For those with or contemplating the 1DIII, Rob Galbraith has tested the forthcoming firmware upgrade (1.09) and found little change to the AF issues - see the embedded link at the top of this page (if the link doesn't direct you to the correct section)
There are a number of issues that have been raised with regards to the AF. I mentioned on another forum that whilst I am not saying that the problems are very real, it is not affecting everyone so it's not a general fault 'per se' rather something that is occuring under very specific circumstances. In that respect, it is probably very difficult to pin down and until it can be reproduced reliaably, then a fix will not be forthcoming.
Having said that, there are one of two very specific faults which ARE addressed by this firmware release notably to do with the AF focusing on the background rather than the foreground (again under specific circumstances that the article describes).
Our business now runs three Mark 3's (alongside one of my 1Ds Mark 2 which I have kept). I can honestly say it is the best camera Canon have produced. The Digic III processors are producing (for want of a better description) the most "full bodied" images I have seen to date from ANY Canon dSLR.
Whilst I don't generally shoot birds in flight or fast moving animals (scenarios which seem to highlight the AF issue which some people are reporting) I have been shooting quite a lot of sports lately (I have a contract for some PR work to do with the Olympics) and the camera has not let me down at all.
One of the major issues with this camera concerns the user. There has never been a Canon camera (I would probably be accurate in saying ANY camera) that has so many user tailorable options. Many of these options are inter-related. I think it is fair to say that whilst without doubt some people are having genuine problems (Phil Shaw for instance is to be relied upon and he has reported an issue with the AF whilst tracking), many of the issues are related to people not bothering to read the manual.
It needs serious reading but unfortunately, human nature is such that a lot of people (especially those who think they know the EOS system), will take the camera out of the box, start shooting and then when they don't get the results they expect, blame it on the camera. RTFM - it really does help!
All in all, the best camera I have used to date. The low light capabilty is second to none. I have published elsewhere and on my website, photographs taken of Jose Carreras and Hayley Westenra under stage lighting. These were shot at 800asa and 1000asa and there is so little noise it is comparable to my 1Ds Mark II at 320asa - it has to be seen to be believed. To give you an idea, one of my photos of Hayley Westenra at 1000asa is going to be on the front cover of a national music magazine in a couple of months time.
Dont know Barry ( There has never been a Canon camera (I would probably be accurate in saying ANY camera) that has so many user tailorable options. ? ) but the D2x has over 21,000 0ptions for the AF setting.
Phillip.
Ps I do believe that this is the first cannon DSLR to have the same lowlights capabilities as nearly all of the nikon models minus 1 ev with this sensitivity you can get problems with the camera decided to focus on the most contrasting part of the image whether that's what you want it to focus on or not.
That's not quite what I meant - the options go far beyond AF and as I say, they inter-relate so that chaning one can affect another. The combinations are considerable. Additionally, the user has the option to change the focussing of individual lenses ona given camera body. All in all, a recipe for dpeisaster in the wrong hands (i.e. those people who tinker without knowing what they are about).
With regard to low light photography (and I am talking about image quality), there is no other camera with the capabilty of the 1D Mark 3 (and I am an ex-Nikon man myself).
"" Update, July 23, 2007: Canon USA has asked that we not release EOS-1D Mark III full resolution photos taken with firmware v1.0.9 loaded while Canon in Tokyo examines one of the bodies we used to check out the new firmware. Because what we want more than anything is for the camera's autofocus problems to be resolved, and because an encouraging roadmap for investigating the problems was mapped out in an extended phone call with Canon USA's Chuck Westfall this morning, we've agreed to not put up photos as originally planned for today. We will of course continue to write about EOS-1D Mark III autofocus when there is news to share."
"
Therefore Canon appear to be suggesting that it may not be user error and that their may be a potential problem with the (specific?) camera body otherwise why ask for its return.
I for one will await the resolution to this issue and want to see what RG says...
If you read what I said, there are definitely issues that some people are reporting but there are also lots of problems being reported that ARE user error. Please accept this from someone who has and uses the camera rather than relying on reports from people many of whom are just rehashing scaremongering stories published on web forums (and we all know what they are like )
As I also said, if a problem cannot be reproduced it cannot be 'fixed' hence Canon's request.
