As a novice and wanting to move ahead to a better body I was looking forward to the Mark IV, but given the Mark III issues I decided long ago to wait for awhile and let some in the field testing happen.
I eagerly went to look at the 7D when it was released and was feeling really good about Canon after seeing it, but it's not for me I wanted either a full frame or no smaller than the APS-H sensor of the Mark IV - birds and architecture.
I'm finding the review from RG has thrown my recovering Canon confidence of the Mark IV in a bit of doubt , no one wants to drop $5K+ on a camera that works some of the time.
I'm looking forward to a few quality reviews, that I can trust, to get a good object sense of what I'll get myself into and making the right decision. I'm on the fence..
I'll just go get my XSI and take some pics with that til I'm ready to leap..
SoundHound wrote:
I have dual inventoried both systems for some time to have the advantages of both. No one body/camera system has all the features of the other. That's why one might be better for different work.
I wish it were that simple. With a (relatively) limited budget, I find it difficult to construct a kit around dual systems. Of course, the argument could be made that when the budget is limited, then maybe a dual system isn't warranted or a wise decision. For someone who makes a living from their photography, dual systems do make sense in some instances.
Paul_R_Canada wrote:
As a novice and wanting to move ahead to a better body I was looking forward to the Mark IV, but given the Mark III issues I decided long ago to wait for awhile and let some in the field testing happen.
I eagerly went to look at the 7D when it was released and was feeling really good about Canon after seeing it, but it's not for me I wanted either a full frame or no smaller than the APS-H sensor of the Mark IV - birds and architecture.
I'm finding the review from RG has thrown my recovering Canon confidence of the Mark IV in a bit of doubt , no one wants to drop $5K+ on a camera that works some of the time.
I'm looking forward to a few quality reviews, that I can trust, to get a good object sense of what I'll get myself into and making the right decision. I'm on the fence..
I'll just go get my XSI and take some pics with that til I'm ready to leap..
some good back and forths in this thread......Show more →
Go out and buy a MKIII, I'd say it's thoroughly field tested at this point and it's done a great job for me shooting birds for the last 2 1/2 years in spite of RG's reviews.
rd4tile wrote:
Go out and buy a MKIII, I'd say it's thoroughly field tested at this point and it's done a great job for me shooting birds for the last 2 1/2 years in spite of RG's reviews.
+1 Use the heck out of it for 6-8 months or so while the dust settles around the 1DIV (the latter aren't that easy to find at the moment anyway).
rd4tile wrote:
Go out and buy a MKIII, I'd say it's thoroughly field tested at this point and it's done a great job for me shooting birds for the last 2 1/2 years in spite of RG's reviews.
globalkiwi wrote:
+1 Use the heck out of it for 6-8 months or so while the dust settles around the 1DIV (the latter aren't that easy to find at the moment anyway).
Hmm, I'd consider it if it they had not so many recalls, it's playing with fire buying one, if you got a good copy great. I'm not in a rush, but it would be nice to have a hands down problem free camera (not necessarily perfect I'm not sure one camera can do everything) I've put my buying on hold for now.
Paul_R_Canada wrote:
Hmm, I'd consider it if it they had not so many recalls, it's playing with fire buying one, if you got a good copy great. I'm not in a rush, but it would be nice to have a hands down problem free camera (not necessarily perfect I'm not sure one camera can do everything) I've put my buying on hold for now.
Well good luck, I've never spent much time "on the fence". I loved the MKIII from the first day I got it in July 07 and now the MKIV is occupying that place. While you were worrying about reviews of the MKIII and now MKIV I've probably taken over 25000 bird/BIF shots (that would have been tough to impossible with a Rebel, I tried after I sold the III / waiting for the IV)
The good BIF guys around here have forgotten more about it then I know so worrying about what RG thinks of a MKIII or MKIV is not real high up on my list. But if you think waiting for the perfect review/perfect camera will instantly give you the results you want you're a better photographer then me.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I would like to strive for some balance in interpreting RG's report. .
His bias is as big as a double decker bus ...
