Gee, I paid the guy a compliment about his work. Didn't know I needed to duck after posting my comment.
Sorry if you took things wrong but I stand by my post. Two images out of a burst of 12 doesn't make for a soft focus camera. Especially when you admitted you used the wrong Case and af mode. All your other images posted on another thread were very in focus.
FYI, I have the 1dx2 and owned the 1dx since it was released.
Sportsmagazine wrote:
Why are people here bashing people with problems with their cameras. This is insane.
Not accusing anyone here, but in my experience it's because nobody wants to learn the camera they like/own/want to own might have a problem. It happens every single time there are rumblings of a possible issue. Sometimes it turns out to be a widespread issue, sometimes it doesn't. The point at which an issue becomes a "known issue" with a particular body or piece of equipment is highly ambiguous, especially if the manufacturer never acknowledges it as is often the case. All the threads start like this one though, with some people claiming to have a legitimate issue, and people who weren't there and haven't a clue about any details chiming in to tell them what happened or tell them they're wrong.
There are always people who think that just because their gear works perfectly, anyone else having issues must be user error or an isolated incident. Time will tell if this turns into something more common, but even a handful of independent reports from seemingly experienced photographers is troubling, particularly on a flagship body. "Evidence" is also pretty difficult to trust on the internet anyway, with everything so easy to fake and people's motives unknown.
Le'ts hope it's a minor isolated incident or something just affecting part of the first production run. It's still early, so time will tell if there ends up being a widespread issue or not. If a professional owning multiple similar bodies all of a sudden starts having issues with a certain body and not the others, all else being equal, I would be inclined to believe it was more likely equipment fault than user error, but you never know.
mogud wrote:
Gee, I paid the guy a compliment about his work. Didn't know I needed to duck after posting my comment.
Sorry if you took things wrong but I stand by my post. Two images out of a burst of 12 doesn't make for a soft focus camera. Especially when you admitted you used the wrong Case and af mode. All your other images posted on another thread were very in focus.
FYI, I have the 1dx2 and owned the 1dx since it was released.
I ignored the compliment because of the matter of the discussion. But thanks anyways.
I said (i thought) i was wrong setting a general tracking case and using a larger focus area. (i wasn't sure, i just assumed it). But after reconsidering, and seeing the focus area that should be in focus, especially with the branch in focus, where the focus point clearly is not on the branch i started to doubt whether a different tracking case and smaller focus area would have eliminated this 'error'.
And just to be clear, i never said that my camera is a soft focussing camera. I think this camera is great and love using it.
therealthings wrote:
Well i have to admit that the 1dxII is not always on the money with it's AF.
Though i had set the wrong case here (1) and AF set to 9 group expansion.
www.serv.therealthings.com/pics/focus1.jpg
www.serv.therealthings.com/pics/focus2.jpg
In those 2 pictures, there is very little difference in contrast (or even color) between the bird and the background. When you are using multiple AF points, regardless of the camera or its AF system, it still has to "guess" as to what the subject is, and, frankly, in that situation, if it was able to get 10 out of 12 shots in focus, it would be, I think, reasonable to conclude that the camera's AF system did a great job.
If you were using a single AF point and if you could be absolutely certain that you were able to keep that single AF point on the bird (which is a very big if), you might expect the AF system (almost) never to miss focus. However, the more focus points you are using, the more you are increasing the chances that the camera's AF system is going to make an incorrect guess as to what the subject is, and that is especially true with a background like that in the 2 linked photos. So, it becomes a trade-off between the photographer's ability to keep a single focus point continuously on the subject or the camera's ability, with multiple focus points, to guess correctly what the intended subject is.
I don't dismiss the possibility that there is an AF issue with (some) 1DX Mark II bodies, but the example of those two photos being the only out-of-focus shots out of a 12 shot burst with that kind of background is not a convincing argument that there is an AF issue with the camera.
therealthings wrote:
I ignored the compliment because of the matter of the discussion. But thanks anyways.
I said (i thought) i was wrong setting a general tracking case and using a larger focus area. (i wasn't sure, i just assumed it). But after reconsidering, and seeing the focus area that should be in focus, especially with the branch in focus, where the focus point clearly is not on the branch i started to doubt whether a different tracking case and smaller focus area would have eliminated this 'error'.
