Hi......

Apologies if this has been asked before but i couldn't find it on a search, but can I ask owners of the 1Ds MK3, how is your autofocus Did you have any problems similar to that of the 1D MK3, or is the 1Ds MK3 clear of all focus issues............. I'm thinking of purchasing a second-hand one as prices are dropping

Thanks

Martin

What autofocus problems?

I had the 1D3 and now the 1ds3 and I notice the 1ds3 focuses much more accurate.

Daan B wrote:
What autofocus problems?

That's what I want to hear

Martin

ward1066 wrote:
I had the 1D3 and now the 1ds3 and I notice the 1ds3 focuses much more accurate.

Thanks Wade

According to God Galbraith, the Archon of AF, the Sultan of sharp and Prince of precision focus, there is NO difference between the 1D and 1Ds models. They both are flawed, and any perception to the contrary is due to the imperfect discrimination of its owners...

Guess my discrimination is imperfect then, as I've observed absolutely no AF problems whatsoever with my 1Ds3.

My 1Ds MK III's AF is fine.

EBH

Fine with me! But set your Micro AF properly for best results.

Having had both multiple 1DMkIII and a 1DsMkIII I can tell you that there is a world of difference. One works (1DsMkIII) and more than one (1DMkIII) didn't. Don't care if KG says they are the same, he isn't shooting my shots for me.

Geofn wrote:
Guess my discrimination is imperfect then, as I've observed absolutely no AF problems whatsoever with my 1Ds3.

Dittos!!

It's the same technology, with a similar build design but different physically installed on each camera.

I've never experienced AF problems remotely like what's been described in the RG article. It's obvious there IS a problem... but I certainly didn't experience it with my 1Ds III.

My 1D MarkIII worked just as specified when I owned it and my vurrent 1Ds MarkIII still does. Go for it, Martin!

Joshua

Thanks guys................i suppose there are always some bad apples in every box doesn't matter what brand you buy.................when i see one that's "A OK" for 2500 UK pounds, I'll bite


Martin

I believe Mark Welsh (hubsand) on your side of the pond is selling his like-new 1Ds MarkIII. Not sure for how much though.

AGeoJO wrote:
I believe Mark Welsh (hubsand) on your side of the pond is selling his like-new 1Ds MarkIII. Not sure for how much though.

He is Joshua, but it's too much for me, I'll wait a while until these cameras come down even more.............won't be long

Shooting at f/5.6 or wider in studio under near-ideal conditions, I have experienced AF issues identical to the 1D3 problems. It happens when the subject is significantly lower in contrast than something in the background, or when a specular highlight in the forground captures the interest of the AF system, over-riding the selected AF point.

Micro-adjusting the lenses does not, in my experience, solve the problem, although it does make he shots that are in focus slightly better. But the missed AF shots, are just missed.

I experience this most frequently when shooting low depth of field headshots. In a run of 10 shots, 8 will be fine, but one or two will be front focused or not in focus at all (as if the AF were still moving when the shutter released.

Sample:

Brent,
To my eyes, even the area that is in focus doesn't seem to be really sharp to me. Maybe it has to do with the low level of skin contrast. I don't know where the actual focal plane is and of course, I know what the problem of that particular shot even less. On a different note, you know that the AA filter of the 1Ds MarkIII is particularly strong and your info indicates that there was no sharpening applied. As such, the files generated by this camera would benefit greatly from sharpening. I am not saying that this is the only issue on that particular shot here but it could definitely contribute to the overall soft appearance. Just a thought.

You indicated that 80-90% of of the sequence would be just fine. I am not sure whether it is a good rate; considering that it was done in a studio under controlled conditions, then maybe not .

Brent.............these are the exact problems why my pro wedding photog buddy wiill NOT touch this or the 1D MKIII, he says that it's too risky whilst i agree a little with Joshua i feel that these shots should in no way be that soft, you shouldn't have to tamper with lenses on a $8k camera just to get accurate focus, just my 2c of course


M

AGeoJO wrote:
Brent,
To my eyes, even the area that is in focus doesn't seem to be really sharp to me. Maybe it has to do with the low level of skin contrast. I don't know where the actual focal plane is and of course, I know what the problem of that particular shot even less. On a different note, you know that the AA filter of the 1Ds MarkIII is particularly strong and your info indicates that there was no sharpening applied. As such, the files generated by this camera would benefit greatly from sharpening. I am not saying that this is the only issue on that particular shot here but it could definitely contribute to the overall soft appearance. Just a thought.

You indicated that 80-90% of of the sequence would be just fine. I am not sure whether it is a good rate; considering that it was done in a studio under controlled conditions, then maybe not .

In my experience with the 5D (my previous studio camera) having 1 or 2 out of focus shots like this in a session would happen, but it would be rare. With the 1DsIII, I have 20-30 in a headshot session with regularity.

The shots all around this one have the eye much sharper, so it's not the effect of the AA filter that you're seeing. I do agree, however, that the 1DsIII files *really* perk up a lot with some fine line sharpening. I routinely do capture and output sharpening now on the files.

I still use the 1DsIII in studio all the time - but I hesitate at shooting lower than f/5.6 - and often turn to the 5D when doing that (which is a pain, b/c that means I need to have a different charger, different batteries on hand).

I also use the 1DIII - and mine was severely effected by the focus problem (it's body # is in the first 5000 produced). It's better now with all the firmware updates, submirror fix etc - but it's still not great.

At last winter's World Hockey Championships, I shot a few games with the 1DIII and Nikon D3 - and the Canon focused faster, but had a significantly lower 'keep' rate of 'in focus' shots.

All that said, I'm remaining a Canon shooter for now. The 5DII will help make the decision for me to continue to wait for the 1DIV, or wheteher to move into the D3x when (if) it's released.