If Rob G. considers 70 degrees a warm day.. Oh boy... I live in Texas. 103 projected this weekend. I will be shooting in late afternoon Sunday. Should be interesting. 70 degrees is practically cold down here.
rscheffler wrote:
So far that is also my impression, but I've mostly tried it in sports use with the 400 2.8 and 600 f/4. The only other f/4 lens that I have is the 70-200 f/4 IS, but I'm thinking of getting a 300 f/4 soon. What I would really like is for Canon to deliver the second Mark III I have on order so I can compare it against the first one. In the past it wasn't unusual for a body to work well with certain lenses and another body with other lenses. I'm coming from two Mark IIN cameras and I always had the impression that one of the two worked better with the 400 2.8... and the other with some of my other lenses... ...Show more →
I use the 300/2.8 IS for sports and the 500/4 IS for wildlife and sports, with my 1D3 I haven't noticed that the f2.8 lens performs any better than the f4 lens, they both work great!
Agreed large lumbering airliners are much larger than a soccer player or runner.
My MK III arrived last Thursday so on Sunday I went to Heathrow to give it a blast. Weather was clear blue skies 31 degrees, probably the best day we have had this year.
When I got into position I was surprised to find that the two guys stood next to me both also had MK III's. One was two months old and the user reported no issues, mine and the other persons were less than a week old.
Two of us were shooting using the 100-400 and the other the 300 2.8 and 1.4.
Surely the best test for the camera is to go out and use it for what you intend to shoot.
I personally feel that this thread would be far more productive and alot shorter if only owners of the camera posted instead of all those who may buy camera or want the camera but have no intention of purchasing.
UA935 wrote:
Surely the best test for the camera is to go out and use it for what you intend to shoot.
I personally feel that this thread would be far more productive and alot shorter if only owners of the camera posted instead of all those who may buy camera or want the camera but have no intention of purchasing.
I have every intention of purchasing it as soon as the AF problems are over. See my posts in this thread and see.
UA935 wrote:
Surely the best test for the camera is to go out and use it for what you intend to shoot.
I personally feel that this thread would be far more productive and alot shorter if only owners of the camera posted instead of all those who may buy camera or want the camera but have no intention of purchasing.
AMEN! Most of the noise on the internet about the af problems seems to be generated by folks who have never even held the thing in their hands.
XsigmaSD wrote:
AMEN! Most of the noise on the internet about the af problems seems to be generated by folks who have never even held the thing in their hands.
Actually most of the noise has been created by credible websites such as FM, RobGalbraith, ProPhotohome and Sportsshooter all reporting problems with the camera. I have also had Samy's and Robert's Imaging tell me that cameras have been returned with the issue. There are also a significant amount of people that have the camera on order but due to shortages don't have them in their possession. It obviously doesn't effect 100% of the cameras in 100% of situations but I would say that it is significant, especially for the people that intended on purchasing multiple Mark III's. There may be people that can throw out $4500 for a tool that might not perform as it is intended. If you make your living with a camera you want to know that it works.
Hello All,
Just wanted to put a checkmark in the happy with my mark III column. 52xxxx with 1.1.0 installed. 24-105 IS, and the 70-200mm IS, both f4's.
I shot a drag race event last weekend with the Mark III. Both cloudy and sunny (Hot, track temp was 36 Deg C when sunny) all at 10 FPS Servo mod, centre point, expanded focus points. Toasted 28 shots out of 1300+ for not being critically sharp. BUT...large targets (cars), moving way faster that a runnng child, not steady velocity either. Accelerating very quickly past me. Camera performed flawlessly!!! Image quality is spectacular. I did shoot in Shutter priority mode to get no movement artifacts so I wouldn't say that I pushed the camera like RG does with the 300mm f2.8. Just want to let people know that RG's method is not the only way to use this wicked machine!
Check out some of the photos @ www.infocus-imagery.com ( Mopar Event). Images have been downsized for proofing/gallery purposes so critical evaluation can be done with originals if you would like to see them.
I did shoot in Shutter priority mode to get no movement artifacts so I wouldn't say that I pushed the camera
You also seem to have shot with a pretty small aperture,so the DoF might be covering AF issues. If that's the way you always shoot, great. As you said, RG's method is not the only way to use this wicked machine!
Most of my shots were around f7.1 to f10, 400 ISO too try and keep the speed up 1/1250-1/1600s and most of the car in focus DOF. I really am stunned at the IQ staight out of the camera though. I really is something to see. I could achieve it with other bodies but the time element in Photoshop was crazy. 10-20 shots no big deal, an evening, but what do you do when you have 1500+. Very happy so far. I have many BIF shots with the 400mm f5.6 and the Mark III, they are very, very nice too. DOF @ 5.6 400mm @ 20-30m is very narrow and as long as I keep the little birdie in the circle the camera does great!
