p.2 #1 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Daan I'm annoyed because I wanted to update my 1D II the day the 1D III shipped but I always hold off on new releases. I'm glad I did and I have every right to be annoyed when I'm thinking of slapping down that sort of money. My 1D II is now 4 yo and I would like to update it and IMO their is still no suitable replacement.
I'd love to know why an engineer thought giving an AF confirmation for an OOF shot was a good idea. Is that in the manual. Apart from this quirk, nothing you said is new. In the chimney example I'd never place the AF point over the centre of the dark brickwork, always on the edge and would not trust the beep if placed elsewhere.
Daan as long as your happy with your camera that's all that matters....Show more →
Whayne, I understand your frustration. I have had my share of it too. Maybe to you the chimney example presented nothing new... so why such a strong reaction in the first place? Anyway, coming from a 5D, to me it is new. Maybe I am lucky not coming from a D2 cam, so I don't carry all that history with me. So maybe for me it is easier to be openminded to the mkIII AF. I am pretty happy with my 1Ds3 and have no regrets purchasing one. I hope you will find a suitable upgrade cam soon
p.2 #2 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
dhphoto wrote:
I come from an era when, believe it or not, we had to do our own focusing. We even sometimes had to find our own exposure.
I know that these systems can fail and I'm a a pro and I can't afford out of focus pictures on a job.
Bothers you, fine. Doesn't bother me in the slightest, because I know how to use my gear without having my hand held.
No AF on any camera is 100% perfect all the time, the Canon system is generally very good, but it can fail in certain circumstances and at or near infifnity is one of them if the AF doesn't have anything contrasty to work from.
Perhaps YOUR 1D3 or 1Ds3 is "generally very good," but many others...including mine are not even close to that description...and it has precisely NOTHING to do with technique or difficult targets...or even infinity focus. Your post is a perfect example of why Canon feels little compulsion to improve on their mistakes. They are comforted that there is an army of excuse-makers and blow-hards who are ever-ready to blame the user when gear clearly fails to perform to specifications. If that REALLY "doesn't bother you in the slightest" then why on Earth would you spend money for supposedly world-class AF that you don't require? Surely the "era from which your superior skills come" leaves you with no need for such foolish things as solid performing AF.
A truly alarming post you've made here, illustrating once again why we're stuck with whatever the heck Canon dishes out.
p.2 #4 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
No, I'm not alarmed, but I am very disappointed.
I could make very good use of the 1D III's improved high iso performance for my night sports shooting under poor light. I'm not a pro but I'm willing to part with the funds to obtain the files the MK III produces. But I shoot bursts at subjects moving at speed in youth field sports, often unpredictably and at difficult angles in tough light, pretty much the kind of shooting where the MK III's AF is weakest, if you believe RG. So I'm on the fence, big time.
I'd love to move up from my 1D IIN for the Mk III's high iso performance. At 3200 the MK IIN can be ratty, even with NI or NN in post. Mk III is clearly a stop better in that regard. But the Mk III I tried (only one) produced consistently large percentages of OOF shots in bursts when I tested it. That kind of error rate doesn't cut it for me.
I prefer not to rail against canon, a la markuson. That's just my style. But then I guess I'm a duffer stuck with old tech, if dhphoto is right. I sure wasn't feeling like a duffer when I moved to a MK IIN from my Mk II, and likewise when I moved from my 1D classic to a 1D Mk II.
So I'm kinda back to Daan's original question. Can anyone articulate a clear and simple workaround for these focus anomalies, or whatever term you wish to use, for those of us moving from earlier generation Canon AF tech? I'd really appreciate the pro view, if anyone is able/willing to share.
p.2 #6 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
Mike Tuomey wrote:
No, I'm not alarmed, but I am very disappointed.
I could make very good use of the 1D III's improved high iso performance for my night sports shooting under poor light. I'm not a pro but I'm willing to part with the funds to obtain the files the MK III produces. But I shoot bursts at subjects moving at speed in youth field sports, often unpredictably and at difficult angles in tough light, pretty much the kind of shooting where the MK III's AF is weakest, if you believe RG. So I'm on the fence, big time.
I'd love to move up from my 1D IIN for the Mk III's high iso performance. At 3200 the MK IIN can be ratty, even with NI or NN in post. Mk III is clearly a stop better in that regard. But the Mk III I tried (only one) produced consistently large percentages of OOF shots in bursts when I tested it. That kind of error rate doesn't cut it for me.
I prefer not to rail against canon, a la markuson. That's just my style. But then I guess I'm a duffer stuck with old tech, if dhphoto is right. I sure wasn't feeling like a duffer when I moved to a MK IIN from my Mk II, and likewise when I moved from my 1D classic to a 1D Mk II.
