I did read most of the white paper, and Canon say this about the AF. (Summary from me, if you like to read it all you have the link)
The two cameras share the same AF Sensor.
The AI SERVO AF algorithm has been optimized to match the continuous shooting speed of the 1Ds3. (so I suppose it's optimized different in the 1D3)
Also, due to the full-frame CMOS sensor,
the Area AF coverage with respect to the viewfinder is slightly smaller than with the EOS-1D Mark III.
Everything else is the same..........
Lars Johnsson wrote:
I did read most of the white paper, and Canon say this about the AF. (Summary from me, if you like to read it all you have the link)
The two cameras share the same AF Sensor.
The AI SERVO AF algorithm has been optimized to match the continuous shooting speed of the 1Ds3. (so I suppose it's optimized different in the 1D3)
Also, due to the full-frame CMOS sensor,
the Area AF coverage with respect to the viewfinder is slightly smaller than with the EOS-1D Mark III.
Everything else is the same..........
Didn't you read the discussion on the previous page (5)
Edited on Jul 08, 2008 at 11:19 AM
Jul 08, 2008 at 11:18 AM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
No I didn't. In this forum there are new threads and polls about the AF every day. And after one year of reading these threads, I must admit that I'm not really interested that much anymore.
Especially when I have both bodies and the AF work really good in both.
Lars Johnsson wrote:
No I didn't. In this forum there are new threads and polls about the AF every day. And after one year of reading these threads, I must admit that I'm not really interested that much anymore.
Especially when I have both bodies and the AF work really good in both.
then why post here ?
Jul 08, 2008 at 11:40 AM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
There is 132 posts in thid thread 110 posts in the other AF thread. And 1404 posts in Jeffs AF thread. All on the first page. And I didn't have time spending ten hours reading all those posts
And I have made about 17000 posts more than you, so it's funny when you ask why I post here
Jeff wrote:
Move on to what? I need a sports camera, and I need a D300-like FF camera, one that is not the 5D. The 1D MkIII is the camera that I need in my bag, and Canon does not currently make the full-frame camera that is its complementary. The MkIIn won't do it after experiencing files from the MkIII.
My only option at this point would be to dump Canon all together, and move into the unknown realm of Nikon. Some of my future lenses (which I currently REFUSE to buy) would be cost-prohibitive on the Nikon side.
Yes, I'm between a rock and a hard place. Not sure which I prefer....Show more →
If Nikon is too expensive, your only other choice is the 1DMk2. That's a bitter pill for sure, but if you A) need a high FPS camera, B) Can't use the 1DMk3, and C) Can't use Nikon, there's really no other choice until Canon puts out a 1DMk3 refresh.
Which begs the question: would you buy a "1DMk3N", given your experience with the 1DMk3?
I've seen a number of people say they will never be an early adopter of a "New & Improved" camera again, after the MarkIII fiasco.
Some have said they will never buy another Canon again after the MarkIII.
I bought the MarkIII right away, it's one of the early 504 serial numbers. Next time? I'll probably wait for some reports from "the street" before jumping.
p.7 #10 · This frickin' 1D MkIII just ain't right!
Yakim Peled wrote:
The 1Ds Mk III and 1D Mk III share the same focus mechanism. In light of this one has to wonder how one is misbehaving so bad while the other is behaving so well.
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
They both share the same AF system, but the AF algorithms are different. AF algorithm is pixel dependent.
To all with 1D Mark III problems, do the following and report back here:
Use tripod, if possible, and shoot stationary contrasty subject under good/perfect light with:
1. AI Servo AF at 10 and 8 fps, respectively.
2. AF at 10 and 8 fps, respectively.
3. Manual focus at 10 and 8 fps, respectively.
p.7 #11 · This frickin' 1D MkIII just ain't right!
Canon 10D wrote:
...
To all with 1D Mark III problems, do the following and report back here:
Use tripod, if possible, and shoot stationary contrasty subject under good/perfect light with:
1. AI Servo AF at 10 and 8 fps, respectively.
2. AF at 10 and 8 fps, respectively.
3. Manual focus at 10 and 8 fps, respectively.
Since you keep posting this in various threads about 1DIII problems, may I ask you to clarify part two?
Are you asking that we shoot some frames in AF single shot mode, to check for any difference between that and continuous AF?
I think I will actually do a test like this, because one thing I've never tried is shooting a burst of a stationary subject at high fps.
Certainly, in manual focus, there should be no variation from frame to frame.
In servo, I wouldn't be surprised to find some focus movement between frames, since the AF will be "taking a reading" each time.
In single shot AF, the focus should in theory not change any more than in manual focus.
If there is any "ghosting" or other such phenomenon caused by movement of the AA filter, gremlins, or whatever,
it might have it's big chance to show up (I haven't noticed such a problem; blue dot MkIII).
p.7 #12 · This frickin' 1D MkIII just ain't right!
Photon wrote:
Since you keep posting this in various threads about 1DIII problems, may I ask you to clarify part two?
Are you asking that we shoot some frames in AF single shot mode, to check for any difference between that and continuous AF?
Hi Photon,
No, just do AF (non AI Servo) continuous mode at 10, then 8 fps for #2.
p.7 #14 · This frickin' 1D MkIII just ain't right!
I made a reference to the following in a previous post but very few people picked up on it, so here it is again:
I had an interesting conversation with a Canon Service supervisor (June 27th) about the DMkIII issues. (He seemed to be a very well informed from a technical point of view, i.e. this was no kid).
