willis wrote:
I wouldn't dispute there have been plenty of 1DIIIs with problems but for the past 18 months, opinion from current owners seems to suggest that a large majority of shooters seem very satisfied with it.
I have the same impression as you but what frightens me is that it is only a large majority. I - personally - wouldn't risk thousands of my hard earned money on a camera that not all are happy. For that kind of money and for that status (i.e. pro cam) I expect it to be bloody perfect at all shooting conditions and for all shooters.
I agree with you, Mike. Mine does have similar problems of yours. But even in single point/ one shot I can get 8 out of 10 shots misfocused, like you said even still shots. It's frustrating, like you said, even a bird on a dang fence. All but one of the people I know who have the 500f4 claim to have no problems with focus. So my comment came from that. Although I know one wildlife shooter that gave up on the MKIII, and she uses the 500f4. My conclusion is there wasn't much input on that 'new' 40D/50D/MKIII auto focus design as far as biffers or sports shooters, and why else would they come up with a new autofocus system now with the 7D, if it wasn't needed?
I would have no desire for a 7D otherwise, just hoping they have corrected the problem. A larger target in flight does help percentages I asked a Nikon user one day what percentage of keepers does he have with birding [still shots] and he said 90% of them, and if it was any less he'd send the camera back in. He consistently had sharp in flight shots too. Lets not forget, THATS HOW a camera is SUPPOSED TO WORK..
And your Cedar Waxwing story is very familiar indeed. I have experienced that since the very first day I brought home the MKIII. A bird in the backyard, could not focus on it whatsoever. I remember thinking 'what the heck is that! Could not focus on a large spider in a web. [even my old 20D could do that!] Again, thats not how a camera is supposed to work. So if the 7D spoils me with consistent autofocus, I will purchase it. It won't fill the MKIII shoes, but the type shooting I do, this is a problem unfair to the money I have spent. Alot of others agree to similar.
And I still stand by the comment that not all people have the problem, like controlled Portrait work, and larger targets. Canon would'nt spring for the money to build a new focus system again if the 40D-MKIII era was working well. That was brand new also. Personally, I think 10fps is beyond what any camera can handle. I now shoot at 7fps, but it doesn't help much. In aiservo, a short hesitation before fully releasing the shutter is helpful for allowing more time for accurate focus. [recommended by canon]
jmikes955 wrote:
I disagree on several points.1) I've never heard anyone complain about focus lock on the Mark III. It's quick and accurate. It's AI servo that's the problem, and AI servo by definition never locks. 2) I primarily shoot with a 500 and most of my focus failures are with it. 3) I don't know how you can say that "most people with closer targets do not have a problem with the MKIII" unless you know most of the people who own them. In my experience, neither relative size in the viewfinder nor distance from the target seem related to the failures. In the last couple of weeks I've experienced the Mark III unable to focus on a stationary cedar waxwing, and unable to focus on frame-filling soccer players. ...Show more →
Dunno I'm from the crowd of 20x30 30D prints. Looked pretty damn good to me even up to a inch or two from the paper...Sure it could always look better but when was the last time you looked at a 20x30 from an inch away? You wouldn't even be able to see the whole picture...what's the point?
If you want that kind of resolution go use 6x6 or 6x7 or better yet large format.
I know some people who use the III for a variety of landscapes,portaits,birds and no issues.
I realize thats not repesentative of everybody who has one as well.
I donīt have the Canon 1D-MK III nor have never tried the 7D - but I have tried the 1D MK IIN twice for hours and IMO itīs a no brainer. The better AF and handling on a more professionel level are highly preferable. Only money or weight concerns can make one chose the 7D in this comparison. My vote for the 1D MK III any moment.
jmikes955 wrote:
I only have issues in that narrow range of parameters. Other than that, I love the Mark III. It's easy to see why wedding photographers tend to swear by it.
+=1 My only issue shooting one-shot for some certain well-lit subjects, like red-winged blackbirds, my 500 will hunt before acquiring focus with the center AF point. Other than that, one shot is dead on. I have had it in for the recent recalls since shooting BIF this last winter, s I don;t know if the recall fix has detrimentally affected my BIF AF yet.
Well I am glad that you guys have good 1D MkIII's, I would trade mine in a heartbeat! I bought mine in 2007 and it was replaced in 2008 and it has been back 3 times in 2009 and is going back again this week! I spent lots of money on a trip out west last week and the focus is so inconsistent that I can't trust the camera! I have shots of an Antelope running, dead center of the focusing ring with my 100-400 at f/8 and 1/250th and it could not get a sharp shot. When I put that same lens on my cheap 20D the shots are sharp..... go figure! I hope that Canon finally helps me out, otherwise I am going to be forced to sell everything and move to Nikon!
pepperman wrote:
Well I am glad that you guys have good 1D MkIII's, I would trade mine in a heartbeat! I bought mine in 2007 and it was replaced in 2008 and it has been back 3 times in 2009 and is going back again this week! I spent lots of money on a trip out west last week and the focus is so inconsistent that I can't trust the camera! I have shots of an Antelope running, dead center of the focusing ring with my 100-400 at f/8 and 1/250th and it could not get a sharp shot. When I put that same lens on my cheap 20D the shots are sharp..... go figure! I hope that Canon finally helps me out, otherwise I am going to be forced to sell everything and move to Nikon!...Show more →
Your close to min shutter speed for a running antelope, I would have used at least 1\800 shutter speed. I would not say your mark3 is broke with that instance.
The 1d series is the only series of canon i would own, regardless of which one it was. 1dmk2/3 whatever. I have a lot of friends with canons and a good friend of mine has a 1dmk3, he's never had a single issue out of it and I haven't either when using it.