So I'm kinda back to Daan's original question. Can anyone articulate a clear and simple workaround for these focus anomalies, or whatever term you wish to use, for those of us moving from earlier generation Canon AF tech? I'd really appreciate the pro view, if anyone is able/willing to share.
That actually wasn't railing against Canon. It was railing against attitudes that accept the unacceptable...and attitudes that assume the only severe problems are related to and caused by experience. It is assumptive, arrogant, ill-informed and simply incorrect.
p.2 #7 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
Markuson wrote:
That actually wasn't railing against Canon. It was railing against attitudes that accept the unacceptable...and attitudes that assume the only severe problems are related to and caused by experience. It is assumptive, arrogant, ill-informed and simply incorrect.
You are fairly new here in terms of postings and perhaps might want to rethink the tone of your replies if you want to hang around.
Personally speaking (and one can only speak personally) I haven't had cause to question the performance of my cameras. That DOESN'T make me wrong.
The fact that I don't immediately agree with your pejorative postings doesn't make me wrong either, just irritated.
p.2 #8 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
Daan B wrote:
Whayne, I understand your frustration. I have had my share of it too. Maybe to you the chimney example presented nothing new... so why such a strong reaction in the first place? Anyway, coming from a 5D, to me it is new. Maybe I am lucky not coming from a D2 cam, so I don't carry all that history with me. So maybe for me it is easier to be openminded to the mkIII AF. I am pretty happy with my 1Ds3 and have no regrets purchasing one. I hope you will find a suitable upgrade cam soon
Daan I jumped the gun a bit as I quickly homed in on the point about the AF confirmation beep even when not focused. I just saw this as another bad result for a mk III. I didn't realise this was your first camera with the 45pt AF system - I've been using it since 2002 starting with the EOS 3.
p.2 #9 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
Markuson wrote:
That actually wasn't railing against Canon. It was railing against attitudes that accept the unacceptable...and attitudes that assume the only severe problems are related to and caused by experience. It is assumptive, arrogant, ill-informed and simply incorrect.
Markuson, you have made your point... a fair number of times already. Would you be so kind to stop poisoning this thread with your personal attacks on everybody that doesn't share your view? It isn't very helpful
Mike Tuomey wrote:
I'm kinda back to Daan's original question. Can anyone articulate a clear and simple workaround for these focus anomalies, or whatever term you wish to use, for those of us moving from earlier generation Canon AF tech? I'd really appreciate the pro view, if anyone is able/willing to share.
Mike, I agree with you... Can we go back to the content and concentrate on the question how to deal with the weaknesses in the mkIII's AF... Tips & tricks please
p.2 #10 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
dhphoto wrote:
You are fairly new here in terms of postings and perhaps might want to rethink the tone of your replies if you want to hang around.
Personally speaking (and one can only speak personally) I haven't had cause to question the performance of my cameras. That DOESN'T make me wrong.
The fact that I don't immediately agree with your pejorative postings doesn't make me wrong either, just irritated.
I understand. Let me give you a little history so I'm not such a stranger.
I was one of the first to identify 1D3 AF issues personally with Canon Irvine's #1 tech from Japan. I have since endured COUNTLESS folks who...since day ONE...have denied (along with Canon) the existence of the issue. In EVERY single instance, I have been shown to be on the correct side of the issue, despite the endless denials of people like you...ever since last May/June. I've grown tired of it, and my ire here is the result.
I STILL have a broken 1D3 and many many others do as well. Every time people start singing the same old "experience" denials, it only adds to Canon's propensity to deny.
--They denied there was an issue from the very beginning...
Yet, they finally issued a firmware "fix" last July.
--I immediately discovered that the firmware "improvement" was a bust.
--Denials continued...but...it slowly became clear to others there was a problem still.
Then once again...
--Canon said nothing for a long time.
Then...
--Canon announced the very expensive (for them) "Mirror Fix."
BUT... Once again...
--I clearly noted that it still was not fixed.
--More denials and slams on me followed...but then...
--RG again weighed in and his finding agreed with me completely once again.
--Canon remained silent, and failed to deliver their promised response to RG's report.
--Finally, Canon AGAIN issued a firmware attempt (1.2.3) to "fix" what they...once again...had continually denied was not broken.
--I noted continued problems.
--More denials
--RG finally did his most extensive testing to date...once again confirming what I has said all along.
--No response yet from Canon.
Are you seeing a pattern here??
Canon deny everything until they perceive they are forced to act.
Canon remains in denial...and people such as yourself prop up their denials.....one......more..............time.
I think you (those of your mindset) might want to consider that I am batting 1000, here, before you assume that I'm wrong. I haven't been wrong yet...even though hundreds like you have wrongly denied the issue in the face of continual and unsuccessful attempts to "fix" what supposedly was never broken (if you take the repeated denials at face value).
