I'm sorry, but anything could look sharp at the size of the swan images posted; you have to look at the images at full resolution if you want to know whether they are sharp or to demonstrate that they are sharp. Also, without any information on the shutter speed used it is not possible for anyone to make a judgement about whether any lack of sharpness is likely to be due to the camera or the capture parameters.
I have just returned from Tanzania where I used my "fixed" (hardware and firmware up-grades) 1D3 to photograph black kites at the Lerai picnic site in the Ngorongoro Crater. The kites are active at mid-day when they come to the picnic site to steal lunch from unwary tourists. Mid-day in the Crater is usually hot and bright - the kind of conditions that should provide a test for the 1D3 fix.
Kites are large birds and are relatively easy to track in flight and at Lerai provide repeated opportunities for close-proximity, in-flight, photographs. I was shooting with flash using 300/f2.8 and a 70-200/f2.8 lenses at f5.6 and 1/1600s in AI Servo mode. The sky was blue and there was nothing else for the autofocus system to grab onto other than the subject. Out of 174 frames where the centre focus point is squarely on the subject only 51 are sharp (29 percent). Personally, I don't think this is acceptable, and is not much of an improvement (if any) upon the performance of the camera prior to the hardware fix. When I have shot at this site before using a 1D2N (and even a 1V back in the days of film), virtually every shot in which the central sensor squarely hits the subject is sharp.
I have also been disappointed by the ability of the 1D3 to capture sharply-focus images when using both the Canon 1.4x and 2x extenders. I generally have no hesitation in using the 1.4x and 2x extenders (suitably stopped down) on my 1Ds2 and have consistently been able to capture sharp images with them. This is not the case with the Mk3, however, which frequently produces images that are softer than I am accustomed to, even when using One Shot AF mode. In my opinion there are still unresolved problems with this camera.
Whilst what you say is true about how to assess if something is sharp, I am assuming that Paul has the nouse to do so and is satisfied with his camera.
As to you experiences what have Canon said about them?
T
Posted by Martin Dyer on January 8, 2008 at 6:30 PM
I have been testing my 'fixed' mark3 for a couple of weeks now and my findings mirror Phil's
It worked reasonably well in bright light, although I did some back to back testing with the 40D and the 40D images were consistently sharper.
However, where it really fell to pieces was once a cloud turned up - just useless in flat or grey light.
All tests with either 300f2.8 and 70-200f2.8 and all micro adjusted as well
The images are still not as good as my old mark2N
Martin
Posted by Graeme Lee on January 8, 2008 at 6:34 PM
I'd like to see a 100% crop posted Paul if you can. For those of us with our money still in the bank (well, someone else's actually!) it would be good to see what the crop looks like. Seems a massive difference to what some people are getting with the 1d3 and maybe what sharpness people are satisfied with
Out of curiosity, I assume you are using the high frame rate when in AI Servo mode but what fps setting are you using (i.e. are you using the default 10fps?).
Just to add my small bit. The focusing is worse than before, even on 'one' shot and with the CF back button set, the focusing will NOT work whilst the camera is in the 'vertical' position, 'portrait'. Plus I had six 'Error 99' messages, even after doing exactly what the camera requested. Not impressed
Steve
Posted by Javier Martin on January 9, 2008 at 5:34 AM
It seems to me that Canon have made a big mistake changing their trusty AF system. I don't foresee an easy and quick solution to this problem rather than an entirely new camera system. This creates a nightmare for those who want to upgrade from 1DIIN and/or 1DsII. I am actually thinking in switching to Nikon who also can offer 12 megapixels and the versatile 200-400mm lens (a substitute for my 300mm, 400mm, 500mm and 100-400mm lenses?).
We all have different needs and expectations so our experiences will differ.
All I can say is that I have never had an AF problem with the 1D Mark 3 bodies I use (regularly use 3 and sometimes 4) either before or AFTER the 'fix'. Most of my work these days for which the 1D3's are used is news gathering but I regularly do sports work (a lot of athletics in the past year because of the Olympics) involving fast moving and erratic subjects. Not quite the same as wildlife but demanding on a camera's AF nonetheless. Mind you, I always have the top frame rate set at 6 or 7 fps rather than 10 - not sure if this makes a difference (hence my question to Phil)
I have always maintained that the problem is real but only affects people under certain circumstances which nonetheless must be a royal pain in the butt for them.
The circumstances seem to be hot and bright which is why I am always doubtful of those people who 'apparently' can find fault here in the UK where neither situation has presented itself for quite a while
As the investment is large, I suggest hiring a body for a while and try and get to use one under the conditions you normally shoot under and see where you go from there. Phil clearly is not convinced (not going to go there ) but a great many reknowned professional wildlife and sports photographers in exactly the conditions the 'problem' is supposed to manifest itself under have no issues at all.
