fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              27              29              42       43       end
  

Archive 2007 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body

  
 
Paul B
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.28 #1 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


Bruce Sawle wrote:
Here is a link to some comments from sports shooters.com. http://www.sportsshooter.com/message_display.html?tid=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. My belief is if there is an issue hopefully Canon will be able to fix it with a firm ware upgrade. My initial observation is that like anything new it may take us awhile to dial in the proper settings each of us will need to be effective in what were shooting. The AF is very sensitive and everyone
...Show more


On the other hand, there are some comments over in a DPR thread (started by the Galbraith article) by a sports shooter who says he's been talking with Galbraith for several weeks about the AF problems. He claims to be having problems with his sport shooting.

Weird. I've been following the threads here and the gigantic one on NSN and was almost convinced it was just an issue of settings but maybe not. I'm sure Canon will get it fixed eventually, though (hopefully, quickly.)



Jun 19, 2007 at 03:20 PM
BobnJake
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.28 #2 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


Just a thought Not saying there isn't a problem with the AF, but could it be only in certain situations. From reading other threads, it seems that most of the people having the problems are shooting birds in flight against different backgrounds. I haven't really read anything from Sport Shooters on any of them having major issues, or have I missed something? I have not had any problems yet with the camera, that weren't caused by me


Jun 19, 2007 at 03:24 PM
Jim Victory
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.28 #3 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


Although I haven't experienced any problems with my AF that couldn't be solved with the proper settings it appears that, as Nill stated, there is a gamut of different problems being reported.

I'm certainly not a tech expert but it would seem to be that because of this variance that it would be more likely software related than hardware. It is not unusual for a given piece of software to function differently on the same type of equipment. It appears that the present firmware works for some but not others. It also looks like the present firmware has different effects on cameras that have problems.

I'm very impressed with the IQ and feature set of the MKIII and would not want to go back to the 1DMKIIn. Those of you that are having AF problems may or may not want to wait for Canon to come up with a solution. It is apparent these issues are being brought forward by a number of respected people that Canon will be have to make some changes.

A problem with AF on their premier sports camera could be an economic disaster with the Pro sector, especially since it took so long to come out with a replacement for the 1DMKII.

Jim



Jun 19, 2007 at 03:25 PM
Bruce Sawle
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.28 #4 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


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.


Jun 19, 2007 at 03:39 PM
Jim Victory
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.28 #5 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


BobnJake wrote:
Just a thought Not saying there isn't a problem with the AF, but could it be only in certain situations. From reading other threads, it seems that most of the people having the problems are shooting birds in flight against different backgrounds. I haven't really read anything from Sport Shooters on any of them having major issues, or have I missed something? I have not had any problems yet with the camera, that weren't caused by me


The Rob Galbraith article specifically address this issue using sports shots as a critieria for his assessment.

Jim



Jun 19, 2007 at 03:48 PM
A. Kingman
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.28 #6 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


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.


Jun 19, 2007 at 04:10 PM
Alistair Watson
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.28 #7 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


While RG's article is well written and without a doubt his opinion is highly respected, aren't people somewhat leaping on the bandwagon to burn the 1D3, before all the evidence is in?

Just a thought.....



Jun 19, 2007 at 04:39 PM
Todd_Brown
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.28 #8 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


Alistair101 wrote:
While RG's article is well written and without a doubt his opinion is highly respected, aren't people somewhat leaping on the bandwagon to burn the 1D3, before all the evidence is in?

Just a thought.....


As specified, the MKIII is my dream machine. I have been using the MKII for 4 years now and am very happy but yearn for the MKIII improvements. I'm certainly not giving up on the MKIII, I'm just not willing to spend $4495 on it, as it is, NOW.

When the problems are fixed and I no longer hear respected voices in the industry like Rob Galbraith criticising the MKIII autofocus issues, then I will glady pay $4495 for it.

Rob isn't the only person having similar issues:

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/546521



Jun 19, 2007 at 05:00 PM
mill4570
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.28 #9 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


I wonder if the backorder list will get any shorter after the RG report?

Richard K.



Jun 19, 2007 at 05:07 PM
kazman442
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.28 #10 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


What would be the best course of action if one was having some issues every now and then with the auto focus and the camera could be returned for money back. Should this be done or wait it out past the point of return?


Jun 19, 2007 at 05:14 PM
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.



Jun 19, 2007 at 05:26 PM
lohnman
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.28 #12 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


I expereinced these same problems with my first copy. Although the replacement I recieved from Canon isn't perfect it is leaps and bounds better that the first one. It makes you wonder, you would expect a design flaw to be consistant across the board. I have put both cameras in the same situations with very different results.


Jun 19, 2007 at 07:12 PM
lohnman
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.28 #13 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


I expereinced these same problems with my first copy. Although the replacement I recieved from Canon isn't perfect it is leaps and bounds better that the first one. It makes you wonder, you would expect a design flaw to be consistant across the board. I have put both cameras in the same situations with very different results.


Jun 19, 2007 at 07:12 PM
mark1958
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.28 #14 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


I wonder if this is the reason for the slow dribble of cameras. This used to happen with the earlier canon DSLR (anyone remember) releases and i was surprised when I saw it happening again.


