p.48 #1 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Jeff wrote:
OK, so I apologize for being out of the loop for the last 8 days (was in Puerto Vallarta), but looking above, it would appear that we are all still speculating about all of this? No word from Canon yet? (I'll get through the last 5 pages, but don't have time right now )
-Jeff
Take a look at page 35. Hope you had a great time.
Shows not only what a working 1D3 is capable of but also what a working 100-400L is capable of. What a shame that so many owners of either or both don't have a properly working copy.
p.48 #4 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
jvarszegi wrote:
[Sure, I know the elementary basics of the setup of SLR cameras, which anyone can know with a quick Google search or two. For starters, the anti-dust vibration system doesn't vibrate the sensor, much less the focus sensors. Even if the vibration system were active when the shutter was open (which isn't happening), it would be physically impossible for the clear plate that is vibrated to cause ghosting. Photons aren't trapped within the glass...
I think you have points her, but I wasn't speculating on the vibration system to be active during shooting, I thought it could "shake" as a result of the "mirror slap". But as the sensor is fixed as you say, it would be "impossible".
Can i ask if this was just a one shot or did you use 10frames a sec burst.
I mean how many clicks it takes to make a sharp one. Or was all of them good?
This is no offence, i just would like to learn if MY AI is working right...
Was just shooting crows (no eagles in my home town) in a sunny day and had quite a few tack sharp pics. But many OOF, too...
p.48 #6 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Hrow wrote:
On the dust issue. In eight months, I have never had to clean the sensor and never had more than a spec or two at a time. I'm not even blowing it out and I don't think twice about changing lenses in the field.
I had the same experience with my 40D. That, alongside with similar menu and features, makes me want to get the 1D Mk III. I just want this story to end…
p.48 #7 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
I haven't kept up to date over the last week or so on this thread, but it seems there is a new firmware coming at some point soon, but no news about what RG reported? The be all and end all of 1D3 fixes?
Feb 25, 2008 at 05:43 AM
Red Grainger Offline • • [X]
p.48 #8 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Yakim Peled wrote:
I like that….
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Since were talking about the MkIII I think "Rumours of my death have been greatly exaggerated" is more appropriate (and more desireable).
Feb 25, 2008 at 06:05 AM
Red Grainger Offline • • [X]
p.48 #9 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
AGeoJo,
Nice shot of a Lillac Breasted Roller over acacia trees and bush. Must have been in East or South Africa. A difficult subject and a nice catch. I'd suggest higher shutter speeds (up the ISO) and don't oversharpen in PP. Some of us will spend our entire lives trying to capture the perfect Lillac Breasted Roller.
Cheers-Red
p.48 #11 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
PasiM wrote:
Can i ask if this was just a one shot or did you use 10frames a sec burst.
I mean how many clicks it takes to make a sharp one. Or was all of them good?
This is no offence, i just would like to learn if MY AI is working right...
Was just shooting crows (no eagles in my home town) in a sunny day and had quite a few tack sharp pics. But many OOF, too...
I used AI servo but for some unexplained (read: subpar) reasons, I left the burst rate to low . That bird is so small and it takes off so fast.... With other words, that's the only good one I caught on that sequence. I anticipated that it would fly from right to left and I was right but the next frame, I caught only a part of the body and the tail although it was in focus also. On a different situation later on the day, I anticipated it would take off from left to right and this time around, I set the burst to high and waited but it took a sharp turn away from me . Yes, I caught it and it was in focus but the position is not even close to the one I posted and I got images of the bush and some empty skies. Again, that darn bird is really fast .
However, I took three sequences of a long crested eagle but I had to use a TC and its position from me was further away although the eagle was significantly slower than the lilac breasted roller. The best sequence of 18 images when it took off from one spot and landed on a different branch. One was blurry due to camera/lens movement (I think somebody in the vehicle moved). The others, to my delight, are in perfect focus although that eagle was not always in the correct spot in the composition, in some cases, I cut its feet off. One thing that I noticed, the background was fairly simple and the vegetation/branches were outside the focusing point area during that sequence. On a different sequence, when the eagle flew lower to catch its prey (but missed), I had quite a few of OOF images. The background was simply too busy and the combination 500mm and 1.4X TC could not keep up with the eagle. Quite a bit of the images show either the background (vegetation) or the eagle was in focus.
Here is one of the 18 images during the high burst (8 frames/sec). Please note that I cropped the image since the eagle was far away and my lens/TC combo didn't quite get the desirable reach.
p.48 #12 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Red Grainger wrote:
AGeoJo,
Nice shot of a Lillac Breasted Roller over acacia trees and bush. Must have been in East or South Africa. A difficult subject and a nice catch. I'd suggest higher shutter speeds (up the ISO) and don't oversharpen in PP. Some of us will spend our entire lives trying to capture the perfect Lillac Breasted Roller.