Even when 1D4 was first launced, his bias was already evident when he proclaimed "If you're an EOS-1D Mark III owner who has struggled with the tracking difficulties that camera presents, you're probably far less interested in the EOS-1D Mark IV's new AF system features and far more interested in whether the darned camera can keep a moving subject in focus"
For the moment aside from RG's observations can we get a some more feedback from existing owners of the mk IV. Each person shoots in a different way and probably has a preferred subject matter. This should give us a good baseline.
I'm not sure of the anger generated especially by non mk IV owners, RG is not making a personal insult. Maybe he's a crap photographer, maybe he's a great photographer, but I cannot believe he is setting out to trash Canon. I'm sure a flawless mk IV would be in his interest. Anyway he a put one set of data points on the table, now we further points before drawing a conclusion.
At the end of the day you can just ignore his findings and buy the mk IV if that's your intention. Plenty still bought a mk III despite his findings.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
For the moment aside from RG's observations can we get a some more feedback from existing owners of the mk IV. Each person shoots in a different way and probably has a preferred subject matter. This should give us a good baseline.
I'm not sure of the anger generated especially by non mk IV owners, RG is making a personal insult. Maybe he's a crap photographer, maybe he's a great photographer, but I cannot believe he is setting out to trash Canon. I'm sure a flawless mk IV would be in his interest. Anyway he a put one set of data points on the table, now we further points before drawing a conclusion.
At the end of the day you can just ignore his findings and buy the mk IV if that's your intention. Plenty still bought a mk III despite his findings....Show more →
It's interesting that many are suggesting that those who are uncertain about the IV buy a III, a camera that was criticized much, much more by not only RG but also by many others, while many IV reviews have generally been favourable. Meanwhile my own experience with the IV indicates that whatever AF flaws it might have (which it does), they're generally fewer than the III.
I do wonder somewhat whether many of those who claim bias by RG own the IV?
Based on two weeks of IV ownership and about 8000 images, I agree with RG's conclusions to some degree. On the whole I find the IV more reliable for AF than the III, but it isn't perfect. It still misses focus, not only of moving subjects, but also stationary. Of the moving subject tracking test sequences I've done, in most sequences the IV will lose focus at some point and will usually be front focused. I agree with RG that when this happens, the misfocus is significantly in front (or sometimes behind). Some of the test sequences have been 20-40 images. Some even more. But such sequences are not truly indicative of how I typically use the camera for action (sports). Usually it's bursts of a few frames, and the limited action photography I've done so far with the IV has generally been very good, with focus often being correct. Many times there have been other factors that likely contributed to focus issues, namely operator error keeping the focus point optimally placed on the subject as well as hints of camera/subject motion blur, even at higher shutter speeds. Here we're seeing how a high resolution sensor can be a blessing or a curse. If AF, technique, subject motion, etc. all line up correctly, the IV's files have great detail. But if anything is a bit out, then that high resolution sensor will more easily reveal these issues.
I agree with RG that focus point placement and subject movement are factors resulting in some suboptimal results with the IV. I think this is why he so strongly recommends the C.Fn. III-8-2 setting. And this is where I have some disagreement with him. Based on my results so far, I'm leaning towards single point without expansion and am getting good results with it. Subject type and shooting situation will influence whether or not to use AF expansion points.
Overall I'm fairly happy with the IV. It has some needed features and UI updates over the III, and while AF performance is not perfect, it's an evolutionary step up from the III that I expect Canon will further tweak with firmware updates as was done with the III.
goering wrote:
His bias is as big as a double decker bus ...
Even when 1D4 was first launced, his bias was already evident when he proclaimed "If you're an EOS-1D Mark III owner who has struggled with the tracking difficulties that camera presents, you're probably far less interested in the EOS-1D Mark IV's new AF system features and far more interested in whether the darned camera can keep a moving subject in focus"
And the winner after the second day of this thread, defending the honor of Canon to the grave, would appear to be "keithreader" with 19 posts. Mr. Reader just barely edged out "Scowl" who finished up with 18, and while "Scowls" posts end really have nothing to do whatsoever with RG, or focus or even a good old knock em out white side - dark side battle, it is interesting to learn how software development works.
