Sahid, thank you for taking the time to report that.
I say it is unreasonable and unhelpful to be jumping into any sort of extreme conclusions here such as the camera might be NFG, or the tester doesn't know AF from his cloaca maxima.
However, my experience tells me that auto AF point selection has generally been a weaker Servo AF mode of all Canon cameras I have owned. That system limitation becomes even more pronounced in low light. In a servo AF tracking situation similar to your test shots, I would definitely start testing with a single AF point manually selected, no AF point expansion, slow FPS, and then take it from there.
Well the test could be flawed due to user error, but Al Servo should be able to track a moving target, be it towards and away or side ways, shouldn't it? Al Servo is for action, and action is unpredictable.
This is in response to 'darryn patch's statement. I am not siding with either party.
Jayem1 wrote:
Well the test could be flawed due to user error, but Al Servo should be able to track a moving target, be it towards and away or side ways, shouldn't it? Al Servo is for action, and action is unpredictable.
You can't expect any camera to work well out of the box using multiple AF points on this kind of busy scene - AI servo isn't the issue.
I find the people here a little bit too quick to defend Canon without having anything to really substantiate what they say, Why this anger to shoot the messenger without knowing him and without answering his question (as he was asking the experience of other people not telling: this camera is crap...). Canon had big troubles with the MkDIII, does anyone who posted here to critize Sahid tested the MkDIV? You need to wait for enough people to have tested it before to declare: the body is good or bad or has troubles with this and that. The problems with the AF might be just with 10% of the bodies so you will need to test 10 cameras before to find one with a problem, at least...
In this post it is not Sahid who looks as a fool put the person anger to defend Canon at all cost without having even tried the camera tested here. Wait for the feedback from the first users and then Sahid might appear as a visionary person... Or it might just have been a bad test, brings data in this debate instead of feelings it would be more useful...
This isn't about "defending Canon", it's about being pig-sick of uninformed, knee-jerk allegations of problems without anything whatsoever to back the allegations up, and, as in this case, a clear lack of any objective basis for the accusation.
Look again that the thread title. It is clearly implying that there are indeed AF problems with the 1D Mk IV (adding a question mark doesn't change what is being suggested), and this thread just looks like another example of someone desperate to be the first with bad news.
I wouldn't dream of starting a thread like this on the basis of a couple of minutes' worth of waving around a brand new camera I had no clue about - I'd assume that the problem was down to me, just as it pretty clearly is with the OP.
This isn't about "defending Canon", it's about being pig-sick of uninformed, knee-jerk allegations of problems without anything whatsoever to back the allegations up, and, as in this case, a clear lack of any objective basis for the accusation.
Look again that the thread title. It is clearly implying that there are indeed AF problems with the 1D Mk IV (adding a question mark doesn't change what is being suggested), and this thread just looks like another example of someone desperate to be the first with bad news.
I wouldn't dream of starting a thread like this on the basis of a couple of minutes' worth of waving around a brand new camera I had no clue about - I'd assume that the problem was down to me, just as it pretty clearly is with the OP.
Quite a ridiculous thread: you clearly attack only the shape of the post as you have no arguments against what he says and especially no careful test. We come back to my initial post: when 100 persons will have bought or tried this camera and shared their initial feedback we could comme back to Sahid's initial feeling /test/whatever you want to call and decide if he was wrong or not. It's a photography forum not a forum about english/posting method, answer what he asked and forget about the shape of the message. Test this camera and brings some valuable input instead of your gut feeling about the initial post and what kind of fame he might have eventually wanted from his post.
p.2 #10 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
darryn patch wrote:
I'll give you 2 bobs worth of advice for free, Ai Servo is solely designed for moving subjects. not stationary objects.
Go and educate yourself on AF and then pick up the camera and try again.
There is no reason (other than calibration issues and when shooting with cluttered busy backgrounds) why AI Servo should do any worse than One Shot on stationary subjects.
p.2 #11 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
Please be joking
darryn patch wrote:
Mate I am going to be blunt.
AI is designed to track movement toward and away from the camera, all these subjects are facing sideways so to that says they are walking across the frame which would mean that the subjects are basically on the same plain as they move and the camera is trying to find something moving becuase these peopel are NOT moving towards or away from the camera.
p.2 #12 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
molson wrote:
+1
-1
Sahid doesn't come across somebody who wants to create a riot. OK, maybe the choice of his title was a bit provoking. But rather than ask him questions on what was going on, this thread turned into a troll vs fanboy debate fast. Sad. Because Sahid is one of the few who have touched and used a 1D4. So, he might be a valuable source of information.
p.2 #13 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
Using AI servo mode with 45 point Auto selecting is going to find the best AF target. In subject #1 - there is no great AF target, so it hunted and found a better one - as mentioned, depending an AF expansion and sensitivity. With target #2, again, it found a better AF target in the sleeve.
With ANY camera - no matter how fast or how slow, one has to have time with it to learn the functions, capability and limitations of the entire system.
I agree that bringing up a post like this after holding the shutter down twice is a farce. Then again, if everybody believes that the AF system is flawed, then I can get my hands on 3-4 of them when they come in stock without having to wait!
p.2 #14 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
+1 for the use of "cloaca maxima."
Almost spilled my coffee.
*I agree with those who say this doesn't demonstrate ANYTHING about the camera... but no need to try to make the OP feel bad. Silly thread title (unnecessarily inflammatory), but this isn't intentional trolling.
p.2 #15 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
Sahid Limon wrote:
Focus was set on default, which as Canon claims... should lock focus on a moving subject without any problems. Yes, I could have changed the focusing to only the inner points or the center point, but why should I have to?
... Because the AF system will place focus on where it thinks it sees the most contrast. That doesn't always correspond with where you want focus to end up.
Just because you could do this succesfully with your 1D2-3, doesn't mean it will work on the 1D4. That might have something to do with the (different) shooting conditions or the new AF system itself.
In the worst case the 1D4 might not be a good "auto AF" camera. But that doesn't say much, because I would anticipate these kind of errors when using auto mode with any cam.
Having said that, for all we know maybe that particular body/lens combo wasn't properly calibrated. Or maybe there were other reasons... maybe it was even user error. Which is understandable, since we are dealing with a new camera/AF system after all...
p.2 #16 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
darryn patch wrote:
Mate I am going to be blunt.
AI is designed to track movement toward and away from the camera, all these subjects are facing sideways so to that says they are walking across the frame which would mean that the subjects are basically on the same plain as they move and the camera is trying to find something moving becuase these peopel are NOT moving towards or away from the camera.
quote]
Wow and you are putting down the OP. You better read up on autofocus yourself.
p.2 #19 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
Daan B wrote:
Sahid doesn't come across somebody who wants to create a riot.
All the more reason why his choice of thread title was unacceptable, Daan - he can't have imagined any other response, surely.
So, he might be a valuable source of information.
That's precisely what this thread isn't - and that's the real point of many of the reactions here. The thread is a complete over-reaction to the badly-interpreted results of a badly-conducted test.
Forgive me if I suggest that on the basis of this "test" and the conclusions Sahid drew from it, I'm not inclined to take this particular "source of information" very seriously.
It's nothing personal, but this is precisely how the worst and most unfounded internet rumours start.
p.2 #20 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
Every 1-Series camera I've seen (or any other Canon DSLR, for that matter) will have issues like this . . if you use the camera in the way it was used here.
