Well, after going through last weekend's shots, I can't honestly say I detect any problem with my Mark III's AI Servo performance with the 24-70/2.8 or the 85/1.8. The 85/1.8 was as usual a little less accurate, but this is something that I've noticed with my Mark II as well. My shot ratio was actually a bit better with this last event. The 24-70/2.8 shots are perfectly in focus and just ridiculously sharp even at f/2.8.
Very happy with the camera. Wish I could comiserate - lord knows I've had problems with Canon gear in the past - but I simply can't at this point.
Just a couple of quick facts;
1) Canon knows there is a problem with the AF on the MKIII. The primary purpose of the 1.1.1 firmware is to resolve AF issues.
2) Canon's apparent slow response is the Japanese way of handling these type issues. They are not in denial, they want to be right this time.
3) RG has been using the 1.1.1 firmware for sometime and is waiting for Canon to remove the "Beta" and make it an official release.
4) Looking at images from someone else's camera will not answer questiions about your MKIII. Each MKIII owner will have to evaluate if the firmware does the trick or not. If it doesn't, the camera should go back to Canon.
5) If Canon can not fix the AF issues with firmware, and hardware is required, they will recall the cameras.
Yes, number 5 may be questionable, but I believe it to be fact based on my use of Canon Equipment for over 30 years. Despite what many believe, Canon is a reputable company.
The "fact" that Canon has not acknowledged this in a letter or press release, is of little importance as I see it. They have placed a beta firmware in the hands of some including RG, sent engineers to monitor and assist RG tests, and loaded new firmware at Osaka during a major sporting event. What other acknowledgement do you need? This is the Japanese way, pure and simple.
The last few pages of this thread have gotten even more emotional than when the thread was started. My intent was just to remind everyone that Canon is serious about the AF issue and are actively working on it and they will not leave MKIII owners out in the cold.
If I have touched anyone's buttons, allow me to apology.
It is just getting frustrating given the length of time which has elapsed from initial ownership to now.
UA935,
Thanks and I agree totally about the frustration levels, but the best post I have read on this issue was Jeff's back on page 92 of this thread. I believe it is the best summary of where we stand on the MKIII AF issue. I would recommend a deep breath and a reread of that post, and maybe a cup of coffee, or a big drink, right Alistair .
A big drink indeed Richard! 6pm here and I have just opened a lovely bottle of Cote de Rhone red, the weekend has begun, and a busy weekend for shooting!
Gear cleaned, packed and charged. 1D3 coming along but unless something happens to my 1D2N (god forbid because I would be really screwed then!) it won't get a shot off.
A recall? Yeah right. Canon still hasn't done anything about the 50/1.2L, has it? That lens is so obviously fundamentally flawed that if anything would get recalled, that would be it. If there's something physically wrong with the design, they'll fix it in later production runs of the camera and leave current owners high and dry - especially considering the minority of users who actually experience the problem.
Wow that seems a little chicken little? No offense intended. I just think if it cannont be firmwareed then thet have to recall or they set themselves up for a huge class action for selling something that cannont be used for the intended purpose. I just don't see canon letting it go that long. The 50 might be a poor comparison as I would guess the # produced or sold are far less.
Yes, number 5 may be questionable, but I believe it to be fact based on my use of Canon Equipment for over 30 years. Despite what many believe, Canon is a reputable company.
Richard K.
I'd agree Canon is a reputable company and that this is going to get fixed one way or another. If it's a hardware fix, though, they wouldn't necessarily need to do a formal, total recall, particularly if it's just some portion of the bodies (let's say 40-50%) that need the new hardware immediately. As long as they notify owners that they can send in MKIIIs (free of charge, of course) with problems, that's answering the mail, in my view (and also protecting them, I would think, from a lawsuit.) Then they can decide how (or whether) it's necessary to deal with bodies that aren't currently having issues. This would probably be a faster way of resolving the problem than having twice as many bodies coming in as is necessary. Whatever happens, though, they need to take care of this and they will, I'm sure (just a question of how, and how fast, it happens given all the complexities.)
