As far as local hostility, Canon Japan is setting policy on this one. Westfall is operating under the constraints of senior management. I guess it's fair to be upset with him, as he represents Canon. But he's just a soldier on this one.
I'm still hoping there are good and bad cameras. That a portion of the AF sensors go out of spec with heat. If it's a design problem, the people who really screwed up this release now have to be good enough to fix it.
Jeff wrote:
One thing I think you can count on, the 1Ds MkIII's AF system was designed long ago, and odds are that it will be exactly the same as the 1D iteration, that is, unless Canon owns up to a hardware fix between now and its release. I'm certain Chuck has been told to keep quiet until Canon Japan figures out a course of action.
I'd bet a dime to a donut that it's a design issue, not a manufacturing or programming defect. They'd better consider damage control soon, otherwise their silence will cannibalize sales of these higher-end products.
Jeff,
I agree entirely with your view. From a customer relations standpoint, their handling of the issue is a disaster. I wonder if this is the result of a company that has grown too large. In some ways I admire their corporate secrecy, but from a consumers standpoint I must wonder how far they think brand loyalty can be tested? If the Ds turns out to be a dud, I will switch back to Nikon. I'll loose a lot but if my choice is to either adopt a flawed technology or not be able to take advantage of the newest processing and sensor advances, I will switch. I understand that not everyone can afford that luxury but enough of us can and that will certainly hurt their bottom line. After all, a few percentage points lost on the anticipated sales of a new model often decides whether or not it'a a success or failure. I can afford to wait a bit longer but I'm getting tired of checking on the latest 1D Mark 3 news. Keep the faith.....
John
I shot a pro bicycle race on Sunday with the 1DMkIII and the results were very disappoining. Lots of misses on the hard stuff (close, tight pack shooting) but I got very marginal performance on pretty easy stuff as well. Shooting down a long uphill straight I am no better than 25% in focus where I would have expected nearly 100%.
Since I normally use the camera for butterflies and flowers I don't see the problems often but when I do I must admit that it pisses me off. If the next Firmware fix doesn't do the trick I think it is time to do a class action suit against Canon - maybe that will get their attention. If filed to coincide with Nikon's product releases it would inflict a fair amount of PR damage and perhaps convince them that ignoring their problems and their customers is not a good idea.
If it is really a design issue, what do you think of those 'good' Mk3 (having the same design as of the 'bad' Mk3) that seem to be working just fine? Or, you really believe there is not one Mk3 available that can do the jobs, and all of the satisfied Mk3 users don't know what they are doing?
I agree that we cannot ignore almost half the users have AF problem. For the same token, we cannot ignore the fact that over 50% of the users, depsite all the warning and internet talks of AF problems, are happy with the AF performance. I don't think I have tested any of my new cameras as rigorously as my new Mk3, and I am still a happy owner. I have been using my Mk3 probably under the most demanding conditions for the AF system, similar to the conditions that I have been using my 1DMk2 for the last 3 years.
slau wrote:
If it is really a design issue, what do you think of those 'good' Mk3 (having the same design as of the 'bad' Mk3) that seem to be working just fine? Or, you really believe there is not one Mk3 available that can do the jobs, and all of the satisfied Mk3 users don't know what they are doing?
I certainly would not say that - many photographers I respect have said they are happy with their MkIIIs, but due to the inconsistent nature of the problem, it's entirely possible that roughly 50% of MkIII owners have never encountered the mysterious conditions that cause the AF to go pear shaped.
What would really seal the deal on good/bad MkIII samples would be for someone who claims to have a good MkIII to swap with someone who says they have a bad one for a week or so, and then compare results. If the 'good' MkIII performs badly and the 'bad' MkIII performs well then one could either put it down to one of the photographers being incompetent, or else one of the photographers is encountering conditions that cause the MkIII to mess around while the other is not.
Jeff wrote:
How long have you owned it, Stephen? It's the inconsistency factor that is so befuddling to me; sometimes it coincides with when I'm shooting AI Servo, sometimes not. Perhaps the intersections of your subsets have been aligned by your good karma...
Jeff, it is not how long I have owned the camera, it is how much and how did I used my camera. Yes, I only had the camera since mid August but I have already shot more than 6,000 shots, mostly were for testing. I have been shooting three solid days of birds. After another 2,000 + shots, I still have not encountered the type of inconsistency problem some of you have.
