p.58 #1 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
The loaner I have focuses much faster and more accurately than my 1DMkIII. There were times when focusing on small leaves at the end of branches that mine just couldn't figure out what to focus on whereas the loaner had no problem. I choose the subject specifically to see how backgrounds would effect each camera and one did great while the other failed miserably.
p.58 #2 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Still soft IMO. I don't have it on hand but I have shot of a helicopter flying over my house at about 80m, with 1D II and 300 and you can make out every little detail, including rivets, pressure lines etc.
How about the other examples after I micro adjusted?
I agree about soft on the helicopters... Thus my "Semi-soft" comment. This was about 10min after I got the camera back from Canon.
All other stuff after microadjustment (done after the helicopter shots post btw) are now very sharp (as much if not better than my Mk2N). I am happy.
p.58 #4 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
FWIW... Over at Naturescapes there are a couple of threads about some 40D's having very similar problems to those that some of us have experienced with the Mk3.
p.58 #5 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
apdieb wrote:
How about the other examples after I micro adjusted?
I agree about soft on the helicopters... Thus my "Semi-soft" comment. This was about 10min after I got the camera back from Canon.
All other stuff after microadjustment (done after the helicopter shots post btw) are now very sharp (as much if not better than my Mk2N). I am happy.
The sign looked very good and the peacock was good but front focussed as you said. But they are stationary. So it works in AI servo well now? I hope for your sake it's all fixed.
p.58 #6 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Hrow wrote:
FWIW... Over at Naturescapes there are a couple of threads about some 40D's having very similar problems to those that some of us have experienced with the Mk3.
My 40D works very much like my first MkIII in AI Servo, that is, it sucks. Not sure what to do about it, though, since I only have it for a backup. I guess if my MkIII ever goes down and I need to shoot soccer with the 40D, I'll be hosed.
p.58 #7 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Pixel Perfect wrote:
The sign looked very good and the peacock was good but front focussed as you said. But they are stationary. So it works in AI servo well now? I hope for your sake it's all fixed.
Yes,,, Thank goodness...I took about 3GB worth of kids soccer shots the next day and was very pleased with the results. Nothing spectacular, as I was fiddling around microadjusting on the fly...(nearly impossible to do in bright sun and with the semi-lousy Mk3 LCD)...but I got it dialed in after a few minutes to what I thought looked good. When I got home and critically reviewed, I found the micro adjustment that worked the best for that lens...in this case (70-200IS F2.8).
Of course, that doesn't mean that I won't be paranoid for quite some time though...
It ticks me off to no end that when I shoot I am now more concerned with chimping to "make sure" than actually shooting with this body. I hope over time that urge will go away. I also hope that whatever Canon does to "FIX" the MK3 ultimately comes soon. I am not convinced that my body is as good as it could be...but after limited testing, it seems to be good enough for me to use again... hate saying that btw.
p.58 #8 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
apdieb wrote:
It ticks me off to no end that when I shoot I am now more concerned with chimping to "make sure" than actually shooting with this body. I hope over time that urge will go away. I also hope that whatever Canon does to "FIX" the MK3 ultimately comes soon. I am not convinced that my body is as good as it could be...but after limited testing, it seems to be good enough for me to use again... hate saying that btw.
Exactly my feeling. And I don't even have a fixed bod but a 547xxx one from right after the fix (first body to hit the store after the recall of in-story 1D3's). Hope they'll have a fix that everyone agrees upon does the trick and makes it as good as the 1D2. Better would be great, but I'll settle for "as good as".
p.58 #9 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Jeff wrote:
My 40D works very much like my first MkIII in AI Servo, that is, it sucks. Not sure what to do about it, though, since I only have it for a backup. I guess if my MkIII ever goes down and I need to shoot soccer with the 40D, I'll be hosed.
Comparing my 1Ds3 and 40D, I totally agree with that statement.
p.58 #11 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
I just wanted to say (although not on topic) how great it is to have such support from fellow photogs around the world... It's been great trading messages with you guys...
p.58 #12 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Reading about microadjustment...
Did anybody try the "global -1" microadjustment that RG recommended in his AF Fix review?
I haven't heard anything positive or negative on this one.
Since my III failed me in some sport paning shots (where my II worked without problems) I changed microadjustment for all lenses to -1 now, though haven't had the time to test it, hence the question
I tested my lenses and they seem spot on calibrated so that wouldn't require any additional microadjustment (which ofc wouldn't be possible).
p.58 #15 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Andrew, are those soccer shots inclusive of the dialing in period? The reason I ask is that there seems to be a number that are front focused as well as a number that are back focus. Thankfully, there are also a number that seem right on!
