Geez, nothing like having to post after Jim & Ron. WOW
I started shooting BIF 2 1/2 years ago with the MKIII and I always thought mine worked great (after an obvious learning curve.) When I got the MKIV I immediately went to mkIII settings. Between those and not the best light in my early shoots I wondered if the IV was really as good. After reading Les's recommendations and going with those (basically all stock with CFN III-8 set to either 1 or 2) my results have been better overall then I ever got with the III after only a couple limited sessions. Static focus is perfect and the files look great and PP well. AFAIC the MKIV is a winner and a worthy successor to the III. http://www.pbase.com/rd4tile/image/121903897/original.jpg http://www.pbase.com/rd4tile/image/121903896/original.jpg
This one was the first shot and I was surprised it grabbed focus given I didn't track it at before that frame was taken. http://www.pbase.com/rd4tile/image/121903893/original.jpg
The test subject that I use to see if the camera can stay locked onto a moving subject and to see how well it can track and hold focus is my ever active Golden Retriever. I've found that she is a really good test because, when I'm trying to focus on her head, the camera could easily be fooled, because her entire coat is the same color, into thinking that her hips or her tail was the head. And shooting from relatively close at f2.8, there isn't a lot of room for error. Below, I've included 3 consecutive shots from each of 2 seven or eight shot bursts. In similar bursts, the camera is pretty much nailing every shot. The shots aren't anything special, but they do give me confidence in the camera's ability to focus.
I loved my 1D Mark III, and, when I sold it, I really missed it. Getting the 1D Mark IV was like getting an old friend back, only better.
I'm coming from a 1D MkIIn to the Mark IV. I got it about 2 weeks ago, unfortunately at the tail end of basketball season, which is what I primarily shoot.
I'm still getting used to the interface versus the MkIIn. I keep trying to press two buttons at once, but that's not a complaint. Once I get used to the interface, I'll be fine.
As far as my impressions of the Mark IV, I am very happy. I was not happy the first day out, but I think I had my CFs all screwed up playing around with the menus. Since then, I've made an effort to figure what CFs work best for me. I am getting many more keepers with the Mark IV than I did with the MkIIn. Focusing is just snappier and holds the target much better. With the MkIIn, when I followed a basketball player down the court, I would invariably get a few OOF shots during a sequence of 10-12 shots. With the Mark IV, I often get everything in a sequence in focus, and only rarely get one or during-sequence shots OOF. I'm also astonished at the ISOs I can shoot at. I hated using ISO 3200 on my MkIIn b/c of all the noise. Now it's not an issue.
Mine came with 1.06 installed. Here's some of the CFs I'm using:
The "issues" I have with the Mark IV are minor, all things considered. The battery life seems less than my MkIIn. The joystick sometimes isn't very responsive in the up direction. You can't use exposure compensation in manual mode with auto ISO as far as I can tell. There's no Live View quiet mode. That's about it. There are a few things I wish it had, like an electronic level and cost-effective geotagging. I use three lenses primarily, the 70-200 f2.8L, the 28-70 f2.8L, and the 85mm 1.8. I get great pictures with all of them, although I've never felt I had a good copy of the 1.8. The longest lens I have is the 70-200 f2.8L, so I have no idea how it works with the big lenses.
There are tons I like about the Mark IV. The autofocus is great. The image quality is excellent. The LCD screen is wonderful. Flash exposure on my MkIIn was always spotty (I have the 580ex). The Mark IV seems to do a much better job with my flash. That was a bonus I wasn't expecting.
Here's an example using my 85mm f/1.8. Shot at ISO 5000, f1.8, 1/1600. This shot has not been processed at all, other than the web resizing.
I've done about 8000 frames with my IV. About half of those have been AF tests, primarily of cars to figure out how or if the various custom function settings affect results relative to my experience with the III.
My initial results with the 600 IS shooting some winter sports were not very encouraging. Part of the problem was probably copying over the exact custom function settings I had on my III. Another issue was that my 600 appears to have some issues on the IV. It front focuses most of the time and a MFA of around +10 has helped. But I plan to eventually get it calibrated to the camera. The 400 2.8 has been a more reliable performer. Sequences of cars have generally been good, but as I also found with the 600, nearly every sequence has some soft frames, typically front focused, but sometimes back focused. For me at least, I seemed to get better, more consistent results with the custom function settings relating to AF set to the defaults. I'm not entirely sure about AF point expansion. I think it will depend a lot on the subject matter, but at least for my car tests, I got somewhat (though not dramatically) better results with expansion turned off. Also, 25+ frame sequences of cars is not what I typically photograph for action. What limited real world action I've shot so far, including a hockey game, has been promising. Short bursts of several frames were usually well focused.