I think this is what frustrates most people. If there was a clear and manifest fault that everyone experienced - it would be bad but at least it would be something we could identiy with and hopefully have addressed but because some people do get it all the time, some people, some of the time and others not at all but think they do 'cos they don't want to feel left out () then I am not sure this is going to go away quickly and because of this, there is no right or wrong answer for you.
Barrie, I have had the maximum frame rate pegged back to 8fps since Day 2 - or soon after I realised that images were soft, in an attempt to see whether frame rate was a factor. The results are the same, as are the results at Low Speed - 4 fps.
Javier, I'm right with you; a D3 and 200-400/f4 is very tempting.
Tom, if you can suggest someone at Canon to talk to, I would be very interested. My current thoughts are to trade-in the mk3 for a 40D before I go to Yellowstone in February.
the focusing will NOT work whilst the camera is in the 'vertical' position
Stephen, I know a couple of other photographers who have experienced exactly the same problem with their Mk3 cameras. I think you have a good case for getting a replacement if not a refund.
Posted by Martin Dyer on January 9, 2008 at 7:43 AM
Hi Barrie,
As I mentioned i am finding the same as Phil, and have carried out extensive testing on moving subjects both BF and AF (before fix and after fix).
I too have pegged back the frame rate and shoot it at 5fps. Lenses AF micro adjusted and drive speed set to be compromised for AF tracking in the CF functions.
After fix, it was much better in bright good light but hopeless in grey light and as mentioned not as sharp as either my old mark2N or my partners 40D.
Phil - Have you tried out a blue spot? If yes and you are still unhappy, the 40D is a good alternate. I now am stealing Sue's more and more.
Quite frankly, I am surprised that all of these people experiencing problems both before and after fixes are keeping their cameras. If I was having a problem, it would be straight back to the dealer for a refund. If the item is not performing as required, it is a clear contravention of the Sale of Goods Act in my (non legal) opinion especially as Canon have issued a recall
Posted by Rob Ashton on January 9, 2008 at 9:44 AM
OK, I'll add my 2 pence worth here. Has anyone considered that the problem may be down to the lens micro adjustment rather than the AF system??
Barrie, have you calibrated your lenses on your MkIII's? It sounds as if Phil and Martin have done.
I am just surmising here but could it be connected with the calibration system??
I calibrated my long lenses but not the shorter ones (not a great deal of point to be honest).
I do find all this very alarming. If there was a "generic" fault, everyone would experience it but we don't. Why do I (and others) seem to have no problem (and I shoot literally thousands of images a month under all sorts of conditions) and someobody else can't seem to use even One Shot mode! This is very worrying for anyone with the camera (is it going to happen to me and if so, when etc) and for those thinking about buying (e.g Javier). I am not sure what the solution is and it would seem that neither do Canon which IS almost terrifying!
Barrie
Posted by Martin Dyer on January 9, 2008 at 11:22 AM
' I am surprised that all of these people experiencing problems both before and after fixes are keeping their cameras'
I am not keeping it - it has gone back to where it came from.
BTW - I never had a problem in One Shot. In this mode, it has produced the best files I have ever had And it was following feedback on this specific area from a number of people whose views and experience I respect, yourself included, that originally helped me towards making the decision to buy.
It is just so frustrating when I try to get images of something that moves, particularly when I compare back to the 2N
I am not aware of anyone who has a blue spot that is unhappy - maybe that is the answer.
I have only heard reasonably positive noises on these - maybe somebody else knows better.
Cheers
Martin
Posted by Phil Shaw on January 9, 2008 at 11:27 AM
Canon's advice, at least to Rob Galbraith in October, is to set C. FnIII-7 (AF Microadjustment) to 1 (adjust all lenses by the same amount) and dial in an adjustment of -1. RG found that this improved tracking performance and resulted in an increase in the number of sharply focused or very nearly sharp frames when the camera is tracking
Canon did not offer an explanation for the advice and all the lenses and bodies used in the October test had been specially calibrated for that purpose by Canon in Japan.
Posted by Paul Ashton on January 9, 2008 at 12:20 PM
Although I have been using SLR cameras for several decades only very recently have I taken to using a super telephoto and taking moving subjects. This is a different ball game entirely and anyone attempting to follow my example will have a steep learning curve to go through
I have not calibrated my lenses and, as yet, am unable to see any need.
