The latest report on 1D Mark III AF issues

kenyc wrote in post #3913280
What thread is this?
only one in stock, could be a return.

KAC

AH well my last post refered to the 1dsmk3 although this is the 1dmk3 wont work right thread lol
Rob.

I had a dream last night that all of my gear was stolen.

Let's just say I was only disappointed because I don't want to make an insurance claim and screw up my good record and I have some shoots coming up I would have to rent gear for. But when the funds came in I was planning on buying Nikon. Only thing I don't like about the D3 is the rather paltry 17 frame buffer for NEF.

Shadowplay wrote in post #3913700
Only thing I don't like about the D3 is the rather paltry 17 frame buffer for NEF.

Hell of a lot better than a screwed up AF system.

jr_senator wrote in post #3913714
Hell of a lot better than a screwed up AF system.

Oh believe me, I'll take 2 bum shots and 15 in focus shots over the 1D's 2 in focus, 25 soft, and 5 totally whacked. But, I'd like to have 27 in focus and 3 OOF

Funny...B&H shows them "In Stock"...never saw that before....must have been some returns

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

GBRandy wrote in post #3913861
Funny...B&H shows them "In Stock"...never saw that before....must have been some returns

First time for everything.

KAC

GBRandy wrote in post #3913861
Funny...B&H shows them "In Stock"...never saw that before....must have been some returns...

I guess I am not the only person that will not (at this time, anyway) touch that camera with an 11' pole.

speaking of D3 samples :
http://nikonimaging.co​m …lcamera/slr/d3/​sample.htm

before anyone jumps the ships (including me)
couple facts:

1) Canon sucks in presenting their samples ...they are kind of on the soft side, wb is not all that good ...expo could be a little bit better
2)nikon does much better job in presenting their sample images which you can all see under the link ...still
they have used perfect conditions to shoot those, i am sure they have used expo compensation and the 6400 samples being very good does show color casts and pretty poor DR...my point is ..no miracles here ...iso performance is in the same league
as mark III or 5D. I don't think it's any better ...i can get that kind of quality of my mark III any time as long as i have enough light to dial in +2/3 expo compensation.

drogos wrote in post #3914692
speaking of D3 samples :
http://nikonimaging.co​m …lcamera/slr/d3/​sample.htm

before anyone jumps the ships (including me)
couple facts:

1) Canon sucks in presenting their samples ...they are kind of on the soft side, wb is not all that good ...expo could be a little bit better
2)nikon does much better job in presenting their sample images which you can all see under the link ...still
they have used perfect conditions to shoot those, i am sure they have used expo compensation and the 6400 samples being very good does show color casts and pretty poor DR...my point is ..no miracles here ...iso performance is in the same league
as mark III or 5D. I don't think it's any better ...i can get that kind of quality of my mark III any time as long as i have enough light to dial in +2/3 expo compensation.

What did you expect? The D3 has roughly the same size photo sites as the 5D, so you could expect a marginally improvement due to larger microlenses and thinner filters at best.
If Nikon continues using strong NR, as they have done in the past, the high ISO images will look cleaner for sure – at the expense of losing tonal accuracy and detail.

As you stated already, one can always tweak an image all the way to make it look pretty good even at high ISO – at least at the first glance - they have done so even with the rather noisy D200.

GBRandy wrote in post #3913861
Funny...B&H shows them "In Stock"...never saw that before....must have been some returns

I was told they received a new shipment. Berger Bros. shows them in stock as well. Looks like there was no significant production stoppage after all.

D200 was slight improvement over d100 ..not really noticable in real life shooting ...but my point is nikon was saying that they have maid revolutionary iso performance improvements ...far surpassing canon's ..well they did make revolution in their own world but that revolution has only matched canon's performace so i feel good about canon again (jeeezz what a gearhead next generation 5D should only prove canon supremacy in high iso world

I just went to BH and sure enough, they show in stock. I wrote a rather scathing review also. Under the area where it asks, "What accessories do you recommend with this item" I entered "A lawyer." It says my review should be posted within three business days. I assume they review my review. It will be interesting to see if they allow my review to be added to the current ones.

Interesting.....well if the shipments are rolling in and the reputation of the camera is shot....at least for people like me...sales will slow and just maybe Canon will concede and at least acknowledge a concern and address it. Stock piles of unsold units that people do not want to buy has to at least get someone's attention at the monolithic Canon.

My point being that if one wants to be taken seriously (whether by Canon, potential consumers, or otherwise), one should write objectively and seriously. Comments such as a lawyer being a recommended accessory detract from rather than add to the credibility of the other comments. A review that states, "Here is what I personally experienced and had problems with ...." without sarcasm would be more persuasive in my mind.

PhotoGeek wrote in post #3915615
My point being that if one wants to be taken seriously (whether by Canon, potential consumers, or otherwise), one should write objectively and seriously. Comments such as a lawyer being a recommended accessory detract from rather than add to the credibility of the other comments. A review that states, "Here is what I personally experienced and had problems with ...." without sarcasm would be more persuasive in my mind.

You haven't even read the review yet. Your previous post, prior to this one, was rude and unnecessarily so.