Sam Bennett wrote:
A recall? Yeah right. Canon still hasn't done anything about the 50/1.2L, has it? That lens is so obviously fundamentally flawed that if anything would get recalled, that would be it. If there's something physically wrong with the design, they'll fix it in later production runs of the camera and leave current owners high and dry - especially considering the minority of users who actually experience the problem.
I agree, Canon will not recall the already sold mk3:s. If they where tinking about that, they would not keep on selling thosends of them every month.
I agree, but the end result is the same. I believe Canon will issue a firmware release deisgned to fix AF issues. Each individual owner will have to decide if his or her camera now works properly. If it doesn't, Canon will recommend sending it to a service center.
Some believe Canon is more interested in avoiding a law suit than fixing the problem. I am not in that number. I believe this is a difference between cultural approaches to problem solving more than anything else.
Lasse Eriksson wrote:
I agree, Canon will not recall the already sold mk3:s. If they where tinking about that, they would not keep on selling thosends of them every month.
Wasn't there a recall on the 24-105 for the lens flare issue? It seems to me if there is an issue and they identify and fix it, they will fix any previously sold cameras. If there is anyone that doesn't believe this, they really should be looking at a different camera manufacturer!
I believe Canon continuing to sell the camera is a sign the AF can be fixed with firmware. However, the different behaviors of the camera leads me to believe many will have to go back for service. The EJ Pecker borrowed camera for example on Naturescape. I can tell you my MKIII has never behaved in that manner.
You can call it a recall, or a service center upgrade or a replacement, one way or another Canon will make this right.
Curator wrote:
Wasn't there a recall on the 24-105 for the lens flare issue? It seems to me if there is an issue and they identify and fix it, they will fix any previously sold cameras. If there is anyone that doesn't believe this, they really should be looking at a different camera manufacturer!
And when was the recall for the 50/1,2 And how many years and how many thousends of complains did it take to recall the G2 camera even if the same part cracked and fell apart on all bodies.
I believe Canon continuing to sell the camera is a sign the AF can be fixed with firmware. However, the different behaviors of the camera leads me to believe many will have to go back for service. The EJ Pecker borrowed camera for example on Naturescape. I can tell you my MKIII has never behaved in that manner.
You can call it a recall, or a service center upgrade or a replacement, one way or another Canon will make this right.
Richard K.
Maybe they will do that. But I have been reading this for many months now
Lasse Eriksson wrote:
[
And when was the recall for the 50/1,2 And how many years and how many thousends of complains did it take to recall the G2 camera even if the same part cracked and fell apart on all bodies.
I'm not aware of any problem with the 50 1.2 lens, so I don't know if a recall is necessary. You seem to have an issue with Canon quality. Why would you continue to buy Canon equipment? I know if I had an issue with a manufacturer that could not be resolved, I would not be buying from them again.
Curator wrote:
I'm not aware of any problem with the 50 1.2 lens, so I don't know if a recall is necessary. You seem to have an issue with Canon quality. Why would you continue to buy Canon equipment? I know if I had an issue with a manufacturer that could not be resolved, I would not be buying from them again.
You must have missed the 500 threads about the 50/1,2 lens in this and other forums.
And why do you write that I keep on buying Canon equipment ? You don't have a clue what I buy and don't buy
Lasse Eriksson wrote:
You must have missed the 500 threads about the 50/1,2 lens in this and other forums.
And why do you write that I keep on buying Canon equipment ? You don't have a clue what I buy and don't buy
Yes, I must have missed those threads. If there were that many threads, it sounds like there were people that did not agree that there were problems, but I guess it could have been 500 threads of people complaining.
Sorry I assumed you purchase Canon equipment. I forgot that there might be people that like to complain about equipment they don't own...nothing wrong with that I suppose, but doesn't sound like too much fun.
.