p.46 #1 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Jonesy wrote:
imperial...I am still undecided on selling it..I love the cam but I need some extra cash right now. But I still need a decent cam for school. You interested?
Yes, I sent you an email 2 days ago and a PM last night....system must not be cooperating....please send me a PM. Thanks.
p.46 #4 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
The Canon rep just left a message that he personally tested my camera and that it looks really, really good. I'll get it back on Monday so I'll hold my breath that his standards are higher than I have seen from the past service attempts.
The caveat to all of this is that I am still being warned that I may have to have all of my lenses calibrated for this body. Since my body is now in perfect spec I am a bit baffled as to why my lenses that have performed so well on other bodies are now broken. Bit of a mystery in logic but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and wait until Monday.
A question occurs to me... if my body is perfect but my lenses are now sh*t and need calibration, how will I know my body is perfect? To take it a step further, if I bought a perfect new 1DMkIII (that matches my new specs) then I could assume that none of my lenses would be on target and they would all have to be calibrated. This could be taken a lot further in the logic department and I don't think Canon would come out too well.
p.46 #5 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Well after this I have been tempted, and gave into that temptation. I have been noticing that when I shoot a player coming at me with the ball in front of them that their foot or the ball seems to be sharp while the chest and lettering/numbering is in focus but not as snap crisp as the ball. When I shoot landscape the person on the left will be more in focus than the person center point. So I called Canon and they are having me send both 400 2.8 and the body in. Oh man I am nervous about that but I tell you if I could nail the center I would be much happier. I am worlds happier than my pre blue dots but still find these odd. I have moved my FP to the right or up in portrait but all that does is shift things. We'll see.
p.46 #11 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Here is exactly what the repair order said when mine came back today: We have examined the product according to your request. It was found that a few of the camera's AF sensors were on the edge of specification. The AF sensors were re-calibrated and fine tuned for optimum performance. They then assured me that the RG article has been thrown about by customers, but as far as the tech's know, the article is completely false. There is no new fix coming. And my camera was at the Lake Success office in NY. If there is a fix announced in the next month, I will drive to NY and stuff this camera up someones buttocks. (I was trying to be nice)
p.46 #12 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
jbfaulconer wrote:
Here is exactly what the repair order said when mine came back today: We have examined the product according to your request. It was found that a few of the camera's AF sensors were on the edge of specification. The AF sensors were re-calibrated and fine tuned for optimum performance. They then assured me that the RG article has been thrown about by customers, but as far as the tech's know, the article is completely false. There is no new fix coming. And my camera was at the Lake Success office in NY. If there is a fix announced in the next month, I will drive to NY and stuff this camera up someones buttocks. (I was trying to be nice)...Show more →
p.46 #14 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Wickedfn4u wrote:
Race you there Apdieb
I have 2 weeks between gigs so I hope they can turn it around quickly.. But more importantly actually Fix the dang thing. I'd rather them hang on to it and just get it right. Not a lot of faith here..
p.46 #15 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Just got back from dinner with a friend who has been a working pro for 30 years. He almost spit his beer all over his wife - seriously, when I told him that Canon had shimmed my mount to get it to line up correctly with the sensor. This was immediately followed by a "they did what?" After a great deal of ragging on Canon, we talked it through and came to the alcohol enhanced conclusion that such a fix could theoretically work but that Canon has a huge design flaw if this is what is required to get these cameras performing to spec. I then had to sit there while he told me how well his D3's were working out (I already knew this - five or six times) and the ladies discussed lady things specifically tailored to ensure non-participation by any male within 50 feet. Thank God for beer or I would have had to use the steak knife on my wrists.
p.46 #16 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
I am thinking about getting out my tape measure and bubble gum.
The sad thing here is... I need to use my 300 tomorrow for something rather simple (a LONG wedding shot from a balcony that we are restricted to). I could use the 1.3x crop... but even in one shot, I don't trust it enough and will be using my 5D instead.
p.46 #18 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Hrow wrote:
Just got back from dinner with a friend who has been a working pro for 30 years. He almost spit his beer all over his wife - seriously, when I told him that Canon had shimmed my mount to get it to line up correctly with the sensor. This was immediately followed by a "they did what?" After a great deal of ragging on Canon, we talked it through and came to the alcohol enhanced conclusion that such a fix could theoretically work but that Canon has a huge design flaw if this is what is required to get these cameras performing to spec. ...Show more →
I've heard (not directly from Canon but from an independent Canon authorized repair facility) of shimming to get the distance between the image plane and lens mount correct; this is really no big deal.
Now let's get down to nuts and bolts, what do you mean by "line up correctly" in your statement above? Are you implying the mount was asymmetrically shimmed to "tilt" the lens mount with respect to the image plane (I certainly hope not)?
p.46 #19 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Joe, According to Canon, the distance from the rear flange of the lens mount to the sensor was wrong. The lens mount was shimmed to make it correct so I have to assume that the distance between the two was too short. Remember that this is on an 8 month old camera whose performance was getting worse and the problem got worse each time it went in to Canon. After the last trip in I couldn't even pretend anything was in focus. The problem I am having with the explanation is this progressive deterioration as there was no slop in the lens mount.
From discussions I had with the Canon guy, their test equipment measures the distance at all four corners and the center. My camera was off on all measure points. I asked specifically if one point could be off and he said yes. As we discussed the repair procedure in such a case he indicated that they would use shims to bring that one side into compliance. The question was asked specifically for Jeff and several others who has been experiencing odd focus plane issues where one side is fine and the other side is totally OOF. So to answer your question, yes, people are experiencing problems that are almost certainly caused by asymmetrical distances between the mount and the sensor.
Combine this with the off-axis problems being reported by 1DsMkIII owners and you now have a situation where all planes of the sensor/mount relationship have had problems.
p.46 #20 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
The way big business works, the techs (other than the customers) would be
the very last to be told about a new "FIX". Expect stonewalling and occasional news releases that's always the big biz game plan. No particular reflection on Canon.
I have to believe that the apparent fact that there are "good" cameras and "cameras needing help" must reflect either on the manufacturing process or the quality of one of the subsystems, or the dreaded "tolerance stacking" where one subsystem is made a location "A" and is at the extreme edge, but technically within spec, and a related and dependent subsystem is made elsewhere and also at the extreme edge, but also within spec...When used in the same camera you get a stacking effect resulting in poor performance. (disaster) ..when you get only one of those components in the camera, you may never know that one subsystem is a bit "iffy". At the tolerances necessary to build a device like the Mark III, it doesn't take much spec drift to cause the Fubar and unpredictable results.