And just to be clear, i never said that my camera is a soft focussing camera. I think this camera is great and love using it. ...Show more →
I've had this happen to me even with my 1dx. I don't use The Case examples provided by Canon. I adjust tracking and af switching to suit the shooting situation and lens used. What I would have done is back off on the Tracking Sensitivety to prevent the af system from locking onto a closer subject and maybe backed off on af switching as well. I wouldn't have used 9 pt but center and four surround. I also include each of the Case parameters in My Menu so I can make changes quicker than going into the menu system. YMMV, but this approach has worked for me.
therealthings wrote:
(i wasn't sure, i just assumed it). But after reconsidering, and seeing the focus area that should be in focus, especially with the branch in focus, where the focus point clearly is not on the branch i started to doubt whether a different tracking case and smaller focus area would have eliminated this 'error'.
Using DPP (or other utility) to see which focus point was used is generally meaningless, and it can be quite deceiving. The point that is illuminated might be on the bird at the instant that the photo was taken, but that doesn't necessarily mean that that point was on the bird an instant earlier when focus was locked in. So, if the AF point was on a branch when it locked in, the AF system is going to try to maintain focus on that branch even if, an instant later when the photo is taken, that AF point was then on the bird.
dehowie wrote:
All I see is page after page of great photos and two randoms with no history generating a sh$& storm for fun.
How about someone put up some images showing an issue?
It's pretty easy to start a conspiracy these days hey if it's on the net it must be true right??
Right now it's nothing but one guy with two logins here and DPR with nothing.
When people who are using the camera with long glass like ME start seeing a problem or some has more evidence than hot air id be saying it's just Nikon faboys stirring the pot.
Thousands and thousands of great photos and all of a sudden it doesn't work?
If it looks like bullsh&$ smells like bullsh$) guess what it probably is?
Show us some proof not words.....Show more →
Aren't you a peach. I bet you are one of the few that still think there was no issue with the 1D3.
Sportsmagazine wrote:
Why are people here bashing people with problems with their cameras. This is insane.
I understand that discovering an issue is traumatic, and that the fastest way to solve problems is often to reach out online. But calming down and documenting said issue(s) - by providing examples - often helps to substantiate one's legitimacy.
mikeinctown wrote:
There are other users who have reported this issue as well with the camera locking up. They just didn't start their own threads. In addition to the lack up issue, there are quite a few people who are having their fies corrupted off f the cfast card.
With the lock up, the common denominator is a long lens 300+ and the need for fast af. (Ie racing action)
Here is another one
I was shooting a Horse Racing event in May and was switching between 200-400 F4 and 70-200 F2.8 MKII. I can't remember which lens but it froze on me. No error message and everything went dead. I turned Camera off and on and nothing happened. I then took battery out and then back it and it worked.
Sportsmagazine wrote:
I just received my 1DX MKII and it freezes all the time. Using f/4 200-400 and 600mm. Switched to f/2,8 300mm same. Focus soft on all lenses, FOCAL cannot adjust MA to fix issue. I've shot with 1DX for many years and can't figure this out. Called Canon CPS and they claim no other reports of any of these issues. Any chance anyone else is having same issues, I can't figure this out.
Jerry
Jerry,
This post on dpreview has a number to call for this issue and the OP say that Canon is aware of it.
ggreene wrote:
.......The fact is the QC on these $6000+ bodies is not what we think it is.........
What one must always keep in mind is that in almost any context we tend to hear the grumblings of the few disgruntled folks while not a peep out of the overwhelming majority of people who are happy. I have a feeling the QC on these $6000+ bodies is far better than what you think it is
chez wrote:
Aren't you a peach. I bet you are one of the few that still think there was no issue with the 1D3.
Well I guess I am not one of the sheep and believe everything I read on the internet.
Do you believe in chemtrails and we never visited the moon as well?
If you "had read" my post I said I was quite open to seeing someone present some information i.e. you know evidence like soft images in sequence with crops from DPP showing AF points and modes etc that showed something.
You see that is what we need to arrive at a conclusion that there is a problem.
Normally you don't arrive at a conclusion that something is occurring when the overwhelming weight of evidence is contrary to what is being written. Especially by someone who has no history here or anywhere else they posted.
Glad to see we have some input from someone saying how they got the results so at least others can try to repeat what happened. Unlike the OP who still has not provide ANY semblance of information other than "oh this camera sucks, shame on Canon, same story as 1DX which by the way is still is the best sports/action/wildlife camera to ever see the light of day.
Regarding the 1D3 I had two and never had an issue. However i did take time to read the manual and the changes in the AF setup from the 1DMk2n which led to more issues than poor cameras.
