While I understand your apparent frustration, the link doesn't say that there is a fault, merely an 'enhancement' is to be made available:
"This firmware update further enhances the AF tracking performance . . . "
Admittedly, having to release an update so soon does put a certain slant on the situation, but then again, even Nikon D3's had early 'enhancements' and they turned out to be great cameras.
It is far too early to be jumping to conclusions; it would however be extremely negligent of Canon if they don't get this camera right - their market share in the DSLR sector would surely take a big hit. I might hold on to my 1Ds3 now - it focuses perfectly.
Cheers,
Chris
I wonder if Cadbury Diary Milk bars will be cheaper in the US too?
Posted by David Kjaer on January 22, 2010 at 2:27 PM
Hi Chris
Not jumping to any conclusions, but I find it odd that Canon are saying 'Canon is working to release a firmware update for the EOS-1D Mark IV' which suggests to me that the AF is not performing as it should in the two areas they mention. If there was not a problem they would simply have announced the firmware update as an enhancement when it was available.
David
Posted by Philip Newman on January 22, 2010 at 2:37 PM
For a camera barely available and at that cost I consider it a fault. Canon is getting a joke and this is a disgrace to them yet again and will do nothing to enhance sales.
I have replied in the main, as per the e-mail, so I won't repeat things. I do know a guy from 'across the pond' who thinks this is 'outstanding', I will be interested to see how he gets on
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Was up at Elstree earlier in the week and got talking to a leading UK sports photographer. He shoots for Getty and has THREE mark IV bodies and says it's a stunning camera. Al servo mode spot on. So there you go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well he's hardly likely to say anything else after acquiring three bodies.
Phil.
Posted by Matt Tellum on January 23, 2010 at 10:43 AM
Phill i for one certainly hope he is right.LOL.
Posted by Andy Astbury on January 23, 2010 at 12:51 PM
There's nothing wrong with the Canon 1danything that switching to a Nikon D3 won't fix - and whining about glass is a waste of time; good glass is useless without a good camera
Sorry - couldn't help it..........................
I think the problem is that the AF is a tweaked MKIII system, They have had 3 years to get it sorted and obviously are still not quite there, Early reports seem to suggest that its an improvement over the MKIII but that couldnt be difficult and that noise is equal to the D3 (Not D3s) which is quite an achievment considering the pixel count, I guess if you buy an early camera from what ever manufactuer then you have to expect early tweeks to get things right
I guess if you buy an early camera from what ever manufactuer then you have to expect early tweeks to get things right
No Dave, you shouldn't expect it.
You should expect something as fundamental as metering or AF to be spot on.That's why manufacturers have QC departments and why cameras are field tested before being released.
Unfortunately all manufacturers in their haste to bring new products to market cut corners and rely on us poor mutts to do their testing for them.. and we let them get away with it every time
Posted by Phil Shaw on January 23, 2010 at 2:07 PM
Was up at Elstree earlier in the week and got talking to a leading UK sports photographer. He shoots for Getty and has THREE mark IV bodies and says it's a stunning camera. Al servo mode spot on. So there you go.
Well I'm not going to give the Mk4 an unequivical thumbs up. Many people thought the Mk3 was great as well.
I've only shot 100 or so frames with the Mk4 (today), but the weather and light levels have been pretty poor today and normally, I wouldn't even have bothered shooting. All of the "test" shots were shot in AI Servo which is how I normally shoot; I was using a single focusing point with no expansion and I had the exposure mode set to auto iso - aperture and shutter speed fixed at f5.6 + 1/400s; lens used was 300/f2.8 IS on a tripod. I was shooting a fox going about its business in long grass with various poles and posts between the camera and the subject. I got a lot of soft frames. OK, maybe the shutter speed wasn't high enough - I like to get it up to 1/800s so at the moment I'm thinking that that is the reason for the majority of the soft shots. One thing is for sure though, image quality at high iso is nowhere near that of my D3. Also, from I've read in the Canon literature, focusing in poor light is no better than the Mk3 - so the D3 is definitely superior in that respect as well. I do find the focus point adjustment on the D3 pretty clunky though, and I definitely loose shots when using that camera, as a result. I'd be interested in comments from anyone who has a D3s about whether or not this aspect of the camera's ergonomics has improved.