XsigmaSD wrote:
AMEN! Most of the noise on the internet about the af problems seems to be generated by folks who have never even held the thing in their hands.
You have to be joking right?
Most of the noise on the internet is about this camera having verifiable focus issues out of the box. the smallest amount of noise is coming from the few that have them and don't use them the way the shooters with problems use them who think they are just fine.
Do you think for a minute Canon would agree to send engineers in to RG taking every precaution imaginable and video taping the tests if they thought everything was just peachy with the MKIII ? hahahah!
The noise is coming from the majority of people who actually have the camera and think it is a P.O.S. for what they paid for it.
Quit trying to sweep this under the rug, what do you own stock in Canon or something? let them feel the pain for hyping an inferior product and roping everyone in to believing this was the messiah of camera technology when clearly it is flawed.
Maybe then they will fess up and provide full disclosure and make it right by everyone......or maybe not.
Dauv McNeely wrote:
[
Most of the noise on the internet is about this camera having verifiable focus issues out of the box. the smallest amount of noise is coming from the few that have them and don't use them the way the shooters with problems use them who think they are just fine.
I happen to use mine shooting the same subjects RG has used in his test and my MKIII has outperformed (3) 1DMKII's and a 1DMKIIn I own. All four of these cameras were calibrated recently by Canon and operate as designed.
Both me and my three staff members have all had the same results with the MKIII. We shoot sports for a living and if the MKIII didn't perform to the same standards as my other 1D's I wouldn't be using it. So far it has outperformed the others in every manner.
So don't tell me I don't use it the same as RG therefore I don't know whether I have a good camera or not. I have been a photographer for over 40 years and I know my way around a camera.
People have good copies and people have bad copies. Your comments are just as worthless as the person you chastised for saying there wasn't a problem.
BTW I shoot in the hot Texas sun which is far more demanding than the environment RG has had problems in. I don't question that he isn't having problems but I don't accept you notion that anyone who doesn't have a problem hasn't used it in the same situation as him.
Oddly, I have sport/pj friend using 1D3 + 400 2.8 IS and found no problem or what so ever with his AF but I am standing beside him and I am force to opt for One shot AI Servo in the same condition as my hit rate of high speed continuous AI Servo sucks and I think we are more or less in the same temperature with Texas.
Jim Victory wrote:
I happen to use mine shooting the same subjects RG has used in his test and my MKIII has outperformed (3) 1DMKII's and a 1DMKIIn I own. All four of these cameras were calibrated recently by Canon and operate as designed.
Both me and my three staff members have all had the same results with the MKIII. We shoot sports for a living and if the MKIII didn't perform to the same standards as my other 1D's I wouldn't be using it. So far it has outperformed the others in every manner.
So don't tell me I don't use it the same as RG therefore I don't know whether I have a good camera or not. I have been a photographer for over 40 years and I know my way around a camera.
People have good copies and people have bad copies. Your comments are just as worthless as the person you chastised for saying there wasn't a problem.
BTW I shoot in the hot Texas sun which is far more demanding than the environment RG has had problems in. I don't question that he isn't having problems but I don't accept you notion that anyone who doesn't have a problem hasn't used it in the same situation as him.
Ron Hew wrote:
Oddly, I have sport/pj friend using 1D3 + 400 2.8 IS and found no problem or what so ever with his AF but I am standing beside him and I am force to opt for One shot AI Servo in the same condition as my hit rate of high speed continuous AI Servo sucks and I think we are more or less in the same temperature with Texas.
[
Excellent comparison Ron! That shows that you can have two cameras in the same situation and one works and the other doesn't. There is no reason for one side to question the other's experience.
You have some good cameras and some bad. I still think it is a defective component on the board possibly from one of Canon's various suppliers of parts.
I have to agree 100% with xsigma, it's the non owners expressing most of the indignation for what ever reason. Even the mkIII owners that are having issues seem to be relatively patient, they've seen the files!
I have to agree.. its hard to be upset about a camera that has so many advantages over the Mark II (anyone who has one knows what I.m talking about, it would be hard to go back)... the AF issues will be resolved soon by canon...
Ive had my M3 for just under 2 month now and the only complaint is the AF and the not so sharp LCD when shooting Raw. I believe this problem is fixed by setting the Jpeg sharpening to max, just be careful if you switch back to Jpeg shooting with this set.
rd4tile wrote:
I have to agree 100% with xsigma, it's the non owners expressing most of the indignation for what ever reason. Even the mkIII owners that are having issues seem to be relatively patient, they've seen the files!