I am sorry that you had to field the brunt of my frustration. I'm sure it seemed personal, but I shouldn't have made it sound that way. The truth is that my reaction was not intended at you as a singular figure, but as a representation to the endless denials that have plagued and compounded the distinct LACK of urgency and honesty Canon has shown in this on-going issue.
Markuson
Edited by Markuson on Aug 15, 2008 at 04:33 AM GMT
p.2 #11 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Daan I jumped the gun a bit as I quickly homed in on the point about the AF confirmation beep even when not focused. I just saw this as another bad result for a mk III. I didn't realise this was your first camera with the 45pt AF system - I've been using it since 2002 starting with the EOS 3.
Yep, the Canon 5D was the first Canon camera I have ever owned... Before that I have always been a Nikon-guy
I did play around a little with the EOS 3 before I bought a 1Ds3 though. So the Canon 45pt AF system wasn't entirely new to me. But all that doesn't matter, since the mkIII AF is newly designed too.
I guess if you are used to doing things a certain way since 2002, it must be hard to adapt to a new way of doing things. But what if this is it? What are you going to do if Canon doesn't change the general design of the mkIII AF and implements it (with maybe some small adjustments) in the mkIV?
p.2 #12 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
Those that truly have bad examples of the 1d/1DS Mark III have every right to be dissappointed----and angry if the focus issue is unresolved. More than likely it does point out a QC issue within Canon that I do hope they address. My sense is that yet another firmware update will bring a bit more satisfaction to the issue.
That being said, I do wonder how many complaints of "focus" issues are from users that have only picked up the Mark III, and not put it into use more than a few times. I don't want to dilute the significance of any company not addressing faulty product issues, but user error does come into play. I would also think that there are fewer 1Ds Mark III complaints coming from photographers like me who shoot primarily in the studio doing commerical and portrait work and only occasional sports, than 1D Mark III users (sports/wildlife) who are more likely to be placed in conditions more susteptible to focusing issues.
Don't confuse an obvious shortcoming of Canon's lack of quality control with becoming more familiar and shooting with a particular camera body. (And please----no intentions here at all aimed at accusing anyone in this thread of not knowing how to use their Mark III).
Those that have good examples (like me) of the Mark III are lucky, but don't rest easy. Will we all be so confident to open our wallets next time when the inevitable Mark IV is released?
p.2 #13 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
FWIW
I redid the shots I posted in the OP using the following methods:
1) focus in the middle of the chimney using One Shot with the following C.Fn settings:
C.FnIII-8-0 (disable AF point expansion): still OOF
C.FnIII-8-1 (enable AF point expansion L/R): still OOF
C.FnIII-8-2 (enable AF point selection area): still OOF
2) focus in the middle of the chimney using AI Servo with the following C.Fn settings:
C.FnIII-8-0 (disable AF point expansion): still OOF
C.FnIII-8-1 (enable AF point expansion L/R): still OOF
C.FnIII-8-2 (enable AF point selection area): still OOF
3) focus on the edge of the chimney using One Shot with the following C.Fn settings:
C.FnIII-8-0 (disable AF point expansion): IN FOCUS
C.FnIII-8-1 (enable AF point expansion L/R): Some in focus / some oof
C.FnIII-8-2 (enable AF point selection area): still OOF
4) focus on the edge of the chimney using AI Servo with the following C.Fn settings:
C.FnIII-8-0 (disable AF point expansion): IN FOCUS
C.FnIII-8-1 (enable AF point expansion L/R): IN FOCUS
C.FnIII-8-2 (enable AF point selection area): still OOF
At shorter distances (like 10 meters/ 30 feet and less) the AF is doing fine when the AF point is placed over/on top of the subject. With longer shooting distances (infinity) the only reliable way to get good focus is to aim for edges, rather than placing an AF point over/on top of the subject. The effect of enabling AF point expansion when focusing at longer distances with both aiming tactics (placing the AF point over/on top of the subject and placing the AF point over the edge of a subject) and using both One Shot and AI Servo is nihil (except for enabling L/R expansion in AI Servo - but this seems to have little benefit over disabling AF point expansion). YMMV
p.2 #14 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
Markuson wrote:
I understand. Let me give you a little history so I'm not such a stranger.
I was one of the first to identify 1D3 AF issues personally with Canon Irvine's #1 tech from Japan. I have since endured COUNTLESS folks who...since day ONE...have denied (along with Canon) the existence of the issue. In EVERY single instance, I have been shown to be on the correct side of the issue, despite the endless denials of people like you...ever since last May/June. I've grown tired of it, and my ire here is the result.
I STILL have a broken 1D3 and many many others do as well. Every time people start singing the same old "experience" denials, it only adds to Canon's propensity to deny.
--They denied there was an issue from the very beginning...