Even if I owned the camera only for one month, I may have posted more examples and images from my new camera than most of FMers who have owned the camera for months. Although I came in the game later than a lot of you, I have been reading for two months regardign the spec and problem people have. Plus, I have been shooting with my Mk2 for three years for the same type of subjects. I do have a shorter and more gentle learning curve, partly thank you for you guys posting the information regarding the camera.
I do feel for you guys who are having problem with the cameras. But, I do not think it is right to imply and speculate that ALL the MK3 are defective due to design problem, and over 50% of the users have no idea what they are doing.
May be it is my luck, or may be I have no idea what I am looking for. I do feel better than I am not the only one who claims that the camera works as advertised . I think we just have to agree to disagree.
Steve, I mentioned something similar to your comments in another thread. The fact that there seems to be quite a few MkIII's with no AF problems one would have to assume that something within the camera besides software is the problem. There is the possibility that some have a defective AF module that is affected by heat or bright light and the problem can be intermitent depending on circumstances. My opinion is that there may have to be a recall in order to solve the problem. I plan on waiting a while before purchasing one. Just broke the on/off switch for the vertical shutter release on my MkII so it's off to Canon but so far I'm impressed with my new 40D
What if the DsIII has the same known focus issues as the DIII. Does it employ the same focus system?? Who would be game to drop serious coin on this new DsIII. Even if 50%+ of new DIII owners are happy would you gamble on this body at the price?
The AF on the 1Ds was the same as that on the 1D, the AF on the 1Ds2 was the same as that on the 1D2, there was no 1Ds2N, but it's almost a sure thing that the 1Ds3 will have an identical AF system to the 1D3.
Regardless of what's causing the MkIII performance problems, I think at present there is an unacceptably high probability that a buyer would end up with a poorly focusing MkIII.
Naturally, I ain't buying it. In fact, even if it performed as specified/implied by Canon, I'd have a difficulty dishing out $4.5k for it, compared to perfectly viable/mint MkIIN's at around $3k.
Yup, Canon hit the camera performance-price point at which I am able to curb my techno-novelty thirst easily.
Unless Canon come clean with the MkIII AF story, I don't see their 1DsMkIII selling like hot cakes either.
Kier wrote:
The AF on the 1Ds was the same as that on the 1D, the AF on the 1Ds2 was the same as that on the 1D2, there was no 1Ds2N, but it's almost a sure thing that the 1Ds3 will have an identical AF system to the 1D3.
Which is very scary indeed.
It was being claimed by someone at dpreview that the 1Ds III has an updated AF module that does not suffer temperature related misbehaviour.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
It was being claimed by someone at dpreview that the 1Ds III has an updated AF module that does not suffer temperature related misbehaviour.
I remembered someone came from Calgary said that the 40D and the 1Ds3 has a new AF system that is different from 1D3 and its not temperature sensitive.
The 40D uses a completely new AF system not seen before in any Canon cameras, I can't comment on that.
Historically, the 1Ds series has used the same AF system as its partner 1D.
The 1Ds3 almost certainly uses the same AF system as the 1D3 for the simple reason that if Canon have found that they need to improve temperature tolerances for their 1-series AF to work, why haven't they announced that they have found the problem with the 1D3 and taken steps to make it right for all those who have already bought the camera?
Consider what you would do if you were in Canon's position? You certainly wouldn't want to owe up to 1/2 of the problem and/or announce a fix or exchange policy that didn't eliminate the entire problem (and the few more that might emerge after more field use?).
Jeff wrote:
How long have you owned it, Stephen? It's the inconsistency factor that is so befuddling to me; sometimes it coincides with when I'm shooting AI Servo, sometimes not. Perhaps the intersections of your subsets have been aligned by your good karma...
Jeff my main AF issues has been in bright sunlight. I had a signficant number of out of focus shots at Big Sur when shooting the rocky creek bridge in AF Single shot mode. I found AF tracking of mountain goats at Glacier was fine when i was shooting them in shade. However when they were out in the sun, same issue. It just seems that the camera is not holding focus under bright conditions.
I also read that both the 1DsIII and the 40D do have some different hardware then the 1DIII. So a hardware fix may be needed, althought so far from everything i've read it looks like canon is just trying to deal with the issue through firmware updates.
I see even after half a day it is still showing in stock. I think there is a message for Canon in there. I can remember reports of 120+ cameras selling out in 30-mins. There are tons of folks wanting a new MkIII but are hesitant to risk $4500 on a dud.
Buying one now is like shooting craps, it's a gamble. You roll the dice you take what you get. I think I'll wait till the Mk3N or when Canon annouces a fix.
