GeneO wrote:
I haven't had much problem with holding the focus once my 1d3 was setup properly. Once I acquire focus it stays on unless the motion is too erratic.
Hey, to use your jargon, no offense meant, but the only examples for that MkIII AF lock I've seen so far was by Mark Fadely (RC jet speeding against the background of some trees and bush.) That was impressive.
However, for all I know your MkIII might be as good as Mark's.
Care to share some of your own shots of that type ?
Well, thanks, but that is where the problem is :single shots hardly demonstrate AF servo lock.
The rippled water surface can be considered to be a "busy" background, I'd be happy even with one decent shot under those conditions, however, the background on the other you showed is not "busy" in my view.
You also seem to have had bird proximity, high contrast and probably low speed working for you very favourably on all of those shots.
I've shot with the MKIII and 40D for a total of two years now. My personal experience is the 40D and MKIII both have focus quirks compared to my old 20D which focus locked on better with small creatures or at a distance.
I'm wondering about the 7D myself, given they supposedly have a higher performance focus system in it. [that, alone may answer my theory that both the 40D and MKIII does have focus problems]. That was also a new focus system, which in theory if it was that great, why did they feel the need to waste money on a new focus system?
That aside, I love my MKIII, when it does focus it spoils you with pure beauty. It is a little different in colors, warmer, which I love for wildlife shooting. I am curious and interested in a 7D also, especially if it really is a true sport/BIF camera, which wasn't a huge consideration with the design of the MKIII and the 40D. All the adjustments are helpful, the 11 page 'help' focus accuracy user guide that Canon put out for the MKIII was a great effort on their part. Very time consuming effort.
I still get a large number of OOF shots in certain conditions. What I discovered was the MKIII does fabulous at close range focusing on a larger target, but it jumps focus easily, especially in aiservo on smaller targets, even in clear blue sky, which doesn't make sense. It appears to front or back focus at random, with no explanation. However, a longer lens with a larger focal area does quite well. I use the 300f4, and a teleconverter often. The MKIII is fabulous with teleconverters btw.
I live with it because I do love the camera, but a 7D as a second body is tempting indeed, bringing my file size almost double what the MKIII has, larger crop factor, 1.6 sensor, making my lens around 50mm longer. I am considering the 500mmf4, which is most responsive to the MKIII, but may try the 7D first, the 500mm being too heavy for my neck problems.
Thousands of photos here with the MKIII, the 40D prompted me to buy the MKIII because it was terrible with focus ability and especially with teleconverters. The question for me is the 7D's better focus system making it the killer camera for wildlife. http://netgarden.smugmug.com/
This is what I consider a sequence of fair difficulty for 1DMkIIN AF Servo. I say "fair" and not "high" because the mitigating factor was that the bird flew slowly. If that was a pijun/dove instead of a gull, then I'd consider it "high" difficulty on the camera's AF system.
The lens was 500 f/4.5L, handheld.
I fired 5 shots at it in AF servo. One went to the background, one had poor wing attitude and the third one was only marginally focused. Those I've discareded. I've kept these two.
The first image is full frame JPG unprocessed....the first image fired in the sequence.
The images #2 and #3 are somewhat processed crops.
I'd be very happy if 7D can let me do something similar. I hope it will, for a pretty good price too.
It just amazes me how people continue to slam the 1D Mark III when the majority of those people have never even held a Mark III in their hands, maybe these people should put up or shut up
PetKal wrote:
This is what I consider a sequence of fair difficulty for 1DMkIIN AF Servo. I say "fair" and not "high" because the mitigating factor was that the bird flew slowly. If that was a pijun/dove instead of a gull, then I'd consider it "high" difficulty on the camera's AF system.
The lens was 500 f/4.5L, handheld.
I fired 5 shots at it in AF servo. One went to the background, one had poor wing attitude and the third one was only marginally focused. Those I've discareded. I've kept these two.
The first image is full frame JPG unprocessed....the first image fired in the sequence.
The images #2 and #3 are somewhat processed crops.
I'd be very happy if 7D can let me do something similar. I hope it will, for a pretty good price too. ...Show more →
They are for practice (gulls, they are slow and predictable). Eagles don't move slow or predictably and close rocks and choppy water are more challenging than trees and grasses pretty far in the background. Look at the background in yours and mine. Yours background is a lot more OOF which means it is less likely to grab the focus. Sorry, not a good example.
Amazes me too, Ray - I've only briefly used a Mk III, but the AF was bloody fantastic.
There's just so much evidence out there that the Mk III is an excellent camera. Accepting that there are odd ones that don't behave, and that there are some situations where the AF might not behave as well as it does in others, it's still my dream camera; if the 7D doesn't pan out for some reason, I'll be having a Mk III...
keithreeder wrote:
Amazes me too, Ray - I've only briefly used a Mk III, but the AF was bloody fantastic.
There's just so much evidence out there that the Mk III is an excellent camera.
After a while it's hard to avoid the impression that there are people who simply don't want to have their preconceptions about the camera changed. In this sense one of the previous posters was correct: reputation has become reality. Eventually one is forced to conclude that it's not worth the effort to try to persuade them otherwise. It is, after all, their loss.
globalkiwi wrote:
After a while it's hard to avoid the impression that there are people who simply don't want to have their preconceptions about the camera changed. In this sense one of the previous posters was correct: reputation has become reality. Eventually one is forced to conclude that it's not worth the effort to try to persuade them otherwise. It is, after all, their loss.
This is exactly why Canon will most likely release the '1DIV' by the end of the year--there are simply too many people out there, both professionals and amateurs alike, who have tarnished preconceived notions about the 1DIII. No matter how many people have success with this camera those who remain in disbelief will, in all probability, never own one. While I agree it is their loss I can't blame them for feeling the way they do.
And let's not forget, these cameras aren't cheap so fiscal conservatism plays a role in reproducing preconception too. It will be interesting to see whether Canon does persevere with the III or chooses to introduce a new model fairly soon (if the 7D delivers, then a new 1 series could be an interesting beast). That said, one thing I think we can all agree upon is that it would be unwise for Canon to rush a new 1 series to market before it's been thoroughly tested.
I'd buy a late serial 1D III for $2K from a reputable seller, to replace my 1D II, but would not pay more. Too me it's too late in the game for the 1D III to pay more than this. It sort of sucks it got the crap lcd, no udma, first gen lv, and only 10MP. Most of what is in the 1D III should have been in the 1D IIn IMO.
Now the 7D has come along I'd be more than happy to run a 7D + 1D II combo for my wildlife/sports/action until the 1D IV is released and proven.
Well I guess people are more willing to beta test a 7D with new AF than a new 1D series given the cost difference it could be that the 7D AF is a beta test for the 1D4 I suppose.
I'm not buying a 7D straight away either. I'll wait a month or two even it it's fine from the get go. I need for software other than DPP to be updated to support it's RAW files. The thought of using DPP is distressing.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I'm not buying a 7D straight away either. I'll wait a month or two even it it's fine from the get go.
Same here. I'm also not going to buy the 100/2.8 IS right away because I still remember the problems with the first batches of the 24-105 IS and 70-300 IS.