With my 'smart alec' head on, I reported on the EOS-Forums website weeks before the cameras release that there was an alleged problem with the AF in the pre-production model. This came from a Canon Technician who was running a hands on day for professional press shooters (in fact us Royal Rota togs). He told me (and the others who were present) that they hoped this would be fixed before the cameras release. This story was picked up by RG themselves and reported on their website. Despite Canons suggestion to the contrary, I remain convinced that early models may well have this fault and that latter models (i.e. those that the majority of users have - particularly those in the UK where this 'issue' is less widely reported) may have escaped.
On balance though, it is a superb beast. Unfotunately, as is the nature of things these days with web based speculation, innuendo and ill informed gossip then a lot of people are being put off by innacurate and ill informed mis-information.
A very large number of the world's press and sports shooters are now using the 1D Mark 3 - pro press shooters are not precious about their equipment - if it didn't deliver, it would be trash by now.
Hi Barry yes I had inkling what you meant I was just having a bit fun .
I do think the capability to calibrate individual lenses is a great idea and after a few images I have taken with one at very high ISO I have to say I was very impressed with the image quality there is noise but it's different from what you would get with nikon bodies.
I tested the first Mk3 in this country and found very few issues with it, in fact I got action shots that I know I would have missed otherwise. Action is my thing too, every bit as much as any other reviewer on the web. I suggested very early on that this issue was for pre-production bodies but of course was ignored. Seems that I may have been right. Sure the camera has a few issues but I managed to work around these and I think that a lot of the problems are a combination of early versions and user error. Lots of pros at wimbledon this year were using it and most loved it. I will be taking mine on my 7 week Africa trip and will trust it implicitly, agree with you Barry, a great camera and the best that they have produced.
The problem with this firmware now is that it is tainted. Everyone expects the MK3 to perform badly because that is what they have read. Now everyone expects the firmware to wave the magic wand and fix everything. I think that Canon here are caught in two minds, they have produced a very customisable camera but the customisation is causing the cameras downfall.
I've had mine since the 8-6-2007 and haven't been able to fault it's AF performance (300/2.8, 600/4, 70-200). I've done bifs and fast jets, all invariably spot on. The one factor absent since purchasing (and may relate to the seemingly happier % users in the U.K. vs U.S?) has been the lack of sun and heat... although the subjects haven't been particularly low contrast.
Another thing that puzzles is the problems some are experiencing in one shot AF... if you have focus problems with that, then it really is a suspect body.
I'd say the MkIII is a stop and a half better with noise than my 1Ds... and that's worth a lot to me. I still love the 1Ds files though, still the camera of choice in many situations.
Hi Andy, yes I agree totally and I have never been able to understand all the problems with one shot. Getty have already accepted lots of my MK3 material and some have been at outrageous ISO's like 1600.
With regards to user error I have seen so many threads about this where users try to use this out of the box. As I said in my review, and many others have agreed, out of the box the autofocus has issues because the CF's need to be reset for high action. I tested my camera against blue sky with a falcon and an eagle and it locked on better than I had hoped, so I out it to the same and perhaps more rigorous tests than our us friends and mine worked. Andy's worked too with jets, which is hard enough at the best of times, so I think that there is definitely a version issue and in the UK we have a later batch I think. For ONCE this is to our advantage.
Wohh - hornets nest or what ! - don't shoot the messenger
I cannot comment as I don't have or have experience with the camera, but I thought someone on the forum had had a disappointing exeperience with single shot mode with a surprisingly low hit rate of focus (wasn't it under 50% or so?).
There are comprehensive tests now being run out there, one test I have seen of a running person has both front and back focus issues, albeit the test was in America and under hot bright conditions, the same tester did a back to back comparison - same lens, same time with mk II and mkIII bodies - the older mkII body had a significantly better focus hit rate - make your own minds up.