On the whole I would say I feel more confident in the IV's overall AF capability compared to the III. It doesn't seem to blow what should be easy situations as often as the III, but it's also not perfect. As a result I still find myself frequently checking images as I habitually did with the III to ensure correct focus.
Issues:
Low light AF lock has been a surprising problem. Shot an event in very low light, around ISO 3200 1/100 f/1.2 and the IV was very slow to acquire and lock focus. One Shot worked better, as would be assumed. In AI Servo it often just would not lock.
Coming from previous 1 series cameras, I've always used the * button for AF and never really got comfortable with the AF-ON buttons on the III, therefore switched AF actuation back to the * button there as well. After nearly two weeks of use, the * button on the IV has become extremely soft. During extended use in situations where I'm typically depressing the button for long periods, such as for sports, it will stay stuck.
I'd like to see a way to use the spot AF function with lenses other than the super-teles. There are definitely times I would like the precision with small subject matter, or where precise focus point placement is desired.
I know there is another thread about "which RAW converter do you use"; but I would like to start that topic in this thread. So far I have been shooting RAW + jpg and using DPP for the RAW.
What are the rest of you RAW shooters doing. I used Bridge for my 1d2 and liked the NR stuff there.
ragebot wrote:
I know there is another thread about "which RAW converter do you use"; but I would like to start that topic in this thread. So far I have been shooting RAW + jpg and using DPP for the RAW.
What are the rest of you RAW shooters doing. I used Bridge for my 1d2 and liked the NR stuff there.
mooneymse wrote:
... I did note that the 1st frame in a series was OOF a lot of the time. ...
You know about leading the AF slightly to let the AI servo catch up to the subject before releasing the shutter? This is because, unlike in one shot where the shutter won't fire until the AF thinks it's locked on, in AI servo it will fire that first frame whether it's acquired focus or not.
mdbassman wrote:
These are all fine posts here. I am still having problems but have NOT ruled out "user error" yet. I have received some fine instruction from some great N&W shooters here which is what I want my MKIV mainly for. BIF, tracking eagles, ducks, osprey...
My bird images when preview RAW in CS4 or DPP(to verify CF on subject) are not good. All these are handheld. All settings MKIV "default".
Maybe some here can offer valid opinions of constructive criticisms versus some of the rancour and other mis-placed criticisms on a few other threads.
The MKIV on still subject large and moving subjects does extremely well.
C&C always welcome and again I repeat, I am NOT blaming the MKIV at this time.
Dan...Show more →
Your settings seem unusual to me. I don't think F13 is necessary to get a bird in focus. Also you have a -1.3 exposure compensation dialed in. Are you doing this intentionally? For example In the first shot you have 1/500 shutter with F13. I would think opening the aperture to gain some shutter speed would help. Also with all that light in the background, I would think that you would dial in a +exposure compensation so I am wondering if you had to push the shadows in photoshop to get the detail back?
Are these heavily cropped images? Do you have NR turned on in camera?
Some more knowledgeable N&W photogs could chime in I am sure but don't give up on the camera. there is a learning curve for anything worthwhile.
Yes, the setting are odd. Most lenses are sharpest at around f5.6 to f8. Beyond that diffraction starts to degrade image quality. In these shots you should have had a much higher shutter speed combined with a larger aperture.
My suggestion would be to start your own thread - trouble shooting your issues will derail this one.
galenapass wrote:
How much have you cropped these?
Yes, the setting are odd. Most lenses are sharpest at around f5.6 to f8. Beyond that diffraction starts to degrade image quality. In these shots you should have had a much higher shutter speed combined with a larger aperture.
My suggestion would be to start your own thread - trouble shooting your issues will derail this one.
Mike, I believe the Nill asked for "hands on". That is what I am posting! If Nill feels this is not what he wants from me than he can request I remove my post and I will.
I don't think you are out of line here, I just think you might be better served with your own post. It looks like something is not right and in the past some of the "trouble shooting" threads can go on for several pages.
.......you know him much better than I do. 