If this or a similar thread remains open, I will add comments about the mk4 as I use it more.
No reports as yet... other than it turns on. The first report will be on ISO as the light is to poor to give me a decent shutter speed to do moving subjects.
Discussion
18 repliesCanon Europe Support announcement on 1D_Mark_IV
surely not again - I find it amazing that for a grossly over priced professional product, that yet again it has not been properly 'beta tested'
I will now wait until the price is closer to £3,000 and the initial bugs have been corrected. I see the opening price in the US is around £3,200
David
In my opinion Canon's reputation has a reliable maker of 'fast action' cameras depends on the performance of this camera.
While I understand your apparent frustration, the link doesn't say that there is a fault, merely an 'enhancement' is to be made available:
"This firmware update further enhances the AF tracking performance . . . "
Admittedly, having to release an update so soon does put a certain slant on the situation, but then again, even Nikon D3's had early 'enhancements' and they turned out to be great cameras.
It is far too early to be jumping to conclusions; it would however be extremely negligent of Canon if they don't get this camera right - their market share in the DSLR sector would surely take a big hit. I might hold on to my 1Ds3 now - it focuses perfectly.
Cheers,
Chris
I wonder if Cadbury Diary Milk bars will be cheaper in the US too?
Not jumping to any conclusions, but I find it odd that Canon are saying 'Canon is working to release a firmware update for the EOS-1D Mark IV' which suggests to me that the AF is not performing as it should in the two areas they mention. If there was not a problem they would simply have announced the firmware update as an enhancement when it was available.
David
I have replied in the main, as per the e-mail, so I won't repeat things. I do know a guy from 'across the pond' who thinks this is 'outstanding', I will be interested to see how he gets on
Steve
Which if you recall, is almost exactly what they said when the Mark 3 first hit the photo headlines for the wrong reasons
Maybe they're trying to head any criticism of at the pass... but they're probably opening a Pandora's box for rumour
Booooo, hissssss
Was up at Elstree earlier in the week and got talking to a leading UK sports photographer. He shoots for Getty and has THREE mark IV bodies and says it's a stunning camera. Al servo mode spot on. So there you go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well he's hardly likely to say anything else
Phil.
Sorry - couldn't help it..........................
Dave
No Dave, you shouldn't expect it.
You should expect something as fundamental as metering or AF to be spot on.That's why manufacturers have QC departments and why cameras are field tested before being released.
Unfortunately all manufacturers in their haste to bring new products to market cut corners and rely on us poor mutts to do their testing for them.. and we let them get away with it every time
Well I'm not going to give the Mk4 an unequivical thumbs up. Many people thought the Mk3 was great as well.
I've only shot 100 or so frames with the Mk4 (today), but the weather and light levels have been pretty poor today and normally, I wouldn't even have bothered shooting. All of the "test" shots were shot in AI Servo which is how I normally shoot; I was using a single focusing point with no expansion and I had the exposure mode set to auto iso - aperture and shutter speed fixed at f5.6 + 1/400s; lens used was 300/f2.8 IS on a tripod. I was shooting a fox going about its business in long grass with various poles and posts between the camera and the subject. I got a lot of soft frames. OK, maybe the shutter speed wasn't high enough - I like to get it up to 1/800s so at the moment I'm thinking that that is the reason for the majority of the soft shots. One thing is for sure though, image quality at high iso is nowhere near that of my D3. Also, from I've read in the Canon literature, focusing in poor light is no better than the Mk3 - so the D3 is definitely superior in that respect as well. I do find the focus point adjustment on the D3 pretty clunky though, and I definitely loose shots when using that camera, as a result. I'd be interested in comments from anyone who has a D3s about whether or not this aspect of the camera's ergonomics has improved.
If this or a similar thread remains open, I will add comments about the mk4 as I use it more.
Cheers, Graham
No reports as yet... other than it turns on. The first report will be on ISO as the light is to poor to give me a decent shutter speed to do moving subjects.
T
Another view
Frederic