The 1D3 is a complex piece of equipment and I have made only elementry adjustments to the settings with regard to AL and AF. The aim being to establish that I can get a sequence of sharp images of moving subjects under favourable conditions. Once this has been achieved then I can do some fine tuning.
Using the 1D3 in one shot mode on static subjects has produced consistently sharp images of high quality from day one. Failures have been a result of user error like to camera movement and shallow depth of field.
In AL mode
I have been able to get decent results of subjects that are travelling across the field of view and it would appear that results after the fix are more reliable.
During yesterdays trial virtually all bursts where the subject was crossing were sharp from start to finish. On subject moving to or from me where the first frame was sharp then so were the remainder. If the first shot was unsharp so were the rest of the set.
With regard to Black Kites in the Ngorogoro then I think Phil has done extremely well to get over 50 sharp images, that's 50 more than I got. They were always to close, to low and to quick. I was using a 100-400 on a 5D
I appreciate that others are more experienced with this type of equipment but can only share with you my own findings to date.
Posted by Paul Ashton on January 9, 2008 at 1:03 PM
Here is a genuine 100% crop of one of the images from the top sequence.
1D3 500mm 1/500 f4 ISO100
On reflection I should have used a higher shutter speed to eliminate the risk of camera shake.
Posted by Paul Ashton on January 9, 2008 at 2:43 PM
Here is a genuine 100% crop of one of the images from the top sequence.
1D3 500mm 1/500 f4 ISO100
On reflection I should have used a higher shutter speed to eliminate the risk of camera shake.
Posted by Martin Dyer on January 9, 2008 at 2:45 PM
Paul,
I would be keen to see exactly where the active AF point was on this. One of water droplets looks sharp.
Has this crop been sharpened?
Martin
Posted by Paul Ashton on January 9, 2008 at 3:12 PM
Discussion
25 repliesHere's the results from a short burst.
OK not great images but they are in focus
Frederic
I have just returned from Tanzania where I used my "fixed" (hardware and firmware up-grades) 1D3 to photograph black kites at the Lerai picnic site in the Ngorongoro Crater. The kites are active at mid-day when they come to the picnic site to steal lunch from unwary tourists. Mid-day in the Crater is usually hot and bright - the kind of conditions that should provide a test for the 1D3 fix.
Kites are large birds and are relatively easy to track in flight and at Lerai provide repeated opportunities for close-proximity, in-flight, photographs. I was shooting with flash using 300/f2.8 and a 70-200/f2.8 lenses at f5.6 and 1/1600s in AI Servo mode. The sky was blue and there was nothing else for the autofocus system to grab onto other than the subject. Out of 174 frames where the centre focus point is squarely on the subject only 51 are sharp (29 percent). Personally, I don't think this is acceptable, and is not much of an improvement (if any) upon the performance of the camera prior to the hardware fix. When I have shot at this site before using a 1D2N (and even a 1V back in the days of film), virtually every shot in which the central sensor squarely hits the subject is sharp.
I have also been disappointed by the ability of the 1D3 to capture sharply-focus images when using both the Canon 1.4x and 2x extenders. I generally have no hesitation in using the 1.4x and 2x extenders (suitably stopped down) on my 1Ds2 and have consistently been able to capture sharp images with them. This is not the case with the Mk3, however, which frequently produces images that are softer than I am accustomed to, even when using One Shot AF mode. In my opinion there are still unresolved problems with this camera.
Whilst what you say is true about how to assess if something is sharp, I am assuming that Paul has the nouse to do so and is satisfied with his camera.
As to you experiences what have Canon said about them?
T
It worked reasonably well in bright light, although I did some back to back testing with the 40D and the 40D images were consistently sharper.
However, where it really fell to pieces was once a cloud turned up - just useless in flat or grey light.
All tests with either 300f2.8 and 70-200f2.8 and all micro adjusted as well
The images are still not as good as my old mark2N
Martin
Out of curiosity, I assume you are using the high frame rate when in AI Servo mode but what fps setting are you using (i.e. are you using the default 10fps?).
Barrie
Steve
Please talk me out of this!!!!!!!!!
Javier
We all have different needs and expectations so our experiences will differ.
All I can say is that I have never had an AF problem with the 1D Mark 3 bodies I use (regularly use 3 and sometimes 4) either before or AFTER the 'fix'. Most of my work these days for which the 1D3's are used is news gathering but I regularly do sports work (a lot of athletics in the past year because of the Olympics) involving fast moving and erratic subjects. Not quite the same as wildlife but demanding on a camera's AF nonetheless. Mind you, I always have the top frame rate set at 6 or 7 fps rather than 10 - not sure if this makes a difference (hence my question to Phil)
I have always maintained that the problem is real but only affects people under certain circumstances which nonetheless must be a royal pain in the butt for them.