Yet, they finally issued a firmware "fix" last July.
--I immediately discovered that the firmware "improvement" was a bust.
--Denials continued...but...it slowly became clear to others there was a problem still.
Then once again...
--Canon said nothing for a long time.
Then...
--Canon announced the very expensive (for them) "Mirror Fix."
BUT... Once again...
--I clearly noted that it still was not fixed.
--More denials and slams on me followed...but then...
--RG again weighed in and his finding agreed with me completely once again.
--Canon remained silent, and failed to deliver their promised response to RG's report.
--Finally, Canon AGAIN issued a firmware attempt (1.2.3) to "fix" what they...once again...had continually denied was not broken.
--I noted continued problems.
--More denials
--RG finally did his most extensive testing to date...once again confirming what I has said all along.
--No response yet from Canon.
Are you seeing a pattern here??
Canon deny everything until they perceive they are forced to act.
Canon remains in denial...and people such as yourself prop up their denials.....one......more..............time.
I think you (those of your mindset) might want to consider that I am batting 1000, here, before you assume that I'm wrong. I haven't been wrong yet...even though hundreds like you have wrongly denied the issue in the face of continual and unsuccessful attempts to "fix" what supposedly was never broken (if you take the repeated denials at face value).
I am sorry that you had to field the brunt of my frustration. I'm sure it seemed personal, but I shouldn't have made it sound that way. The truth is that my reaction was not intended at you as a singular figure, but as a representation to the endless denials that have plagued and compounded the distinct LACK of urgency and honesty Canon has shown in this on-going issue.
Markuson
Edited by Markuson on Aug 15, 2008 at 04:33 AM GMT...Show more →
You have a lot of nerve!! I guess you are the self proclaimed God of Photography and no one else here knows what there doing. We are just beginners and we have no clue what a sharp in focus photo is. Maybe the problem is we who are in denial don’t have unrealistic expectations, or we have adapted to the focus of the MK III.
p.2 #15 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
Very informative posts Daan. I agree that focusing on the edges for distance shots is best.
- The downside to disabling AF point expansion is the ability to track moving objects as well.
- At 2.8 and lower (guess it depends) the downside to having to focus on an edge is that the focus isn't razor sharp on the actual desired focal point.
If I know what the shot is I can find a way to take it in focus. The problem is most of the shots I take are not setups. Even still I am able to get a good keeper rate and the quality of the shots is outstanding.
p.2 #16 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
I am not sure if this is the case but it seems like there is a trade off for each CFn change.
If I want more reliable focus I lose speed in obtaining initial focus and in tracking and vice versa.
I am wondering if this is just true in general with the current technology. I haven't used the Nikon D3 series to see if they have been able to deliver the best of both worlds. It does seem though it is this way for Canon, even to the point of the MK2 vs the MK3.
p.2 #17 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
I think it is important to realize that Daan is using a 1DsMkIII and not a 1DMkIII. Having owned both and multiple copies of the 1DMkIII I can tell you from experience that there is a huge difference in the AF performance between the two. It is important not lump them together.
For the vast majority of my rather eclectic shooting, the 1DsMkIII is dead on. I would like to see better low contrast performance and in large part, that is the point of this post. Daan has found what I have as well, that certain low contrast targets can fool the system. I would prefer that that wasn't the case but that is a problem that is both historical and shared by Nikon. Differences between the two system are of degree not of kind.
We can bitch and moan about it all we like and get OOF pictures or we can adjust the way we work to better match the strengths of the camera and get in focus pictures. I think that was all he was suggesting and I think he has a very valid point.
PS. My comments apply to the 1DsMkIII only. The AF on the 1DMkIII just totally sucked on the three bodies I had and I still feel that numerous members of the Canon management team should be tossed from the roof for the way they treated their customers.
p.2 #18 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
Pixel Perfect wrote:
In the chimney example I'd never place the AF point over the centre of the dark brickwork, always on the edge and would not trust the beep if placed elsewhere.
I agree with Pixel Perfect on this. AF sensors are very tiny and I doubt they have enough resolution / sensitivity to distinguish between the dark bricks & dark mortar. Worse yet, it's a dark subject with a bright background. My 1Ds and 1Ds2 would have been hit or miss under those circumstances too.
p.2 #19 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
HROW: That is interesting that there is a difference because in theory the systems are the same. I wonder if simply having 2x the resolution means that it is able to evaluate more pixels to run through the algorithms or if there are some unreleased changes we don't know about?
p.2 #20 · 1Ds3 AF: learning to understand how it works
Daan, could it be that because the AF-sensors of the 5D are larger, chances are bigger that an AF-sensor will be on an edge and therefore the 5D seems to perform better? (IIRC, the AF-sensors are larger than outlined in the viewfinder)
??