Posted by Phil Shaw on January 25, 2010 at 11:26 AM
I have concluded my testing with the Mk4.
I shot another 100+ images of foxes on Sunday. Again the light was suboptimal so I was shooting AI servo using auto ISO at f4 and 1/640s with a tripod-mounted 300/f2.8IS and single focus point selected (no expansion). I have looked at all of these images at full resolution using the Canon supplied software with the focus point highlight; only 29 of the images were acceptably sharp at the point of focus; 68 images were soft or not critically sharp at the point of focus and in 6 frames either the focus was lost due to intervening objects or the focus point was not on the intended subject (1 sharp at point of focus: 5 not sharp).
I have subsequently done some more testing in the garden today, using the same set up, shooting a static test chart. What this has revealed is that the image is consistently soft when using the peripheral focus points, which I use alot.
Having been through the 1D Mk3 wait-and-see saga and never getting a properly working camera, or my money back, the Mk4 is being returned promptly for a refund.
Posted by Ian Butler on January 25, 2010 at 11:35 AM
Sounds like the same issue as the 7D!! What are Canon playing at? I need a new camera but after purchasing the 7D and returning it 3 weeks later and now wanting the 1d mK4 and hearing this I'm very tempted to move to Nikon.
I don't want to get into some form of autofocus debate, as I am no expert and more importantly I have not shot a lot of action shots as yet, so I will simply state the following.
I have, somewhat, tested the peripheral and centre focus on a static subject in reasonable demanding light conditions and am impressed.
Shooting at dusk, through a patio door glass into my garden, I used the washing line pegs on green para-chord as subjects. As the line is diagonally across the garden the pegs vary in distance between 2 meters and 4 meters in front of a dark brown fence and are individually about the size of a focus rectangle on the camera screen. They are about 12->14m from the camera.
The camera focused accurately with both the centre and far left/right horizontal peripheral focus points with no expansion points applied. The camera was placed on a bean bag on the kitchen surface I was able to obtain sharp results at the manufactures stated minimum -1EV i.e. 1600ASA, F2, 0.5". The lens was a 135mm USM EF L with an F2 maximum aperture. Focus was acheived with both AI-Servo and one shot AI selected with the AI servo hunting slightly before it found focus. It is worth noting that my eyes had trouble discerning the single red peg against the brown fence background so much so that manual focus was not really an option.
What the above proves to me is that the camera is capable of focusing accurately on a very small, isolated, static subject, with little contrast, in very low light - I was quite impressed as this opens up some new nature-photography avenues for me.
What it does not show is its performance in low light, or for that matter any light, on a moving subject. The likes of Galbraith can post that.
As for the ISO performance, I would say that @1600ASA it appears comparable to the performance of my old full frame 1ds3. The 1D4 has a small pixel size to the 1Ds3 hence I see this is an advance.
Posted by Karen Summers on January 25, 2010 at 12:25 PM
bad news for me I had my eye on that one later in the year now I am not so sure
Had you applied any micro-adjustment to the lens - i.e. corrected for the lens' manufacturing tolerances via the custom function? Out of interest have you repeated the test-card test with the Nikon D3?
Posted by Mark Green on January 26, 2010 at 4:05 AM
There are not any complaints on DPREVIEW, that i can see, I think if this camera was a duffer, it would suffer the same fate on there as the 7D did.
I agree on the micro-adjust, or you might be unlucky and have a bad copy.
There were a couple of posts on dpreview where people have duff ones, and the replacement was fine. all been said when you pay that much, it should be spot on.
Discussion
6 repliesI shot another 100+ images of foxes on Sunday. Again the light was suboptimal so I was shooting AI servo using auto ISO at f4 and 1/640s with a tripod-mounted 300/f2.8IS and single focus point selected (no expansion). I have looked at all of these images at full resolution using the Canon supplied software with the focus point highlight; only 29 of the images were acceptably sharp at the point of focus; 68 images were soft or not critically sharp at the point of focus and in 6 frames either the focus was lost due to intervening objects or the focus point was not on the intended subject (1 sharp at point of focus: 5 not sharp).
I have subsequently done some more testing in the garden today, using the same set up, shooting a static test chart. What this has revealed is that the image is consistently soft when using the peripheral focus points, which I use alot.
Having been through the 1D Mk3 wait-and-see saga and never getting a properly working camera, or my money back, the Mk4 is being returned promptly for a refund.
I have, somewhat, tested the peripheral and centre focus on a static subject in reasonable demanding light conditions and am impressed.
Shooting at dusk, through a patio door glass into my garden, I used the washing line pegs on green para-chord as subjects. As the line is diagonally across the garden the pegs vary in distance between 2 meters and 4 meters in front of a dark brown fence and are individually about the size of a focus rectangle on the camera screen. They are about 12->14m from the camera.
The camera focused accurately with both the centre and far left/right horizontal peripheral focus points with no expansion points applied. The camera was placed on a bean bag on the kitchen surface I was able to obtain sharp results at the manufactures stated minimum -1EV i.e. 1600ASA, F2, 0.5". The lens was a 135mm USM EF L with an F2 maximum aperture. Focus was acheived with both AI-Servo and one shot AI selected with the AI servo hunting slightly before it found focus. It is worth noting that my eyes had trouble discerning the single red peg against the brown fence background so much so that manual focus was not really an option.
What the above proves to me is that the camera is capable of focusing accurately on a very small, isolated, static subject, with little contrast, in very low light - I was quite impressed as this opens up some new nature-photography avenues for me.
What it does not show is its performance in low light, or for that matter any light, on a moving subject. The likes of Galbraith can post that.
As for the ISO performance, I would say that @1600ASA it appears comparable to the performance of my old full frame 1ds3. The 1D4 has a small pixel size to the 1Ds3 hence I see this is an advance.
Had you applied any micro-adjustment to the lens - i.e. corrected for the lens' manufacturing tolerances via the custom function? Out of interest have you repeated the test-card test with the Nikon D3?
Cheers,
Chris
Robert
I agree on the micro-adjust, or you might be unlucky and have a bad copy.
There were a couple of posts on dpreview where people have duff ones, and the replacement was fine. all been said when you pay that much, it should be spot on.
Cheers
Mark