Chris Dees wrote:
Do you really think Canon would charge you for fixing a defective camera?
I can/will not believe that!
based on my experience with canon philippines i believe they will skin me alive
Studio58 wrote:
no I did not miss it. The association of the name Canon with the words words " admits fault " implies a connection which does not exist. Best to stick to the facts.
Cheers,
PB
Wrong. I suggest boning up on your language skills.
if this were an admission of an issue with the camera then canon would make a statement immediately on their website, through dealer networks, and by directly contacting the owners. waiting a month for a published article to be released (which will reach a very small audience) shows that canon is not in a hurry to address a problem but instead help train end users how to set up their mkIIIs for autofocus/ai-servo use.
mark petri wrote:
Misleading? you guys need to lay off the ale and liquid vision.
Nothing misleading bout the post at all.
I'm hoping Chuck discusses it. It is confounding that there has been no public statement by Canon up to now.
I agree....I have got to assume that Canon has done some testing. If their testing showed no issue at all, they would come out and say that.
I would guess they will spin this by saying the camera has a problem, but only under specific, well-defined circumstances which do not require an immediate fix. They will also give tips on how to avoid the issue...pending a fix from Canon. I am also guessing that it will turn out to be firmware fixable. If not, they would be more likely to make a quick announcement in order to reduce the number of items sold and thereby reduce their repair costs later.
Chuck Westfall's column is for providing information to help owners to better operate their camera.
I expect his next column will have info about how AI Servo acquires its target and tracks and how to use settings to better achieve your purpose. He has written about that extensively before elsewhere.
There will most certainly not be an "announcement" in the column.
hahr wrote:
if this were an admission of an issue with the camera then canon would make a statement immediately on their website, through dealer networks, and by directly contacting the owners. waiting a month for a published article to be released (which will reach a very small audience) shows that canon is not in a hurry to address a problem but instead help train end users how to set up their mkIIIs for autofocus/ai-servo use.
-erik
"article to be released (which will reach a very small audience)"
now thats a funny statement.
the DJ doesn't exactly have a "small audience". its one of the better read photojournalistic efforts on the web. what you miss is that it is read by more people that actually use this type of camera in their work rather then the hobby heads around who actually make up yet a smaller percentage of actual users. i'm one of that "small audience" thats been reading it regularly for about 5 years now almost from its humble beginnings and learn fom it
Well I, for one, would appreciate an AF MkIII "White Paper." Obviously any camera has AF limitations. The Mk III has many AF adjustments to tailor its AF to each user's needs. I welcome more "official" information.
I don't see any Canon declaration that addresses the autofocus problem whatsoever - no less a statement that could even be remotely construed as an admission of fault.
Kind of like those BS National Enquirer headlines... All sensationalism but no solid facts.
John Power wrote:
I am still waiting to see a "3" photo that looks better than those I have seen taken with the 1DMKIIN or 1DMKII. Haven't seen that yet...
Your not going to see that on web shots. I own 3 1DMKII's, a 1DMKIIn, 1DMKIII, and a 1DsMKII. The IQ of the shots from the 1DMKIII are better than the 1DMKII and 1DMKIIn. The IQ compared to the 1DsMKII is a toss up and when DR is important it goes to the MKIII.
Your simply not going to see that in a downsized shot posted on the web. Side by side at full rez or in print is where you see the difference. There has been plenty of people that own the MKIII that have commented on the difference in IQ. If anything everyone that owns one can agree on that if not the AF. IQ simply hasn't been an issue when comparing previous models.
rgallie wrote:
I expect his next column will have info about how AI Servo acquires its target and tracks and how to use settings to better achieve your purpose. He has written about that extensively before elsewhere.
