@Gochugogi - you are correct and I should have mentioned the entry level DSLR's AF system.
My only excuse is that I wanted the discussion to centre around my interests which are the prosumer, ID and 5D body types. Selfish...sorry.
Assuming the rumoured 19 pt AF system for the mythical 5DII is true. Would you think that its array would be similar to the 19 selectable points in the 1D series bodies
Different need I guess. I am like the OP: AF first, big time.
f/4 doesn't cut it for me. If I buy fast lenses I need capable AF. I am holding on buying faster lenses because of that, and went MF because my 10D's AF sucks. Didn't move 20D/30D/40D because of it. Didn't go 1DMkIII because of it (my mistake though!)
So, no need for 51 points. Few well spread f/2.8 cross type and I'm in
I wouldn't presume to speak for pros, but as a hobbyist I think it would be adequate and desirable to have five basic cross-type AF sensor points of which you could select any one or more - the center and the thirds intersections; and four additional points of which you could select zero or more - each halfway between a thirds intersection and its corner. Can any of you envision that not being sufficient? Heck, I could live without the outer corner points, even.
orangefirefish wrote:
Yup- that was an improvement, however, it was still clunky to shift from the inner to the outer in two different steps.
You can choose to manouvre the outer circle or the inner circle or all of the 19 AF points at once with the joystick. If you choose the latter, no clunky two step shifting is involved. Just push the joystick to any of the 19 AF points you want to select
ozhop wrote:
The problems with Canon's new 45 pt AF system via the 1DmkIII and 1DsmkIII have been well documented.
If I remember correctly the majority of tests done by Rob Galbraith were done with only one (the center) AF point active. And he said that the 1DMkIII still outperforms the 40D by a large margin.
Perhaps people who use both a 1DMkIII and a 40D or 5D can confirm if the AF on the MkIII is significantly better than the others even when using center AF only?
If so then it seems that the difference between "prosumer" AF and "pro" AF has very little to do with the number of AF points. There must be some other difference in the sensor and/or processing then. Whatever this difference is, Canon can either decide to include or not include this technology in the "prosumer" models.
ozhop wrote:
I appreciate that not all people place the same weight on an AF system when it comes to selection of a particular body or camera system. Some however do.
I would believe that it would take some considerable time to develop an Autofocus system. I say this without any real knowledge to support this claim
Canon's AF sytem seems to fall into 2 catagories.
1. Prosumer 9 point, now all cross type
2. Pro 45 point - with several configurations.
The 50D's reported superior AF to that of the 40D seems to be explained by the faster Digic IV processor so there is no real development in the system.
The problems with Canon's new 45 pt AF system via the 1DmkIII and 1DsmkIII have been well documented. I would believe that Canon will have to have a different pro AF system to distance the next 1D from the mkIII's.
The leaked/rumoured specs of the 5DII suggest a 19 pt AF system. Is this a totally new system. Is it the 9 pt with invisible points similar to the 5D's invisible points.
I would be interested in hearing people's thoughts/speculation on Canon's need for a revised AF system and what they would like to see.
I just purchased a Mark III and have found the AF to be a major improvement over the 1D Mark II's I've been using for years. Maybe I got lucky by waiting or just was fortunate to have received one that was manufactured correctly with the right parts.
I was very careful and rented two different bodies for winter sports and both seemed to work flawlessly...indoors for hockey, basketball and gymnastics...but not under the outdoor conditions that were causing "much-documented focus problems" for Rob Galbraith and other users..
My local dealer called Wednesday to say the camera was in and I rushed over with check in hand, took it back to the studio, unpacked it, charged the batteries and headed out to my first assignment of tennis, junior high football and volleyball.
This camera takes some getting used to since the controls are different than other previous Mark II's and I did get a few OOF's until I figured out that this thing is fast...faster than I'm used to and the AF is lighting quick.
I'm not discounting the problems other shooters experienced with this camera because of quality control or assembly issues ...but I was amazed at how much more responsive the Mark III is than the previous generation of Series One bodies under daylight conditions with contrasty, front-lit uniforms and jerseys. It does take some getting used to!
I shot 6 youth football games under the problem conditions RG reported on Saturday afternoon and evening in 90 degree heat with bright sunshine and some serious backlighting and the camera focused perfect...much better than my Mark II's did last year under the same conditions.
Also...I noticed the lowlight AF performance was much improved during a Friday night football game under poor lighting conditions...ISO 6400, f/2.8 at 1/500. Many of the shots I got Friday night wouldn't have been possible with a Mark II.
There is a learning curve with any new camera body and the Mark III will lock on focus so fast with an EF 300 f/2.8 that you'd better be sure the center focus point is exactly where you want it to be...or you'll get more out-of-focus shots than previous Canon pro bodies.
If Canon does improve the AF system with the next generation Mark IV, it will be some camera.
godfather wrote:
There should not be any dust on the sensor/viewfinder on a $3k camera. Lenses should not have to been sent in for calibration.
I've never had any dust on the sensor or viewfinder, not even with a <$1k€ camera. I've never needed to send any lens in for calibration, either.
But then again, here in Finland, you cannot return equipment to the shop, working or not. If it is not working, then you use Canon service to get it fixed (and that also works well, based on my experience). Thus, all equipment that I buy from the shop as new, is new and was packed in the factory.
Unlike in the US, where I am pretty certain that returned equipment will be sold as new. I am basing this on the large number of stories of returning equipment, either because it is faulty or you just don't like it, and the low number of refurbished or returned equipment being sold. I don't really believe that when margins are tight, shops would return all returned merchandise back to the factory. If it looks like it could be sold as new, then it will.
So you might be barking at the wrong tree - it's not Canon who is responsible for the situation over there.
