"all would be forgivein if they just own up to their responsibility and assure owners that they will sove the problems."
How is Canon not owning up to their responsibility to solve the AF problem? Do you believe there is a simple fix which they are concealing or chose to ignore? Do you want a personal letter of apology and commitment from Canon?
As for Leica's prompt response to the M8's infrared issue, that fix involved the simple and readily apparent solution of placing an IR filter on each lens (a solution which, by the way, made many Leica users unhappy). I don't see how that situation is comparable to the complex AF issues affecting the Mark III.
Since when does Canon ever announce a software fix in advance of releasing it? If it were only software, the code would be changed, and we'd have it in our cameras today. Why 'announce' something like that? All they'd be doing is drawing attention to the fact that it doesn't work correctly, whereas if it were only a software fix they'd get it in our cameras, and all of their woes would magically be solved overnight.
No way. Me 'thinks' we all have another trip to Virginia in our futures, although when it will be remains to be seen. Hopefully they won't allow this to drag on too long without giving some details.
FWIW, from a post last night one of the main folks over at Naturescapes.net (Chas Glatzer) says he's replaced all his 1DMkIII's with 1DsMkIII systems which he says are a significant improvement over the 1DMkIII's (the fixed versions of which continue to have a servo issue and "fine detail smearing") but the 1DsMkIII's still do not provide as many sharp images as a 1DMkIIn. There are still servo issues with the 1DsMkIII, apparently. He says if he has any glitches with either of the 1DsMkIII bodies the next move will be to Nikon. Yikes, I wasn't aware that there were that many heavy hitters on the brink of going Nikon. Canon better fix this quick.
Paul B wrote:
FWIW, from a post last night one of the main folks over at Naturescapes.net (Chas Glatzer) says he's replaced all his MkIIIs with 1Ds systems which he says are a significant improvement over the MkIII's (the fixed versions of which continue to have servo issue and "fine detail smearing") but the 1DsMkIII's still do not provide as many sharp images as a MkIIn. There are still servo issues with the 1DsMkIII, apparently. He says if he has any glitches with either of the 1Ds bodies the next move will be to Nikon. Yikes, I wasn't aware that there were that many heavy hitters on the brink of going Nikon. Canon better fix this quick. ...Show more →
Paul, are you sure you got all the "D" and "Ds" references above typed accurately? You compare a 1Ds MkIII to a 1D MkIIn, so I'm thinking maybe it should have been a "D"?
madmax200 wrote:
The new fix is a harmonic balancer and firmware to enhance it.
And where did you get this information? I'd be very curious to see a reference, or to hear the actual source. I'm guessing we'll know from Canon soon enough, but being that vibration has been an oft-mentioned 'potential' cause, it certainly would not surprise me.
Just got off the phone with the friendly fellow from Canon that I have been speaking with on a regular basis (not being snide - he is very friendly) and...
1. They are aware of what RG has on his site but have heard nothing from Canon Japan.
2. He set up an appointment for me to talk to a senior tech because the problems are my fault because I am using the rear * button for focusing and according to them, you can't do that with the MkIII as you can with the 20D.
So by logical extension it is apparent, the fix of the fix must be the disabling of the rear focus button option.
Urghhhhh, every time I get off the phone with them I feel like screaming.
Jeff wrote:
Paul, are you sure you got all the "D" and "Ds" references above typed accurately? You compare a 1Ds MkIII to a 1D MkIIn, so I'm thinking maybe it should have been a "D"?
Yep, sorry. Too much abbreviation. All comparisons are between the 1DMkIIn, 1DMkIII and 1DsMkIII if that answers the questions. I'll fix.
Hrow wrote:
Just got off the phone with the friendly fellow from Canon that I have been speaking with on a regular basis (not being snide - he is very friendly) and...
1. They are aware of what RG has on his site but have heard nothing from Canon Japan.
2. He set up an appointment for me to talk to a senior tech because the problems are my fault because I am using the rear * button for focusing and according to them, you can't do that with the MkIII as you can with the 20D.
So by logical extension it is apparent, the fix of the fix must be the disabling of the rear focus button option.
Urghhhhh, every time I get off the phone with them I feel like screaming.
You have moved AF away from the AF-ON button to the * button? Hardly a problem as that is the way I shoot since my 2nd body is a 1D2N and it makes swapping back and forth easier.
Try to keep your patience Henry, it is the worst thing to hear from Canon that this is all your fault and you can't shoot with the 1D3 like you did with previous 1D series. Been there, done that, broken my headset!
I did think about calling Canon UK this morning but since Canon USA don't appear to know anything I can't imagine why Canon UK would. We are always the last to hear!
You have moved AF away from the AF-ON button to the * button? Hardly a problem as that is the way I shoot since my 2nd body is a 1D2N and it makes swapping back and forth easier.
Well, don't do it anymore because it doesn't work.
Well Shucks....I broke down and purchased a Mark III a couple of weeks ago, but haven't commented on its focusing abilities publicly as I wanted to run it through a few basketball games first. Now it looks like I jumped the gun...7 months after the product came out.
Anyways....I found the AF to be about like my Mark II when shooting basketball. However, I will say I like the look of the Mark III files better when it does hit the focus just right.
And of course I am using the * button for focusing, instead of the AF-ON button, so it would have the same button functions as my remaining Mark II.
At least I have a backup for when I send it to Virginia, or wherever, for the next fix....sigh.
I really think there should be some sackings in Canon senior management over this. They released a pro camera half cooked and they knew it. Although the impact to the bottom line won't be immediately obvious (due to cameras being only 25% of Canons business and pro DSLRs a small fraction of that), I think there has been considerable damage to Canon's reputation, that will play on the mind of consumers for many years to come. How many people will be early adopters for Mk IV I wonder?
andrewd01 wrote:
How many people will be early adopters for Mk IV I wonder?
You might get a surprise out of that. The early adoption urge is very strong.
However, we don't need to go into future at all. How many people are buying the 1DMkiii as well as 1DsMkiii right now as we speak ?
yeah I suppose you are right. Many people just buy on impulse without researching. I still stand by my comments that there needs to be a shake-up in Canon management so this doesn't happen again
From the RG article, "Canon's autofocus engineers have determined the root cause of the EOS-1D Mark III's warm/sunny autofocus problems." Warm and sunny is not your typical night soccer, or gym dungeon basketball game, or low light stage show. If your camera will not focus in low light mild temperatures, I wonder how this will help. I would have felt better had they said "we have found the problem with the AF system, and it impacts all areas of AF".
If you re-read RG's MKIIN vs the MKIII, his III never beat his IIN accept at night pole vaulting or something. I believe everyone who bought the MKIII expected it to out perform the IIN in all areas of AF. I hope Canon will make it so.