He told me that they have discovered that part of the focus issue is caused by a pin covered with a rubber grommet that limits the travel of the mirror (not sure if he meant the principle mirror, or the second one which is used the by focus system). Anyways, he says that they have found that the grommet changes shape under heat and stress (i.e. rapid fire high fps) and that this minimal change in shape is enough to throw off the focus. Now what's weird is that although it kind of makes sense, I haven't seen any mention of this anywhere by anyone.
The second issue deals with the AI algorithm; he says that they find it is reliable so long as the object being tracked doesn't change speed or direction since all the camera is doing is guessing where the next focus point will be in a constant trajectory. As an example he says that certain sports photographers covering events like boxing, soccer, etc, are giving up on autofocus altogether and doing it the old fashioned way.
Grant it, some of what he says makes sense, but when I study the OP's images I think we're looking at blur, not OOF...I'll continue my discussion with the gentleman when I go back to pick up one of my 40D's which I sent in for a checkup and calibration (No, I chickened out from getting a III and got two 40D's instead...but my business partner has an Aug07 copy of the III and has zero focus issues).
p.7 #15 · This frickin' 1D MkIII just ain't right!
Chris Tylko wrote:
I made a reference to the following in a previous post but very few people picked up on it, so here it is again:
I had an interesting conversation with a Canon Service supervisor (June 27th) about the DMkIII issues. (He seemed to be a very well informed from a technical point of view, i.e. this was no kid).
The second issue deals with the AI algorithm; he says that they find it is reliable so long as the object being tracked doesn't change speed or direction since all the camera is doing is guessing where the next focus point will be in a constant trajectory. As an example he says that certain sports photographers covering events like boxing, soccer, etc, are giving up on autofocus altogether and doing it the old fashioned way.....
I don't know why MkIII sports photogs would have to give up using AF when it seemed to work fine with the MkII and MkIIn. On the algorithm issue, is he saying that Canon is discounting Galbraith's findings that the body has problems when tracking an oncoming runner?
A better question might be "When are you going to fix the darn thing? Or do you think it's fixed already?"
p.7 #16 · This frickin' 1D MkIII just ain't right!
In between two studio sessions, I set up a quick little test. I used an artificial flower arrangement, a mix of tungsten and fluorescent light, a bit of back light. Focusing point was off center, and was carefully placed on an edge (with other edges nearby in the background and purposely lit a little brighter). I used the 135L wide open at f/2 (on the 1DMkIII). I did bursts at 10fps in servo AF, single AF, and MF. All of the shots showed perfect focus, with not the slightest shift nor any change in the appearance of the transitions to OOF areas.
None of this was surprising to me, other than the complete stability of the servo AF results. I also don't think it necessarily has any bearing on any problems that some photographers are having in the field, but if I were having persistent problems I think a test like this might be a good "elimination" to perform. A rock solid tripod at least means no changes in camera to subject distance and no changes in positioning of the AF point on the subject.
Now if I only had a 300/2.8 and a willing runner...
Canon 10D wrote:
Hi Photon,
No, just do AF (non AI Servo) continuous mode at 10, then 8 fps for #2.
p.7 #17 · This frickin' 1D MkIII just ain't right!
Photon, thanks for sharing your test. Does your 1D Mark III experience any "ghosting" as seen by Jeff and others when out in the field?
Photon wrote:
In between two studio sessions, I set up a quick little test. I used an artificial flower arrangement, a mix of tungsten and fluorescent light, a bit of back light. Focusing point was off center, and was carefully placed on an edge (with other edges nearby in the background and purposely lit a little brighter). I used the 135L wide open at f/2 (on the 1DMkIII). I did bursts at 10fps in servo AF, single AF, and MF. All of the shots showed perfect focus, with not the slightest shift nor any change in the appearance of the transitions to OOF areas.
None of this was surprising to me, other than the complete stability of the servo AF results. I also don't think it necessarily has any bearing on any problems that some photographers are having in the field, but if I were having persistent problems I think a test like this might be a good "elimination" to perform. A rock solid tripod at least means no changes in camera to subject distance and no changes in positioning of the AF point on the subject.
Now if I only had a 300/2.8 and a willing runner... ...Show more →
p.7 #20 · This frickin' 1D MkIII just ain't right!
CKrueger wrote:
Which begs the question: would you buy a "1DMk3N", given your experience with the 1DMk3?
I'm not certain that I would, although I'd certainly accept one in exchange for this camera I've got now.
Chris Tylko wrote:
I made a reference to the following in a previous post but very few people picked up on it, so here it is again:
"I had an interesting conversation with a Canon Service supervisor (June 27th) about the DMkIII issues. (He seemed to be a very well informed from a technical point of view, i.e. this was no kid).
He told me that they have discovered that part of the focus issue is caused by a pin covered with a rubber grommet that limits the travel of the mirror (not sure if he meant the principle mirror, or the second one which is used the by focus system). Anyways, he says that they have found that the grommet changes shape under heat and stress (i.e. rapid fire high fps) and that this minimal change in shape is enough to throw off the focus. Now what's weird is that although it kind of makes sense, I haven't seen any mention of this anywhere by anyone..." ...Show more →
I'm not sure what we're supposed to 'pick up on' here. Your 'non-kid' service adviser simply describes the well-known submirror fix using different terms than is typical. Nothing new there.
?
110 posts in the other AF thread. And 1404 posts in Jeffs AF thread. All on the first page. And I didn't have time spending ten hours reading all those posts