-Official- 1D MK III AF Thread.

you may or may not be able to get a good shot at a shutter speed of 1/80 or 1/200 with a 300mm lens and a 1.4 converter but who in their right mind would then use that in order to suggest there is a problem with the markIII?..try shooting at 1/1000 and up and see what you get....

jlbrach wrote in post #5261170
you may or may not be able to get a good shot at a shutter speed of 1/80 or 1/200 with a 300mm lens and a 1.4 converter but who in their right mind would then use that in order to suggest there is a problem with the markIII?..try shooting at 1/1000 and up and see what you get....

That would be jBear2000 who was making that complaint! He was comparing his results to those from his Mk II.

Tested with my daughter running at 12 noon.

justshot wrote in post #5267605
Tested with my daughter running at 12 noon.

Do you think the focus is ok?

well, Do You???
it's really hard to tell by looking at compressed, downsampled online version ..I am sure it's easier to determine by looking and original raw at 100%. Looks decent enough for me, nice color

the exif is removed but it looks like the shutter speed is too slow to really determine focus.

justshot wrote in post #5267605
Tested with my daughter running at 12 noon.

Do you think the focus is ok?

Looks ok from here but the question is, what were the others like in the burst, if there was one?

drogos wrote in post #5267660
well, Do You???
it's really hard to tell by looking at compressed, downsampled online version ..I am sure it's easier to determine by looking and original raw at 100%. Looks decent enough for me, nice color

Looks ok to me. But then, I am still new to this

blonde wrote in post #5267661
the exif is removed but it looks like the shutter speed is too slow to really determine focus.

Checked my file... it's F8, 800 and ISO 200.

What is the recommanded setting for this type of shoots?

Anke wrote in post #5267672
Looks ok from here but the question is, what were the others like in the burst, if there was one?

The rest are the same

Burst it like a machine gun. Wife was standing about 50 meters away and she could hear the shutter sounds. Perhaps because there were no one else there then.

I am like gunning down my daughter, hahhahahaha.....

justshot wrote in post #5267701
Checked my file... it's F8, 800 and ISO 200.

What is the recommanded setting for this type of shoots?

Try ISO 800. Two stops faster shutter available, or two stops smaller aperture, or a combination.

800 on the mk3 seems to be essentially noiseless with correct exposure.

-js

Thanks number six.

Will try that next time... got to "pursuade" my daughter to run again...

What a sweetie. Enjoy every moment at that age, it goes by so darn fast!

Who in his right mind... sheesh nice talk!

When i'm standing next to honestly one of the absolute best aviation photographers in the business and flanked by a really good Nikon shooter on the other side... and I'm holding a 1Ds Mark II with a 100-400 L IS AND a Mark III with a 70-200 L IS 2.8... and the damn Mark III doesn't perform as well under similar conditions and compared to the other guys who are shooting with similar settings (since 1/80 IS the standard for prop disc)

Who the hell are you to question something you evidently didn't read or know enough to say anything about? Stay with your 1/1000 safety shots - but when you're ready to play with the big boys... you're gonna have to show your stuff at 1/80th!

---------off my soap box speech to the ill informed...

now on to one who matters...

Tony - that 1/100th shot of the blue Staudacher(?) is really nice and your panning is coming along nicely. Its really really good. It might be a tad soft though but that could be the difference between the 5D and the 1D series. I don't believe its you. I've just seen too many Mark III shots like that. I've also seen too many Mark II and IIn shots that are so tack sharp you would cut yourself.

Head to head - by experience and by the results of others as well as mine - I'm going to judge the Mark III in the shooting conditions for which it was made - high speed, AF servo tracking fast moving objects. It fails - it has failed and Canon has acknowledged it - and it hasn't been remedied to the satisfaction of many pros who have tried to shoot with them. It is too unreliable for day to day use - when an important clients spends 10 grand or more on a one hour air to air shoot - and then has to be told you'll re-shoot for free when your Mark III images aren't good enough. You're not going to get a recall - you probably will get sued!

I know my skill set isn't Jim Wilson's or Paul Bowen's or a lot of shooters out there - but frankly - they are pretty good and I aspire to get better. I left 1/1000 long ago unless I'm shooting jets - which have no visible moving parts you WANT to blur... and I could shoot 1/4000 or more if the light were right... gee...
Pan this:

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Is there a force field that'll force you to get good pictures?

pjtemplin wrote in post #5277021
Is there a force field that'll force you to get good pictures?

let me roll it to you...

NO

They are just really good shooters who happen to be using similar settings and getting better results. One using his 1Ds Mark III and a 100-400 and the other using his Nikon D300 with a 200-400. Granted - Jim Wilson can hand hold a 600 and get great shots like this - his record though is in near total dark at 1/20 and tack sharp air to air - and if I remember correctly with a 70-200 2.8. The bar is set where it CAN be done - not where anyone can walk up and meet it Some (maybe a lot) is the shooter. But the problem this thread exists for, is that some of the problem is the equipment. The rubber meets the road where we live and breath - for some thats way up in those lofty heights of 1/1000... for those I chose to run with - its at 1/120 or slower.

The comparison only goes so far as to say - all things being equal as far as the many variables - the Mark III does not perform.

We'll see how it does when its back from fix #2... and by the way - i sent 400 images to Canon and many were shot from 1/80 all the way up to 1/1000. They needed a good sample.

If all i had to shoot were brides running away from their jilted boyfriends at the alter... then I'd not worry about this as much either. But that's not photography to me - its just another mediocre job I never want to do again.