Did you use the 1Dmk3? Or did you learn everything about how bad it was from Roger Galbraith and his extremely thorough scientific testing of it where he:
A)Failed to specific his test methods re AF selections,points and setup.
B) Failed to do a comparison with its primary competitor the Nikon D3. Where if he did as was proven in multiple tests the 1DMk3 outperformed it in every test by an average of 30% more frames in focus.
C) When questioned about all of this refused to do a side by side or release any information.
In short it was a load of bullish&^ to even listen to anything he said where he displayed clear bias and highly weighted commentary.
Because of his commentary the real issues for those with them(and there where people with issues) got lost in the blizzard of rubbish coming from people who didn't own the camera, had never used the camera and had no idea what they where talking about.
D.Hussey wrote:
What one must always keep in mind is that in almost any context we tend to hear the grumblings of the few disgruntled folks while not a peep out of the overwhelming majority of people who are happy. I have a feeling the QC on these $6000+ bodies is far better than what you think it is
I'm not so sure after the 1D3 fiasco and the 1DX lubrication recall. Not saying this is a Canon only issue but you do have to expect people's expectations of QC to be higher at $6000+. These are flagships not Rebels.
On the 1D3, I seriously doubt Canon issues recalls and multiple FW releases on the basis of a blizzard of rubbish. That body had clear issues. Posting a couple photos from it is not evidence that all was well.
ggreene wrote:
I'm not so sure after the 1D3 fiasco and the 1DX lubrication recall. Not saying this is a Canon only issue but you do have to expect people's expectations of QC to be higher at $6000+. These are flagships not Rebels.
On the 1D3, I seriously doubt Canon issues recalls and multiple FW releases on the basis of a blizzard of rubbish. That body had clear issues. Posting a couple photos from it is not evidence that all was well.
ggreene wrote:
I'm not so sure after the 1D3 fiasco and the 1DX lubrication recall. Not saying this is a Canon only issue but you do have to expect people's expectations of QC to be higher at $6000+. These are flagships not Rebels.
On the 1D3, I seriously doubt Canon issues recalls and multiple FW releases on the basis of a blizzard of rubbish. That body had clear issues. Posting a couple photos from it is not evidence that all was well.
Yes it seems like a few people believe that if they have no issue with their camera...then no issue could possibly exist and it's all user errors. Seems a little ignorant to me.
Yeh...the 1D3 fiasco which cost Canon dearly was all caused by people not reading the manuals. Sure, Canon would issue multiple recalls and FW upgrades just to pacify the people who would not read their manuals. Very ignorant thinking here on people's parts.
Now it looks like Canon has acknowledge an issue of the 1Dx2 locking up. Is this acknowledgment again to pacify the one's that are not reading their manuals?
chez wrote:
Yes it seems like a few people believe that if they have no issue with their camera...then no issue could possibly exist and it's all user errors. Seems a little ignorant to me.
Yeh...the 1D3 fiasco which cost Canon dearly was all caused by people not reading the manuals. Sure, Canon would issue multiple recalls and FW upgrades just to pacify the people who would not read their manuals. Very ignorant thinking here on people's parts.
Now it looks like Canon has acknowledge an issue of the 1Dx2 locking up. Is this acknowledgment again to pacify the one's that are not reading their manuals? ...Show more →
Yeah, based on dehowie's logic, GM never had a problem with the gas tanks on it's pick up trucks because millions of the trucks were sold to people who drove them millions of miles and they never burst into flames. Oh and the Ford pinto wasn't defective either because people drove these millions of miles too. (And faulty airbag switches aren't really faulty because mine went off just fine when I had an accident... Everyone else is lying I tell you!!!)
Canon CPS knows there are issues and they are trying to fix the freezing and focus problems in the 1DX MKII. I don't know what is causing this but the issues are real. On my first repair from CPS they said they found an issue that caused the camera to front focus. They said they made mechanical and electronic adjustments. My camera is still soft and MA even with FOCAL did not solve it. Then the freezing issue pops up. So now we sit and wait and see if the second repair by CPS can solve both problems. But to bash a person who is looking for advice or even simple confirmation that others are having similar issues is ridiculous. Because someone can take a good picture with one copy of a camera does not preclude the angst that a pro goes through when their 1DX MKII fails from defects. I came here for confirmation, got it and now the Canon FAN boys act like horrific animals. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Archive 2016 · 1DX MKII Freezes & Soft Focus
