 is having.
I have a 1dmk2 (not the N) and AT TIMES it has the exact same issue. I cannot recall a photo series (with at least 5+ shots) that had EVERY shot perfectly focused. There might be one or two oof shots in a sequence with the rest being in focus.

Interestingly the 1dsmk2 does not have this problem, but of course it does not shoot at anywhere near the speed of the 1dmk2. (And because it shoots slower, most oof shots are the result of losing the lock on the subject, which in my case is operator error ;>)

O.C.

ocgarza wrote:
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."

You need to read this article...

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-8740-9006#june21

"We'd heard less than 20 complaints about the camera's autofocus before this article was published; since the story went up, that number has climbed past 200. And the email is still rolling in...

Canon, like any big company making popular products, needs help in determining what's a major problem - as we think the EOS-1D Mark III's autofocus is - from things that are more minor or even user error...

"But, the kind and quantity of shooting we've done, combined with a little experience with this stuff and a little common sense too, adds up to the belief here that the problem is in the design of the autofocus system vs there being a few bad EOS-1D Mark III apples around...

If we didn't think that was by far the most likely explanation, we wouldn't have published this story. And the number of photographers we've heard from now that are having the same sorts of troubles in the same types of shooting situations suggests that we're onto something..."

Alistair101 wrote:
What I am unhappy about is simply the number of unfocussed shots, not front or back focussed, just nothing in the shot is in focus.

There has to be focus SOMEWHERE. Now, it's possible that there's nothing in your frame at that distance to look focused.

Caveat: lenses can focus beyond infinity, which could result in looking like there's nothing in focus.

Bruce Sawle wrote:
I originally voted I don’t know but since I have had the opportunity to test the camera servo mode I wanted to provide an update on my cameras performance. I am in NY with my family and was able to shoot some softball with and 70-200 2.8L IS out of the 50 some pictures I took in servo mode (default Setting) at 5 frames a second. I only had to delete 5 of them all due to my focusing errors confirmed by image browser. The shots I took were all taken at midday 75+ degrees and many had front light and side light. I was amazed at the accuracy and the responsiveness of the focus. I will continue to shoot and confirm this and I will post these pictures once my wife gives me more than 10 minutes on the computer. One of my suspicions when this focus issue first came up is maybe 10 frames a second is just to fast so i backed off and shot at 5 frames a second tomorrow I will try 8and then 10 to see if there is any difference in the keeper rate.


Bruce


Here is a series of pictures at 5 frames per second as mentioned above I had good keeper rate and I will try the camera today at 8 and 10 frames per second today. I took these pictures from about 30-50 yards so I had to crop substantialy to show the detail in the runners. These are RAW images straight out of camera. The only edits in ACR were highlight recovery and sharpening set to 25.

1.

2