As long as it was you making the adjustments I think you are fine. If it is the camera that is doing it then I think you have some problems.
p.58 #16 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Henry,
You should contact Canon and relay your experience with the loaner MKIII before sending them your lenses. If they still insist, I would only send them one and see what that does. I believe your camera is like Jeff's old one.....just plain broke, and eventually Canon will replace it. I know that "eventually" may cost you another year because of the type photographs you take, but Jeff went through a lot to get his replaced, unfortunately you will have to do the same.
As far as the loaner not repeating focus, I'm not sure it or any other Canon camera will. The AF has a tolerance associated with it that was discussed in a thread that "RDKIRK" had on FM some time back. F2.8 and below have one tolerance and all others have another. If you defocus a lens to infinity and then AF the lens, it would not be uncommon for the majority of the DOF to be behind the point of interest. If you rack the lens to the near focus position and then AF, the majority of the DOF may be in front of the point of interest. This is inherent in mechanical systems. In both cases, the POI should be in good focus. What constitutes "good focus" is also discussed in RDKIRK's post.
p.58 #17 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
I understand that there are tolerances but these seem to be really, really wide if it is within spec. The questions I have are:
1. How do you micro-adjust if the focus point is always changing? I just did a test where +5 seemed best and on the next go around 0 was definitely the better setting.
2. With such a wide tolerance, are people limiting their use of the 85L at F1.2 to manual focus?
p.58 #18 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Hrow wrote:
I understand that there are tolerances but these seem to be really, really wide if it is within spec. The questions I have are:
1. How do you micro-adjust if the focus point is always changing? I just did a test where +5 seemed best and on the next go around 0 was definitely the better setting.
2. With such a wide tolerance, are people limiting their use of the 85L at F1.2 to manual focus?
I have the 85f1.2, and I allow the lens to AF normally (MKIII camera). Another FMer had set up a test where he used a paper clip on a blank sheet of white paper. He placed a ruler to one side of the paper, but away from the AF sensor. The camera was at about 20 to 30 degrees on a tripod. The only thing the AF could see was the paper clip. This sounded interesting to me so I tried it with my MKIII and 85f1.2. If I racked the lens to infinity and hit the AF, the paper clip was in focus, but the ruler showed most of the DOF was behind the paper clip. If I racked the lens to near focus, again the paper clip was in focus, but you could see the slight shift on the ruler towards the front. The total DOF on the ruler was less than 3/4 of an inch. The camera can focus a 1.2 lens.
I have never tried to make micro adjustments to any lens I own. Canon has put some caveats on the micro adjustment to the point where I would have to see a consistent front or back focus issue in real world shooting (not test targets) before I would make a change. As terrible as it sounds, I am saving OOF images by lens, to see if there is a pattern.
Your MKIII, in my opinion, is hopeless.....I would not waste any more of my time with it other than trying to pacify Canon, so they would give me a new one. I'm sorry that is the case, but they have corporate policy. You will end up with a new camera, you just have to jump through the same hoops as Jeff.
p.58 #19 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
Hrow wrote:
Andrew, are those soccer shots inclusive of the dialing in period? The reason I ask is that there seems to be a number that are front focused as well as a number that are back focus. Thankfully, there are also a number that seem right on!
As long as it was you making the adjustments I think you are fine. If it is the camera that is doing it then I think you have some problems.
Yes... I was dialing it in throughout the game...Though, most of those were probably at +10 adjustment. I started with 0 and worked my way up. Had to guess pretty much.
I included some that I knew were misfocused due to not having enough of a certain kid, etc...
The slideshow is out of order too (basically, to balance and try to keep the parents happy)
Shooting white uni's wasn't very easy on exposure either. When they have their away jerseys I hope that the contrast will be a bit better. I certainly could lock on to those blue ones easily.
Thanks for taking a look and commenting. I appreciate it..
p.58 #20 · ['NEW Fix' UPDATE!] - MkIII AF still broken
I got a call from Canon today...just to preface, I was contacted about three weeks ago about my Mark III, after I sent a letter to Canon's CEO and some of the other executives.
I sent a DVD of images to Canon a couple of weeks ago, and now that they've had time to review it, they asked me to send in my body for the engineers to take a look at. The good thing is that I will have a chance to use a CPS body with MY settings and the way I shoot, to figure out if there really is something to the notion that not all bodies are the same. I have to believe that CPS would not have bodies in their stable that would not work properly.
Mark3 on the left Mark 2 on the right Both with 500mm F4 IS + 1.4ext.
Your G9 puts out beautiful and sharp images edge to edge 