Jun 19, 2007 at 07:15 PM
Garylv
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.28 #15 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


I would have to think so, that's exactly what I was thinking this afternoon. We don't know exactly when the issue was raised at Canon USA and Canon Canada about the production units hitting the stores with those same focus issues. It could have been a couple weeks ago, prompting Canon to hold further shipments to retailers until they can make a good evaluation of the situation.

Some of the latest few units that people are receiving this week (seems like just a few), could actually be from those earlier shipments with all the rest, finally getting processed through to the customers.


mark1958 wrote:
I wonder if this is the reason for the slow dribble of cameras. This used to happen with the earlier canon DSLR (anyone remember) releases and i was surprised when I saw it happening again.




Jun 19, 2007 at 08:01 PM
72chevelle454
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.28 #16 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


yep me too, I wonder if they send out a few thousand and sit back and watch the show on the forum..

mark1958 wrote:
I wonder if this is the reason for the slow dribble of cameras. This used to happen with the earlier canon DSLR (anyone remember) releases and i was surprised when I saw it happening again.




Jun 19, 2007 at 08:04 PM
Tim Gray
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.28 #17 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


Garylv wrote:
I would have to think so, that's exactly what I was thinking this afternoon. We don't know exactly when the issue was raised at Canon USA and Canon Canada about the production units hitting the stores with those same focus issues. It could have been a couple weeks ago, prompting Canon to hold further shipments to retailers until they can make a good evaluation of the situation.

Some of the latest few units that people are receiving this week (seems like just a few), could actually be from those earlier shipments with all the rest, finally getting processed through to the
...Show more

Don't forget that RG indicated that Canon was aware of the problem when they gave him the pre-production unit.



Jun 19, 2007 at 08:33 PM
Paul B
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.28 #18 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


Alistair101 wrote:
While RG's article is well written and without a doubt his opinion is highly respected, aren't people somewhat leaping on the bandwagon to burn the 1D3, before all the evidence is in?

Just a thought.....


"Burn the 1D3"? There have been a number of people who've encountered AF problems, including photogs that have used 1Ds for years. It could be new settings, could be occasional freaky production issues or any number of other things which may or may not be systemic. But I don't know that many people are trying to "burn" the 1D3. It's actually not that unusual for new software/hardware systems to have quirks that need to get worked out and when you're pushing the technology envelope the way Canon is (which gives us all the best cameras) you've got to expect some issues occasionally on first release.

Here's a question for you (don't know if you're allowed to answer this kind of thing, or whether this is something CPS even does.) But I see you're a member of CPS. When I worked in the US intell community we had various mechanisms for bringing in outside "competing" analytical teams (red/blue teams, tiger teams, whatever) to produce alternate views on stuff. Does Canon have some sort of system where they can bring in such "tiger teams" of professional photogs to test out new systems? These groups could sort of provide a sanity check on new products produced by the various engineering groups at Canon. I realize Canon (and really no other large firm) can do all the testing that's possible on new products but you'd think that for major upgrades like this there'd be a pretty robust system in place to put the camera through its paces (obviously there's some system in place already but when you have this many questions being raised, something probably needs to be added.) At the very least, when someone like Galbraith finds (or says he's found) issues with a new product, Canon (and any large firm) ought to be in a position to understand what's going on, explain what's happening and be able to do it in a way that would prevent publication of a Galbraith-type article (or at least ensure that if it's written Galbraith is able to tell readers that Canon knows what's causing the issue and knows how to quickly solve it.)

And for the record, I'm a Canon fan, have the MkIIn and will no doubt purchase a MkIII when Canon does the official "n" upgrade (in the meantime, I'll be spending even more money on other Canon equipment--lenses. )



Jun 19, 2007 at 08:44 PM
Garylv
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.28 #19 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


Yes that's what makes it even more unsettling. But also remember they didn't tell him what the actual issues on the preproduction AF were. Rob said he assumed that's what they were talking about.

After Rob's initial review with the preproduction unit, did they research a little further and decide no serious issue existed that they could reproduce? Or did they say "Let's just go ahead with the release and see how many people actually notice it?"

Yikes! That's some crazy speculation. I wish we knew.

One thing for sure, with everyone online these days, bad news travels very fast. Thousands of people found out about this today, even more in the next few days. Canon has to take it very seriously. Someone who has been in discussion with Rob over the past couple weeks has indicated they are indeed.









Tim Gray wrote:
Don't forget that RG indicated that Canon was aware of the problem when they gave him the pre-production unit.




Jun 19, 2007 at 08:55 PM
Hrow
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.28 #20 · •Hands-On• Eos 1D Mk III body


72chevelle454 wrote:
yep me too, I wonder if they send out a few thousand and sit back and watch the show on the forum..




At $4,500 a pop (potential liability) that's a hugely expensive way to test a camera even if you don't factor in the cost of bad PR.



Jun 19, 2007 at 10:30 PM
1       2       3              27              29              42       43       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              27              29              42       43       end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account