Cheers-Red
Thanks, Red. I don't think I could re-do the shot/shots. The oversharpening effect happened during the resizing for the web using FM WP Pro. Yes, I set the setting to "high" but I revised that to "no sharpening" just for you .
After the fix (soft)
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/milw55/2260110905/" title="snowy day by Milw55, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2033/2260110905_882cfaf880_o.jpg" width="900" height="1123" alt="snowy day" /></a>
Looking at your first example, I'm puzzled how the dog's toe-hair (left foreground) could be in focus while his/her eye (upper center) is also in focus. Perhaps it's perspective that I cannot determine from the two-dimensional image (i.e. the camera was pointing significantly 'downward', even though it does not look like it), but something looks very odd with that. T+S lens is the only thing I can come up with, other than the obvious misaligned sensor (like my first MkIII).
p.48 #14 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
jkurkjia wrote:
Regarding Jeff, if ( big "if") I remember correctly Jeff had two problems with his non-BD body. One side of a shot could be in focus while OOF on the other. Also, he (Jeff) experienced situations where he couldn't even find the plane of focus (if Jeff is reading and I'm wrong perhaps he can re-calibrate my memory). Jeff's experience was very confusing to me and I never could make sense of what the heck could be wrong with his camera (apparently Canon couldn't either and they eventually replaced it with a BD body).
Joe, you are essentially correct on both counts above. Most of the time it was the left side in focus while the right was OOF, however I could find instances of the opposite, which makes little sense unless the flange is moving.
After having seen some recent images from my Blue Dot, it is quite possible that some of the images showing nothing in focus could have been extreme front-focus, where there was nothing in the foreground to reveal the fact. However, there is no way to separate this 'focal plane' issue from extreme focus errors without somthing in the field of view in focus. I've been able to provide examples recently showing errors that should not be possible using a 'conventional' understanding of all dSLRs that preceded the MkIII. These 'focal plane' issues presumably being a result of flange-to-sensor distance errors is new to the MkIII, and I can't see what aspect of its design should have made the 1D MkIII uniquely susceptible to these errors.
Having now had the opportunity to read through the last 8 days of posts, I remain unfulfilled, especially since Canon Corporate refuses to publicly address what is going on. I can't wait to hear how Henry's 'flange-fixed' camera performs, but I'm not sure I fully understand how this issue can also be responsible for other 'true' AF issues that the camera still has. I suppose that if the lens is not aligned properly, neither are the AF points in relation to what is 'supposed' to be the subject focused upon, and thus it is not the sensor that is misaligned, thus affecting both focus and sensor capture. In that respect it might make some sense, but you would think, then, that the resultant AF problems would always go hand-in-hand with the 'focal plane' errors, which clearly is not widely reported (not that that means anything).
p.48 #15 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Let's assume for a moment that it is a distance issue and that shimming is an acceptable solution.
If the distance from the rear flange to the sensor is wrong then it is likely that the distance from the lens to the AF sensor is also wrong. Now you have a situation where the AF is telling the camera to adjust for X focus but X is incorrect as is the distance to the sensor which we will call Y. If the X "error" is opposite the Y "error" then you might not see much if any problem as the errors offset each other. If the impact of X and Y are cumulative then the problems could be very substantial. If the lens mount is also tilted then all hell could break loose if you are using an off-center focus point.
After seeing those eagle shots I am really hoping that Canon got it right on my camera as I am going to be a very happy camper. My camera never came close to that. Hopefully, Fed-X will get here before the light goes so that I can end my anxiousness.
p.48 #18 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Jeff wrote:
I just looked at the original (this was cropped) Yes, it is perspective. I was standing up pointing somewhat downwards. I'm not a pro but dang you have a good eye!
p.48 #19 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Hrow wrote:
I have found the anti-dust feature on the 1DMkIII to work exceedingly well. That said, I don't know how you can make so definitive a statement that it is not responsible for ghosting or focus issues. Do you know something that you might want to share with us?
Ditto. That is the one thing that works great on my MKIII.. Very little if ANY dust on my sensor and I have been using it heavily since July. Lots of lens changing too. Can't say that about my 5D though..
p.48 #20 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
apdieb wrote:
Ditto. That is the one thing that works great on my MKIII.. Very little if ANY dust on my sensor and I have been using it heavily since July. Lots of lens changing too. Can't say that about my 5D though..
FWIW
Lots of people dismiss the anti-dust feature on the mkIII but I agree. Compared to my 5D, the 1D's sensor is spotless.
)
