Sorry about the link, it works for me. He doesn't shoot everything at f5.6. He shoots at f2.8 later in the test. At any rate it is a very good test of two MKIII, and a MKIIN. If you have the time, you should read it start to finish.
What does Drew dispute? That it may be faulty cameras rather than a design problem? People want their cameras to work. I don't think what Canon has to do to fix the problem is a primary issue. 'When' is the issue.
Edited by dcmiller on Sep 07, 2007 at 04:05 PM GMT
wondering has anyone heard anything from what came of the 1.1.1 FW testing in Osaka??
I'm surprised there hasn't been any news good or bad (or the actual public FW...)
thanks
arashm wrote:
wondering has anyone heard anything from what came of the 1.1.1 FW testing in Osaka??
I'm surprised there hasn't been any news good or bad (or the actual public FW...)
thanks
I am not sure if this is accurate but here you go anyway:-
Here is an exerpt from the prophotohome thread that concludes the 45 point approach is more effective than single-point center::
This drop in performance, when only using one focus point rather than all 45points, has been noted before. We do tend to believe there may be some sort of issue with the center point. We have also noted that the center point is almost never chosen when using 45 pt. mode. We found this odd given that the focus system is supposed to start with the center point and move out. In other words, all else being equal, the center point should be chosen over any of the auxiliary focus points. This is not the case.
However, even given this center point oddity, the MKIII still outperforms the MKII in AI Servo 45 pt. mode.
Honestly I have RARELY used AF in Auto mode (45-point). I usually use just the center point and have lived with some OOF shots that I couldn't explain. I have been assuming that the single center point would be better for birds in flight, for instance, because I could focus on just the bird's eye. I am going to try using the 45-point AF and see if I get better results even with birds in flight. Clearly, 45-point AF should work OK with subjects on a single plane of focus. I just don't know whether it is likely to change the focus plane to a bird's wing even if I have the center point on it's eye. Any thoughts? Any testing experience? .
I don't want this to go too off-topic with a discussion of single-point vs ring-of-fire shooting, but on my 1D, 1D2 and 1D2N bodies I often shoot in 45 point (ring of fire) mode when using AI servo and get great results. I rarely if ever use it in one-shot mode though.
I can't take a chance with cluttered backgrounds and almost always shoot my 1DmkII with the center AF point with AF assist; this has always worked perfectly for me unless I couldn't get the center AF point "near" the target. My toughest shot is a long necked swan and to get both the head and body composed properly I have to lay the lay the center AF, or at least the assist AF points right on the neck.
This AF setup has worked great shooting cars, wildlife, and an occasional soccer game. I would only use the ring of fire while shooting a bird flying against a clear sky.
I bring this up because Drew's test is of no interest to me; he based everything on ring of fire and I don't shoot that way. From my perspective the m3 has to work with a single AF point plus AF assist or it is a no-go.
Am am curious why it has gotten so quiet with the 1.1.1 firmware. Including the link above at SportShooter being removed.
At this point an official recognition from Canon that there is an issue and they are working on it would be nice. The units are still shipping out of Canon steadily and I hope that is a good sign that they do not feel it is a hardware issue. If it is it will probably take a long time for us to get things fixed properly as every m3 will need to be sent into service.
So why has the 1.1.1 rumble so quickly quieted down to a tremor if even that?
samd12 wrote:
Am am curious why it has gotten so quiet with the 1.1.1 firmware. Including the link above at SportShooter being removed.
So why has the 1.1.1 rumble so quickly quieted down to a tremor if even that?
"Maybe" 1.1.1 firmware will not solve the AF problem , same as the previous update.
samd12 wrote:
Am am curious why it has gotten so quiet with the 1.1.1 firmware. Including the link above at SportShooter being removed.
At this point an official recognition from Canon that there is an issue and they are working on it would be nice. The units are still shipping out of Canon steadily and I hope that is a good sign that they do not feel it is a hardware issue. If it is it will probably take a long time for us to get things fixed properly as every m3 will need to be sent into service.
So why has the 1.1.1 rumble so quickly quieted down to a tremor if even that? ...Show more →
The link does not work but the thread is still there about 20 down in the message board
Monique wrote:
"Maybe" 1.1.1 firmware will not solve the AF problem , same as the previous update.
Did Canon officially say that the new firmware 1.1.1 will solve the AF problem, or even announcing officially there is problem with the 1D3 AF system? Not that I know of.
Monique wrote:
I don't know, but photographers in Osaka are testing it. Thats why I said "maybe"
I did not go to the CPS thingy in Calgary on Sept 5&6. But I think people attending the presentation was told by the Canon rep on site that the firmware 1.1.1 are not designed to address any AF issue. I definitely will not hold my breath.