For what I shoot and the size of my hands a pro body or a gripped body are a must. But not all people feel that way. I wouldn't worry about mpix that much, the large prints I have seen come from a 1dmk3 are quite nice. Given the choice I would choose ruggedness ,feel and better af over higher megs and having the newest camera on the block anyday.
I contemplated getting a canon for a while because of the 400 4.6. It's pretty much the only lens I would really like to have that nikon has no equivalent to that I feel i need for wildlife. I found the 1dmk3 was the only one I really liked out of using all of my friends different canons.
After playing with a friends 1D mkIII I've decided that my next cameras (I buy in pairs) is going to be the 1Ds mkIII. All the things that used to annoy me with my original 1Ds are gone, quick to access off center cross focusing points that are accurate, fast and can be used with spot metering, a center focusing point about 4 times faster than my 5D's for focus with f4L lenses, real weather proofing, etc, etc.
I've never used AI Servo and certainly not at length on the 1d mkIII so I don't begin to feel qualified to have an opinion unlike certain individuals who may have held one in a shop and now feel qualified to trash talk serious pro's who know their cameras inside out and are experiencing real problems that have led canon to make 3 recalls already.
Ģ9K though, that's one heck of a lot of money. One kidney wouldn't be enough. Maybe in 4 years time, not that my 5D's will last that long, they both have well over 100,000 frames apeice and are dying slowly. Wouldn't begin to consider bothering with the 5D mkII or even a FF version of the 7D (no extra accurate/fast AF for lenses slower than f4, no spot metering tied to focus point, no real weather sealing).
Oh well, back to dreaming and shooting the heck out of my battered 5D's...
BTW, my friend with the new 1D mkIII says the AWB is catastrophic compared to his 5D. Anyone else find that? I've never heard of that being a problem with the 1D but his examples bear him out.
1DmkIII.
And has been stated by many a more knowledgeable, recognised & renowned photographer than I, much of the adverse comments have been due to user error &/or not having custom functions set up correctly in the first place. I invested in Art Morris 1DmkIII set up manual, have had no issues & learnt a lot.
BTW, my friend with the new 1D mkIII says the AWB is catastrophic compared to his 5D. Anyone else find that? I've never heard of that being a problem with the 1D but his examples bear him out.
Quite the opposite, I've found the AWB of the 1D3 and now 1Ds3 to be better than the 5D, though similar to the 5D2.
I have a 7d on order as a backup to my 1d mark iii. I do not expect the 7d to out perform the mark iii in any way. But I do expect it to be close. The 1d mark iii makes great images with lots of adjustment "headroom", which I doubt even the additional 8MP of resolution comming from the 7d will surpass. From an autofocus perspective I can offer this about the mark III. (do not have 7d yet).
1) AF is highly configurable, but not in the linear manner most folks think. Linear meaning a focus point on a target at all costs. The AF is actually tuned to get a high percentage of shots in focus based upon two alernatives, one being best available contrast target, and the secound being tracking the first target locked. This is controlled by Cfn. III 4 which is by far the most important AF custom function and secondarly influenced by Cfn. III 8
2) The AF is tuned to get the highest percentage of shots in focus under variable conditions, including holding tracking when line of sight is interupted within a user adjustable set of sub seconds.
3) The mark III shoots 10fps to enable the shooter to get the best percentage of "keeper" images under "must have the image scenarios."
4) Anybody can produce a bad result from the mark iii if not used to its best advantage, and some have already reported poor results from 7d auto focus, I doubt I will have similary poor results from the 7d.
Some folk have - without owning a Mk III either - been beating up on the bloody thing forever, and yet when I proffer an equally informed alternative view (and be clear about this, I don't own but have used a MK III and been very impressed by its AF) I'm trolling?
You really need to grow up.
Being clear about this, your 'equally-informed' view based upon only using the camera for a few hours can't barely even be considered anecdotal. You sure have spent a lot of time touting the 1D MkIII while simultaneously giving little credit to thousands of people who actually own the camera. Canon has jumped through hoops trying to fix the thing over the course of nearly 3 years, and if you think it wasn't warranted or was their reaction to internet hysteria, I've got a camera to sell you.
And Canon's got a couple new cameras to sell you, ones with completely redesigned AF systems.
1 DIII! The 7D, while evidentally a good camera - is really aimed at a different market. It's new & there's some (deservedly) enthuiastic buzz about it now but for those who've had the chance to use both, there's really no question.
mabidally wrote:
Yes I agree but only time will really tell. All depends on the actual performance of the 7D, especially the Servo auto focussing. The nearest competitor is the 1DsMkII.
The 1D MkIII at 10mp is just not enough when even a P&S G10 has 15mp.
If the 7D can focus anywhere near as well as a 1DsMkII, then the 7D will be super value, and one can see used 1DsMkII prices crashing to below 1k.
It appears Canon really want to be No1 in the pro category and the recent bold move by Canon to raise lens prices indicates that they are coming out with some irresistible new technology.
The 1D MkIII at 10mp is just not enough when even a P&S G10 has 15mp
What a rubbish 10 Mp is quitte enough. I did quite a few weddings and non of my clienst complaint about the10 Mp. A g10 with 15 is not even comparable to a 1dm3. Try one and you will wonder what the 10 mp will see like. I own a 30d to and saved 2 years to by the 1dm3. I could also buy the 7d or 5dm2 but it is really a different cam.
- but I have tried the 1D MK IIN twice for hours and IMO itīs a no brainer. The better AF and handling on a more professionel level are highly preferable. Only money or weight concerns can make one chose the 7D in this comparison. My vote for the 1D MK III any moment.