The circumstances seem to be hot and bright which is why I am always doubtful of those people who 'apparently' can find fault here in the UK where neither situation has presented itself for quite a while
As the investment is large, I suggest hiring a body for a while and try and get to use one under the conditions you normally shoot under and see where you go from there. Phil clearly is not convinced (not going to go there
I think this is what frustrates most people. If there was a clear and manifest fault that everyone experienced - it would be bad but at least it would be something we could identiy with and hopefully have addressed but because some people do get it all the time, some people, some of the time and others not at all but think they do 'cos they don't want to feel left out (
Barrie
Javier, I'm right with you; a D3 and 200-400/f4 is very tempting.
Tom, if you can suggest someone at Canon to talk to, I would be very interested. My current thoughts are to trade-in the mk3 for a 40D before I go to Yellowstone in February.
Stephen, I know a couple of other photographers who have experienced exactly the same problem with their Mk3 cameras. I think you have a good case for getting a replacement if not a refund.
As I mentioned i am finding the same as Phil, and have carried out extensive testing on moving subjects both BF and AF (before fix and after fix).
I too have pegged back the frame rate and shoot it at 5fps. Lenses AF micro adjusted and drive speed set to be compromised for AF tracking in the CF functions.
After fix, it was much better in bright good light but hopeless in grey light and as mentioned not as sharp as either my old mark2N or my partners 40D.
Phil - Have you tried out a blue spot? If yes and you are still unhappy, the 40D is a good alternate. I now am stealing Sue's more and more.
Cheers
Martin
Quite frankly, I am surprised that all of these people experiencing problems both before and after fixes are keeping their cameras. If I was having a problem, it would be straight back to the dealer for a refund. If the item is not performing as required, it is a clear contravention of the Sale of Goods Act in my (non legal) opinion especially as Canon have issued a recall
Barrie, have you calibrated your lenses on your MkIII's? It sounds as if Phil and Martin have done.
I am just surmising here but could it be connected with the calibration system??
Rob
I calibrated my long lenses but not the shorter ones (not a great deal of point to be honest).
I do find all this very alarming. If there was a "generic" fault, everyone would experience it but we don't. Why do I (and others) seem to have no problem (and I shoot literally thousands of images a month under all sorts of conditions) and someobody else can't seem to use even One Shot mode! This is very worrying for anyone with the camera (is it going to happen to me and if so, when etc) and for those thinking about buying (e.g Javier). I am not sure what the solution is and it would seem that neither do Canon which IS almost terrifying!
Barrie
I am not keeping it - it has gone back to where it came from.
BTW - I never had a problem in One Shot. In this mode, it has produced the best files I have ever had
It is just so frustrating when I try to get images of something that moves, particularly when I compare back to the 2N
I am not aware of anyone who has a blue spot that is unhappy - maybe that is the answer.
I have only heard reasonably positive noises on these - maybe somebody else knows better.
Cheers
Martin
Canon did not offer an explanation for the advice and all the lenses and bodies used in the October test had been specially calibrated for that purpose by Canon in Japan.
I have not calibrated my lenses and, as yet, am unable to see any need.
The 1D3 is a complex piece of equipment and I have made only elementry adjustments to the settings with regard to AL and AF. The aim being to establish that I can get a sequence of sharp images of moving subjects under favourable conditions. Once this has been achieved then I can do some fine tuning.
Using the 1D3 in one shot mode on static subjects has produced consistently sharp images of high quality from day one. Failures have been a result of user error like to camera movement and shallow depth of field.
In AL mode
I have been able to get decent results of subjects that are travelling across the field of view and it would appear that results after the fix are more reliable.
During yesterdays trial virtually all bursts where the subject was crossing were sharp from start to finish. On subject moving to or from me where the first frame was sharp then so were the remainder. If the first shot was unsharp so were the rest of the set.
With regard to Black Kites in the Ngorogoro then I think Phil has done extremely well to get over 50 sharp images, that's 50 more than I got. They were always to close, to low and to quick. I was using a 100-400 on a 5D
I appreciate that others are more experienced with this type of equipment but can only share with you my own findings to date.
1D3 500mm 1/500 f4 ISO100
On reflection I should have used a higher shutter speed to eliminate the risk of camera shake.
1D3 500mm 1/500 f4 ISO100
On reflection I should have used a higher shutter speed to eliminate the risk of camera shake.
I would be keen to see exactly where the active AF point was on this. One of water droplets looks sharp.
Has this crop been sharpened?
Martin