Andy (R) regards versions/production varience - Chuck Westfall has confirmed that there are currently (or have been) no production differences in assembling the mk III (covered in the link)
This was just a flag, anyone considering going on an African safari with a mkIII may encounter issues in the hotter conditions, running the firmware upgrade to be released next week may not solve those "issues"
All in all i think this is the best camera i have ever owned or used,The low light ISO is superb,the images straight out of the camera is head and shoulders above the 1d2 and the live view for macro work is awesome, I have done some birds in flight and have so far had no problems even using A 2x on a 500f4, And i paid the equivialnt of £2200 in Switzerland so not everything over here is an arm and a leg, I would say that if you are in the market for one now to get one
Hi, well there is clearly a difference between batches of cameras as nothing else logical could explain that most of ours work fine. There is certainly no skill difference between the US pros and us so it has to be the camera. Anyway let's see what the firmware brings, I will try to test as no doubt will Dave, but since we have working cameras anyway I am not sure what t he result will be. I have a falconry course next week so will try on that if I get it in time, although it will probably be raining.
I've yet to find a good reason to brandish the cps card and make the trip to Canon Elstree for the firmware update... but they are a massive 3 miles away from me
I'm sitting in Anchorage airport waiting for my flight to the Pribloffs. I'm certainly not expecting it to be hot and sunny, but I bought a new 1D2N before I left, just in case the Canon Service Centre fix doesn't work
This is interesting. I have been following this debate since it began on the Net. Rob Galbraith is not the only pro photographer capable of reviewing this camera. Others have reviewed it without experiencing these AF issues to the extent that he has.
I am not saying there is no issue with the AF. What I will say is that I doubt it is a physical design flaw. Too many other photographers have no problem with their copies.
Discussion
15 repliesMike
There are a number of issues that have been raised with regards to the AF. I mentioned on another forum that whilst I am not saying that the problems are very real, it is not affecting everyone so it's not a general fault 'per se' rather something that is occuring under very specific circumstances. In that respect, it is probably very difficult to pin down and until it can be reproduced reliaably, then a fix will not be forthcoming.
Having said that, there are one of two very specific faults which ARE addressed by this firmware release notably to do with the AF focusing on the background rather than the foreground (again under specific circumstances that the article describes).
Our business now runs three Mark 3's (alongside one of my 1Ds Mark 2 which I have kept). I can honestly say it is the best camera Canon have produced. The Digic III processors are producing (for want of a better description) the most "full bodied" images I have seen to date from ANY Canon dSLR.
Whilst I don't generally shoot birds in flight or fast moving animals (scenarios which seem to highlight the AF issue which some people are reporting) I have been shooting quite a lot of sports lately (I have a contract for some PR work to do with the Olympics) and the camera has not let me down at all.
One of the major issues with this camera concerns the user. There has never been a Canon camera (I would probably be accurate in saying ANY camera) that has so many user tailorable options. Many of these options are inter-related. I think it is fair to say that whilst without doubt some people are having genuine problems (Phil Shaw for instance is to be relied upon and he has reported an issue with the AF whilst tracking), many of the issues are related to people not bothering to read the manual.
It needs serious reading but unfortunately, human nature is such that a lot of people (especially those who think they know the EOS system), will take the camera out of the box, start shooting and then when they don't get the results they expect, blame it on the camera. RTFM - it really does help!
All in all, the best camera I have used to date. The low light capabilty is second to none. I have published elsewhere and on my website, photographs taken of Jose Carreras and Hayley Westenra under stage lighting. These were shot at 800asa and 1000asa and there is so little noise it is comparable to my 1Ds Mark II at 320asa - it has to be seen to be believed. To give you an idea, one of my photos of Hayley Westenra at 1000asa is going to be on the front cover of a national music magazine in a couple of months time.
Anyway, I'm now rambling on.......
Barrie
Phillip.
Ps I do believe that this is the first cannon DSLR to have the same lowlights capabilities as nearly all of the nikon models minus 1 ev with this sensitivity you can get problems with the camera decided to focus on the most contrasting part of the image whether that's what you want it to focus on or not.
That's not quite what I meant - the options go far beyond AF and as I say, they inter-relate so that chaning one can affect another. The combinations are considerable. Additionally, the user has the option to change the focussing of individual lenses ona given camera body. All in all, a recipe for dpeisaster in the wrong hands (i.e. those people who tinker without knowing what they are about).
With regard to low light photography (and I am talking about image quality), there is no other camera with the capabilty of the 1D Mark 3 (and I am an ex-Nikon man myself).