Coming in a tied for a distant 3rd would be "Kakomu", who seemed to run out of steam in the debate about firmware upgrades and "Pixel Perfect" who was at a huge disadvantage as he actually stuck to the point of the OP in the first place.
Honourable mention goes to "Nill Toulme" though his tactic of using complete sentences, logic and fact went against the grain of thread and also to of course to "David P" who could not quite "FOCUS" and spread his 28 posts across the 3 different threads that RG has inspired.
Stay tuned for tomorrow nights stats as it is quite possible that someone who actually owns a MIV may make the top 10.
Ron Hole wrote:
And the winner after the second day of this thread ...
Hey, Ron, I'd like some credit for starting all the fun. I've been tucked away in my little corner of the world, chuckling quietly with a big bowl of chips and a beer or two. To my dismay the thread was locked yesterday but it seems I can keep on crunching those chips even though I'll sorely miss our newfound friend jmikes955 who has evaporated overnight. It was fun so far, don't y'all disappoint me now
Ron Hole wrote:
And the winner after the second day of this thread, defending the honor of Canon to the grave, would appear to be "keithreader" with 19 posts.
I am not defending Canon, I'm questioning RG's methods, motives and findings.
There's a difference, and I'd rather you not misrepresent what I've said or why I've said it.
Ron Hole wrote:
And the winner after the second day of this thread, defending the honor of Canon to the grave, would appear to be "keithreader" with 19 posts. Mr. Reader just barely edged out "Scowl" who finished up with 18, and while "Scowls" posts end really have nothing to do whatsoever with RG, or focus or even a good old knock em out white side - dark side battle, it is interesting to learn how software development works.
Coming in a tied for a distant 3rd would be "Kakomu", who seemed to run out of steam in the debate about firmware upgrades and "Pixel Perfect" who was at a huge disadvantage as he actually stuck to the point of the OP in the first place.
Honourable mention goes to "Nill Toulme" though his tactic of using complete sentences, logic and fact went against the grain of thread and also to of course to "David P" who could not quite "FOCUS" and spread his 28 posts across the 3 different threads that RG has inspired.
Stay tuned for tomorrow nights stats as it is quite possible that someone who actually owns a MIV may make the top 10.
Good show, Ron, you've holed them up pretty good.
Fortunately for my peace of mind I am not interested in MkIV primarily because of its , in my opinion, grossly inflated price. However, if I was interested, I'd pay attention to what Galbraith has to say about it. Hiis MkIII/IV tests seem a bit more solid and convincing than diverse camera evaluations done by forum members around here. At least Galbraith has owned and used the camera he evaluates.....always a big plus in my mind.
Ron Hole wrote:
...Stay tuned for tomorrow nights stats as it is quite possible that someone who actually owns a MIV may make the top 10.
For your next effort, how about a tally of posts that contribute nothing to the thread? ;-)
Those who actually own a Mark IV are invited and encouraged to recount their experience in the "Hands-on only" thread. Folks in search of such real information shouldn't have to wade through the thigh-high dreck level of threads like this one in order to find it.
Paul_R_Canada wrote:
As a novice and wanting to move ahead to a better body I was looking forward to the Mark IV, but given the Mark III issues I decided long ago to wait for awhile and let some in the field testing happen.
I eagerly went to look at the 7D when it was released and was feeling really good about Canon after seeing it, but it's not for me I wanted either a full frame or no smaller than the APS-H sensor of the Mark IV - birds and architecture.
I'm finding the review from RG has thrown my recovering Canon confidence of the Mark IV in a bit of doubt , no one wants to drop $5K+ on a camera that works some of the time.
I'm looking forward to a few quality reviews, that I can trust, to get a good object sense of what I'll get myself into and making the right decision. I'm on the fence..
I'll just go get my XSI and take some pics with that til I'm ready to leap..
some good back and forths in this thread......Show more →
Have NO doubt. The 1D Mark IV is a great camera. Period. It's amazing how one mediocre review can skew the dozens of great reviews the camera has seen already by people who actually use it! I put more stock in the actual user community and those making their living using the camera rather than the 'presumed' pundits who introduce bias and raise more questions than they resolve.
, no one wants to drop $5K+ on a camera that works some of the time.
