The latest report on 1D Mark III AF issues

To try and show the diffrence this is with a 5D A SLOW STUDIO camera. same lens at 70mm 1/2000sec f4 iso 125 same sort of weather and aircraft about the same speed.
Rob.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

GyRob wrote in post #3864507
To try and show the diffrence this is with a 5D A SLOW STUDIO camera. same lens at 70mm 1/2000sec f4 iso 125 same sort of weather and aircraft about the same speed.
Rob.

Rob, How are you processing the M3 file , i.e RAW to JPEG in DPP and what picture style are you using in the M3.

Although I am one of the happy MKIII users I think under certain conditions the AF can be very inconsistent, in very bright light I often have to pump the AF-ON button to get the AF to start tracking again. I tried to take a picture of a small bird on a bird bath which was a off white colour, brightly lit. The camera had a lot of trouble focusing on the bird, kept hunting back and forth even with the lens limiter switch on. I only use AI-Servo, Centre AF point.

NickR wrote in post #3864587
Rob, How are you processing the M3 file , i.e RAW to JPEG in DPP and what picture style are you using in the M3.

Although I am one of the happy MKIII users I think under certain conditions the AF can be very inconsistent, in very bright light I often have to pump the AF-ON button to get the AF to start tracking again. I tried to take a picture of a small bird on a bird bath which was a off white colour, brightly lit. The camera had a lot of trouble focusing on the bird, kept hunting back and forth even with the lens limiter switch on. I only use AI-Servo, Centre AF point.

this mk3 shot was from the incamera jpeg set at 6 sharpness and plus 1 on the contrast the other settings in the midle.
i use cs3 to process.
i had to pump mine the other day shooting bird,s i just thought that was a glich and me not being use to it ,
Its A1SERVO that's the problem on mine either ROF or single point - 1shot seems to be fine .
i just rang the shop he said take it in and we will get it fixed
Rob.

NickR wrote in post #3864587
Although I am one of the happy MKIII users I think under certain conditions the AF can be very inconsistent, in very bright light I often have to pump the AF-ON button to get the AF to start tracking again. I tried to take a picture of a small bird on a bird bath which was a off white colour, brightly lit. The camera had a lot of trouble focusing on the bird, kept hunting back and forth even with the lens limiter switch on. I only use AI-Servo, Centre AF point.

Nick so you are one if the happy mkIII users even though you admit that the AF is inconsistent? not sure i understand that and why you are willing to accept that. the only reason why all of us has been screaming murder the entire time is not because we don't like the camera or don't think that it takes great images, it is because we are unwilling to accept inconsistent Af in a $4500 camera.

GyRob wrote in post #3864660
this mk3 shot was from the incamera jpeg set at 6 sharpness and plus 1 on the contrast the other settings in the midle.
i use cs3 to process.
i had to pump mine the other day shooting bird,s i just thought that was a glich and me not being use to it ,
Its A1SERVO that's the problem on mine either ROF or single point - 1shot seems to be fine .
i just rang the shop he said take it in and we will get it fixed
Rob.

I'll be anxiously awaiting the result.

KAC

blonde wrote in post #3864765
Nick so you are one if the happy mkIII users even though you admit that the AF is inconsistent? not sure i understand that and why you are willing to accept that. the only reason why all of us has been screaming murder the entire time is not because we don't like the camera or don't think that it takes great images, it is because we are unwilling to accept inconsistent Af in a $4500 camera.

Its only on the odd occasion I have problems, shooting Motorcycle Racing is my main interest and have not experienced many problems at all because I am probably getting a keeper rate of about 80%, I have been watching this thread for a long time so I sympathise with you and all the other M3 users having problems and agree Canon need to do something to FIX or change the way this camera works in AI-SERVO mode. I guess there are some very bad cameras which can be fixed by changing a faulty component in the M3 but mainly there seems to be a design flaw which may be fixable with a firmware update but probably will need a component change in the camera.

Cheers

kenyc wrote in post #3864855
I'll be anxiously awaiting the result.

KAC

i Just hope they dont send it to the same guy that fixed your's again and again and etc etc

i too am very happy with the camera as a camera BUT no way do i want one that wont do what it's supose too, HIT and Miss is no good to me and to have to take 10 shot's in the hope that i get a good one is a joke

I would not recomend anyone getting a mk3 at the moment all it does is cause frustration some shots sharp some not sharp yet the same setting's .
Rob.

jdizzle wrote in post #3863262
I was thinking Kenny that maybe your 100-400 needs calibration, since there's a possibility at 400 for it to be soft. How's the 100-400 @ 400 on your 5D and 20D?

all this talk about re-calibrating the lens to match the M3. here's my problem. all of my glass works fantastically on my 1Ds M2. That tells me that the "calibrate your lens" theory is another cop-out from Canon on this. if i re-calibrate everything for the M3, they won't work with my 1Ds so that is a lame solution and not something i'm willing to do.

also, i can confirm that it's not just the long lenses that have an issue. i get almost nothing usable out of my fisheye on the M3. the same lens that work awesome on the 1Ds. if the 1Ds had a reasonable FPS, i never would have wasted my $ on this new "supercamera".