Barrie
"" Update, July 23, 2007: Canon USA has asked that we not release EOS-1D Mark III full resolution photos taken with firmware v1.0.9 loaded while Canon in Tokyo examines one of the bodies we used to check out the new firmware. Because what we want more than anything is for the camera's autofocus problems to be resolved, and because an encouraging roadmap for investigating the problems was mapped out in an extended phone call with Canon USA's Chuck Westfall this morning, we've agreed to not put up photos as originally planned for today. We will of course continue to write about EOS-1D Mark III autofocus when there is news to share."
"
Therefore Canon appear to be suggesting that it may not be user error and that their may be a potential problem with the (specific?) camera body otherwise why ask for its return.
I for one will await the resolution to this issue and want to see what RG says...
T
If you read what I said, there are definitely issues that some people are reporting but there are also lots of problems being reported that ARE user error. Please accept this from someone who has and uses the camera rather than relying on reports from people many of whom are just rehashing scaremongering stories published on web forums (and we all know what they are like
As I also said, if a problem cannot be reproduced it cannot be 'fixed' hence Canon's request.
With my 'smart alec' head on, I reported on the EOS-Forums website weeks before the cameras release that there was an alleged problem with the AF in the pre-production model. This came from a Canon Technician who was running a hands on day for professional press shooters (in fact us Royal Rota togs). He told me (and the others who were present) that they hoped this would be fixed before the cameras release. This story was picked up by RG themselves and reported on their website. Despite Canons suggestion to the contrary, I remain convinced that early models may well have this fault and that latter models (i.e. those that the majority of users have - particularly those in the UK where this 'issue' is less widely reported) may have escaped.
On balance though, it is a superb beast. Unfotunately, as is the nature of things these days with web based speculation, innuendo and ill informed gossip then a lot of people are being put off by innacurate and ill informed mis-information.
A very large number of the world's press and sports shooters are now using the 1D Mark 3 - pro press shooters are not precious about their equipment - if it didn't deliver, it would be trash by now.
Barrie
I do think the capability to calibrate individual lenses is a great idea and after a few images I have taken with one at very high ISO I have to say I was very impressed with the image quality there is noise but it's different from what you would get with nikon bodies.
Phillip.
The problem with this firmware now is that it is tainted. Everyone expects the MK3 to perform badly because that is what they have read. Now everyone expects the firmware to wave the magic wand and fix everything. I think that Canon here are caught in two minds, they have produced a very customisable camera but the customisation is causing the cameras downfall.
Another thing that puzzles is the problems some are experiencing in one shot AF... if you have focus problems with that, then it really is a suspect body.
I'd say the MkIII is a stop and a half better with noise than my 1Ds... and that's worth a lot to me. I still love the 1Ds files though, still the camera of choice in many situations.
With regards to user error I have seen so many threads about this where users try to use this out of the box. As I said in my review, and many others have agreed, out of the box the autofocus has issues because the CF's need to be reset for high action. I tested my camera against blue sky with a falcon and an eagle and it locked on better than I had hoped, so I out it to the same and perhaps more rigorous tests than our us friends and mine worked. Andy's worked too with jets, which is hard enough at the best of times, so I think that there is definitely a version issue and in the UK we have a later batch I think. For ONCE this is to our advantage.
I cannot comment as I don't have or have experience with the camera, but I thought someone on the forum had had a disappointing exeperience with single shot mode with a surprisingly low hit rate of focus (wasn't it under 50% or so?).
There are comprehensive tests now being run out there, one test I have seen of a running person has both front and back focus issues, albeit the test was in America and under hot bright conditions, the same tester did a back to back comparison - same lens, same time with mk II and mkIII bodies - the older mkII body had a significantly better focus hit rate - make your own minds up.
Andy (R) regards versions/production varience - Chuck Westfall has confirmed that there are currently (or have been) no production differences in assembling the mk III (covered in the link)
This was just a flag, anyone considering going on an African safari with a mkIII may encounter issues in the hotter conditions, running the firmware upgrade to be released next week may not solve those "issues"
Mike
Dave
This is interesting. I have been following this debate since it began on the Net. Rob Galbraith is not the only pro photographer capable of reviewing this camera. Others have reviewed it without experiencing these AF issues to the extent that he has.
I am not saying there is no issue with the AF. What I will say is that I doubt it is a physical design flaw. Too many other photographers have no problem with their copies.
Rob