But to his credit he addressed that he does not shoot all sports. It is a lot like a movie critic, if you know how he judges a movie genre, you take his opinion and mold it to your view. (Not sure I said that right, EG if he hates hack and slash and gives it a thumbs down and you like them, you still may see it)
Also if a body has trouble tracking a moving object, car or person it has a problem. Fix one maybe you fix all, lets hope!
gbee wrote:
Well l said it was not the sub mirror! And it isn't!
I guess my Canon expansion is probably at an end?
Will be watching the competition closely for my next camera, in the New Year.
Did you read the same article that I read?
"Without question, the sub-mirror fix improves EOS-1D Mark III AI Servo autofocus: it eliminates the camera’s big drop in autofocus accuracy when the mirror box gets warm or hot. Our experience is that it helps stabilize the autofocus performance so that the EOS-1D Mark III delivers about the same number of in-focus frames whether it's warm or cold."
gbee wrote:
Well l said it was not the sub mirror! And it isn't!
I guess my Canon expansion is probably at an end?
Will be watching the competition closely for my next camera, in the New Year.
Well gbee I wouldn't buy that wireless transmitter for your 1D3 now!
Jeez guys, as I said, with all fairness and respect to RG, do we let him determine if the 1D3 is now fixed? Sure, he has a potent voice, especially for those who shoot athletics in hot climates.
Having just watched an epsode of Star Trek while flipping through the cable channels over a quick dinner, this is like 'we are the 1D Mark 3 [borg] collective, we speak one voice, Rob Galbraith's voice, we are one, our cameras are one!'
EB-1 wrote:
I wish RG would compare the 1D MK III's AF to that of the D3.
EB
On the Nikon forum there was a nice test of the D300 vs 1D II that showed the D300 was much better. The test was shooting fast running dogs in bright light and the guy does this professionally and is mainly a Canon user. He says the D300 got far more focused shots than he ever got with his 1D II's.
I'm guessing the D3 will be just as good although there are some minor differences in the D300 and D3 AF.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
On the Nikon forum there was a nice test of the D300 vs 1D II that showed the D300 was much better. The test was shooting fast running dogs in bright light and the guy does this professionally and is mainly a Canon user. He says the D300 got far more focused shots than he ever got with his 1D II's.
I'm guessing the D3 will be just as good although there are some minor differences in the D300 and D3 AF.
The users of D300's I've talked to have been amazed at it's focusing. One fellow felt it was substantially better than his 1D mkIIn in low light. Hmmm.
Alistair Watson wrote:
Having just watched an epsode of Star Trek while flipping through the cable channels over a quick dinner, this is like 'we are the 1D Mark 3 [borg] collective, we speak one voice, Rob Galbraith's voice, we are one, our cameras are one!'
Hey, what happened to the collective? My 1D3 just stopped working! RG said something and now it's a lump of coal.
Don't know if anyone looked at the images, but the 'fast' series (of the runner) are particularly interesting. The MkIII certainly elicits some unique qualities when the focus accuracy goes astray...
gasmaster58 wrote:
Since the 1DIII is a piece of crap now, anybody wants to sell theirs for cheap? It's worthless anyway. Maybe you can get some of your money back.
There have been PLENTY of 1d3's for sale on the BS forum. People buy one and it doesnt work so the dump the non-working camera on someone else. Really amazing if you ask me.
Don't know if anyone looked at the images, but the 'fast' series (of the runner) are particularly interesting. The MkIII certainly elicits some unique qualities when the focus accuracy goes astray...
Yep and the fast1 series between the 1D2N and the 1D3 is quite worrying. By worrying I mean in this particular case, this particular test, how many out of focus shots there were.
madmax200 wrote:
There have been PLENTY of 1d3's for sale on the BS forum. People buy one and it doesnt work so the dump the non-working camera on someone else. Really amazing if you ask me.
I'm talking about CHEAP. Not $4000 which was the ORIGINAL price before Canon jacked it up.
Jammy Straub wrote:
The users of D300's I've talked to have been amazed at it's focusing. One fellow felt it was substantially better than his 1D mkIIn in low light. Hmmm.
Oh, just like the 1D3? At least, that's what RG says: it's substantially better than the 2n in low light conditions. Even gets an A+ rating for low-light back-lit pole vaulting.
Then again: the chance I'll ever EVER shoot low-light back-lit pole vaulting is as close to zero as it gets.
What bugs me is: I don't want to see an A/B/C rating (btw, all are grade C and better for both cameras, let's not over-dramatize the "uselessness" of this camera) - I want to see numbers. How many OOF shots during what conditions and compared to the 2N? I'll add my own rating to that according to what I use most. If anyone has the patience to count all the sequences and post them, he'll get a bottle of beer from me.
All in all - I think Canon has made great strides in the right direction. Everyone will read the report as he wants to. So do I - positively.
Emile Gregoire wrote:
Oh, just like the 1D3? At least, that's what RG says: it's substantially better than the 2n in low light conditions. Even gets an A+ rating for low-light back-lit pole vaulting.
Then again: the chance I'll ever EVER shoot low-light back-lit pole vaulting is as close to zero as it gets.
What you've never heard of The Midnight Vaulters of America?
It might be just like the 1D3 in that particular circumstance low light, but I've yet to hear anyone heap praise on the 1D3 AF in the same magnitude as the D300/D3. I've heard great things about the 1D3's single shot acquisition, when it works. Oh well, it'll be interesting to see a real comparison. I don't think there's much question at this point of who's brand new AF system turned out for the better. Sigh, make no mistake I'm a Canon shooter and not trying to start trouble