bmx43 wrote in post #3865434
all this talk about re-calibrating the lens to match the M3. here's my problem. all of my glass works fantastically on my 1Ds M2. That tells me that the "calibrate your lens" theory is another cop-out from Canon on this. if i re-calibrate everything for the M3, they won't work with my 1Ds so that is a lame solution and not something i'm willing to do.

also, i can confirm that it's not just the long lenses that have an issue. i get almost nothing usable out of my fisheye on the M3. the same lens that work awesome on the 1Ds. if the 1Ds had a reasonable FPS, i never would have wasted my $ on this new "supercamera".

by recalibrate you mean micro adjustments or sending it to canon? because microadjustments are not destructive and quite helpful. if they want you to send it to canon, that's a different story...

basroil wrote in post #3865533
by recalibrate you mean micro adjustments or sending it to canon? because microadjustments are not destructive and quite helpful. if they want you to send it to canon, that's a different story...

absolutely. calibrating the camera to the lens is one thing, but calibrating the lens to the camera is a completely different deal.

NickR wrote in post #3864947
Its only on the odd occasion I have problems, shooting Motorcycle Racing is my main interest and have not experienced many problems at all because I am probably getting a keeper rate of about 80%, I have been watching this thread for a long time so I sympathise with you and all the other M3 users having problems and agree Canon need to do something to FIX or change the way this camera works in AI-SERVO mode. I guess there are some very bad cameras which can be fixed by changing a faulty component in the M3 but mainly there seems to be a design flaw which may be fixable with a firmware update but probably will need a component change in the camera.

Cheers

Nick, I'm really surprised to hear somebody say they are content with an 80 percent keeper rate. I need to better understand what you mean by keeper rate. Are you saying that "after" you toss out the shots that were your fault for not keeping the AF point on target that you only get an 80 percent keeper rate?

Regards,

jkurkjia wrote in post #3866042
Nick, I'm really surprised to hear somebody say they are content with an 80 percent keeper rate. I need to better understand what you mean by keeper rate. Are you saying that "after" you toss out the shots that were your fault for not keeping the AF point on target that you only get an 80 percent keeper rate?

Regards,

Joe, I guess 20% throw aways would include OOF due to my errors not nailing target, also camera shake due to low shutter speeds. I usually shoot about 600 frames at a Bikerace Meeting so roughly 80% keepers take a bit of sorting.

Cheers

NickR wrote in post #3866275
Joe, I guess 20% throw aways would include OOF due to my errors not nailing target, also camera shake due to low shutter speeds. I usually shoot about 600 frames at a Bikerace Meeting so roughly 80% keepers take a bit of sorting.

Cheers

well thats a great rate of keeper's often with my mk2 shooting birds in flight i got 95% But there the throw away ones
lucky if 5% were worth keeping -i get around 30% of jets but that can veary quite a lot.
i was hopeing my MK3 would have got around 8 to 10 % on birds and 40 to 50 % on the jets.
Rob

To NickR and GyRob

Not a m3 owner but interested in purchasing one and am interested in what is going on with the AF issues (as well as non-issues).

Have either one of you had the family car (a repeatable piece of test equipment) coming at you at a constant velocity, say 30 MPH and shot a sequence ending with the car about 10 feet from you? If you do the constant velocity car thing you should always wind up with 100 percent keepers with unquestionably sharp focus; this is the result I get using my 30D or 1DmkII. Note, you can even tape a resolution test target on the car for critical evaluation of focus.

A long time ago I got excellent results with my 10D on a city street but wasn't smart enough to do the test in a controlled fashion using the family car in our own subdivision at a specific time of day (also, the bursts on the 10D were short because of the limited buffer capacity).

Also, I'd like to repeat my question above for various levels of constant acceleration with the car taking off from a standing start. It would be interesting to compare constant velocity AI Servo AF with that of various levels of acceleration. I "suspect" the m3 should out-perform a 1DmkII in acceleration tracking "if" the AF is as fast as Canon claims.

Thanks in advance for your replies.

Regards,

jkurkjia wrote in post #3867019
Not a m3 owner but interested in purchasing one and am interested in what is going on with the AF issues (as well as non-issues).

Have either one of you had the family car (a repeatable piece of test equipment) coming at you at a constant velocity, say 30 MPH and shot a sequence ending with the car about 10 feet from you? If you do the constant velocity car thing you should always wind up with 100 percent keepers with unquestionably sharp focus; this is the result I get using my 30D or 1DmkII. Note, you can even tape a resolution test target on the car for critical evaluation of focus.

A long time ago I got excellent results with my 10D on a city street but wasn't smart enough to do the test in a controlled fashion using the family car in our own subdivision at a specific time of day (also, the bursts on the 10D were short because of the limited buffer capacity).

Also, I'd like to repeat my question above for various levels of constant acceleration with the car taking off from a standing start. It would be interesting to compare constant velocity AI Servo AF with that of various levels of acceleration. I "suspect" the m3 should out-perform a 1DmkII in acceleration tracking "if" the AF is as fast as Canon claims.

Thanks in advance for your replies.

Regards,

Like this? http://www.tessfamily.​com …IIN/1DMKIIIvs1D​MKIIN.html