rscheffler Online Upload & Sell: Off
|
p.28 #11 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body | |
First off, after reading the Galbraith article, I feel it very closely echos my experiences with the camera. Though I have not covered nearly the same number of sports events as he has, I have experienced similar results. As well, a few of us have already discussed some of these issues here: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/545082
Bruce Sawle wrote:
Just a thought could this issue be related to just those cameras who have had Err 99 issues. It seems like it is not everyone reporting this problem much like the Err 99 problem.
No, because I've never had the Err 99 problem.
A. Kingman wrote:
I have had my Mark III for a few weeks now and while I've gotten some nice sharp images with front lighting, a high percentage of backlit photos have been out of focus.
Exactly what I'm finding. Backlit results for me are maybe 50/50 while front lit, sunny warm day is somewhat better, especially the closer the subject is to the camera.
72chevelle454 wrote:
Earlier we posted some dog jumping shots, here is a burst series of shot's I took with the M3 with the 300mm F4 IS lens.
I must admit that the focusing was not spot on but did seem to catch up and achieve focus.
This is what I'm seeing - that the AF catches up. First frame or two might be out but the closer the subject gets, generally the better the AF lock becomes (though not always).
Bruce Sawle wrote:
Here is a link to some comments from sportsshooters.com. http://www.sportsshooter.com/message_display.htmltid=25247
There comments on the Auto focusing abilities of the MK III all sounded positive. They all mentioned that the AF seemed much better than the MK II and IIn.
Well, if you check again, you'll see my comments are not all positive, neither is the one by Matthias Hangst... I think for the most part the camera is still very new, even to most SportsShooter members, so definitive feedback from SS members will take some time to trickle in.
Jeff wrote:
I agree the article was well-written, but must admit that I have a hard time believing that Canon would release a pro-level system that was affected by sun and heat.
As strange as the heat claim may initially seem, I experienced similar results back in 2004 when the 1D Mark II was first released. Shooting motorsports under hot, sunny conditions, images had a soft, mushy look that wasn't present in images made during the same event, same day, same subject under cloudy/overcast conditions. The Mark II's strong AA filter wouldn't be the quick answer because of the sharp results under cloudy conditions. I'm not sure it's the same issue as reported in the article, but I wouldn't quickly discount his findings only because he said it was hot and sunny.
Another heat & hardware issue I've had was with a 15mm fisheye that would lock up completely under hot conditions, like a hot summer's day. I sent it in several times without luck until I was able to demonstrate the problem in person to a senior Canon technician during a Canon clinic at a local dealer. Additionally, a few years back I borrowed a demo 600 IS from Canon to cover a few sports events. A fall football game up here under cool, overcast conditions was perfect with that lens but a game in Tampa under hot, sunny conditions resulted in severe backfocus that rendered images unusable. Yet, the same camera with the 400 2.8 worked flawlessly. I later learned through a contact at Canon that the 600 demo lens was in fact returned by another shooter who had identical problems with it...
Anyway, my Mark III results with sports so far has been mixed, though I'm hopeful Canon will resolve it with firmware fixes. Otherwise the camera is mostly stellar and I love using it.
|