michael49 wrote:
M Vers wrote
.. The problem with the 5D was always it's focus speed and accuracy when using peripheral points at wide apertures...this is where the 5D fell short of 'ideal'. Landscape, macro and portraiture can be, and for some is, done using 100% MF. Not only is AF speed/accuracy a downfall for the 5D but so is the AF point spread...or better worded 'cluster'. I feel the point many seem to be missing in regards to the 5DII's recycled AF system is the fact that it took three years to release a successor to the 5D, that's three years of technological advancement, yet the 5DII carried on a legacy a lot of 5D owners wanted to forget--it's AF system. Obviously there are those who can overlook this, but why shouldn't the upgrade have been a complete upgrade? Canon pissed in the coffee and while some don't mind it, it has left a very bitter taste in the mouths of many others. Agreed.
Many have suggested that the 1DmkIII's AF issues caused Canon to become "gun-shy" about putting a new AF in the 5DmkII. Does anyone here agree with this or do you think it was purely a marketing decison?
marketing, it's not like the 1dmkii AF system was not available.... who said they had to use the troubled MkIII's?