-Official- 1D MK III AF Thread. Firmware? Hardware Fix Is IN!!!

This thread is intended as a place to document the progress being made by Canon and MK III owners in the resolution of the autofocus issues. In the old thread, there was a lot of discussion about whether or not there even was a problem, a lot of venting about Canon, rumor, speculation, and a fair amount of off-topic banter. Except for the promising reports on the pending release of the 1.1.1 firmware upgrade, there has been very little new information in weeks. We're hoping for a more concise discussion of significant developments without having to sort through pages of irrelevance.

In fairness to everyone hoping to get useful information, we're going to start this discussion over again with a few limitations:
1. The problems are well documented by now. We don't need more horror stories about blown shots. We would prefer to hear from people who have actual experience with the MK III.
2. We are interested in relevant news ('news' being the operative word). Endless rehashing of old developments is not useful to people trying to find useful, current information about the MK III.
3. We are eager to hear what things you might have done to improve the camera's performance. (settings, techniques, etc.)
4. A lot of you are very unhappy with Canon right now, and have openly discussed your frustrations here. We're going to ask that you refrain from that sort of venting in this thread. That might be a potential topic for another thread someday, but it contributes nothing to the discussion we want to have here.
5. If it has been said before, please don't repeat it.

We will 'sticky' this thread in the EOS Forum so it will be easy to find.

At present, the big news is the pending release of firmware ver. 1.1.1. Much of what we've heard is very hopeful. We want to hear from people who have actual experience with it, first-person preferred. Hearsay is useful, but not as convincing as actual experience. If Canon has made a hardware repair to your MK III that seems to help, we'd love to know what it was so we can have the benefit of that knowledge when we're dealing with Canon service personnel.

The main idea is to eliminate the need for people to read through 3,000+ posts to find out what's going on with the MK III. We're just tightening things up a little.

Thank you all for your cooperation, patience, and understanding.


Tom

For those of you who are new to this discussion, the old thread can be found here.

I can agree with the change...thanks for narrowing this down. Now, I do have experience with the Mark III, and own one...

fair enough. however, i ask that you don't "lose" the original thread. i believe the size of that thread speaks volumes about the size of the problem. if a new buyer (or somebody from Canon) comes to this thread and only sees 27 posts, it may be dismissed as internet BS.

I've posted a link to that thread here (in my second post). You are absolutely right...it serves as a historical benchmark. It's just too long to be useful to people new to the subject.

Reposting from the old thread.

I am a MkIIn loyalist, was one of the first in the country to take delivery, and I believe the first @ POTN in 9/05. I have shot near every situation with multiple bodies in those two years. I had been holding off on the MKIII, but decided to pickup a new copy from a local brick and mortar shop yesterday.

The camera was built in 08/07 (Oita) and has a SN of 53XXXX with firmware 1.1.0 installed. After testing what claims have been prevalent, I can say that my body is experiencing none of them so far. These tests were done right out the box, no Cfn's, no tweaks, etc...I've tested the AI-Servo with accelerating objects coming towards me, static images with both focus point and RoF, and under harsh/high contrast lighting.

Feel free to PM with specifics questions if you are deliberating on making the switch. Your questions should help me round out testing.

Thanks.

bmx43 wrote in post #3935399
fair enough. however, i ask that you don't "lose" the original thread. i believe the size of that thread speaks volumes about the size of the problem. if a new buyer (or somebody from Canon) comes to this thread and only sees 27 posts, it may be dismissed as internet BS.

If you're into statistics, see https://photography-on-the.net …php?do=whoposte​d&t=336920

I started typing this in the other thread, and it was locked when I went to post, so I lost it all

Screamer: I agree with your attempt to test before your return period expires. Your tests against the issues some were having are a good idea. Also make sure you take plenty of pictures in your 'normal' shooting environment, before time expires.

However, I don't think your tests are any indication Canon has fixed or changed anything, which some seemed to draw as a conclusion. I and others conducted the same tests with our early release cameras, and we did post pictures too. There are very few people with issues in these shooting scenarios. If you told me you were buying an MK-III and going to run these tests I would put money on the outcome being positive. I'd loose this bet on occasion, but rarely, with early or current release III's.

I can't explain RG's tests. I did my best to reproduce them and did NOT have the same problems he has had with multiple bodies.

JohnC

Completely fair and I agree, I think it's promising but not conclusive by any means. I mentioned I wasn't selling any MkIIn's yet.

I'll be shooting heavily with it in the next couple of weeks. I'm shooting in studio tomorrow for publication and I have every intent on testing it there. Live work next weekend, etc...I'll be able to say with more certainty at that point if that particular body is performing correctly for my needs.

My hope is that we start seeing a trend towards consistently correct performing bodies. I was just documenting what I had so far. Feel free to send me specific scenarios that your's failed. I'll try to do as much a/b with my mkIIn's as possible.

Pekka wrote in post #3935519
If you're into statistics, see https://photography-on-the.net …php?do=whoposte​d&t=336920

I agree in regard to the topic of size doesn't matter. What does matter are two things:

1) The fact that numerous pro's are having problems (validates the issue which Canon has yet to acknowledge)

and

2) the actual ratio of good MkIIIs to bad MkIIIs (which says how big the problem is).

KAC

Let´s see if I can contribute with some partial positive news related to ver 1.1.1 ... I apologize if it´s already know by all you as the post day is not very lastly ...

http://www.sportsshoot​er.com …ge_display.html​?tid=26151

I extract this infos ...

Slobodan Juric

->> Someone just e-mailed me who is a Sportshooter member and also on the dpreview site - made me aware that someone claims they have their hands on firmware 1.1.1 which claims to fix AF issues and Error 99 message. The person also says the public release is September.

Hope this has an ounce of truth - but I doubt it for now at least.

......

.....

Dan Root

Just an added note. If anyone uses a 1.4 extender on a Mark III, Canon recommends that you use the center point only. I read this in the Canon literature. I also came across a web page that said choosing all 45 points gets better results than picking out a single AF point. I did that while shooting skateboarding indoors, and had great results, but I did not check it against choosing a single point. So take this with a grain of salt.


Matti Matikainen

->> One Finnish shooter who is in Osaka and has 1.1.1 beta, told that Mark III is now better keeper and it doesn´t go back and forth so much anymoore. But overall he is not sure if it is true or is it just a feeling. But the possible fix is just for one focus point servo shooting. The major question is that the 45point focus is still what ever and will it be fixed soon or not at all. I personally don´t need 45 point focus but I know many who use it. In Finland Canon doesn´t comment anything about focus "possible" problems in Mark III. But if Canon admit the problem -legally in here you would be the winner and
in that case you could bring your Mark III´s to Canon and say "you have been selling me an bad products and I want my money back- by the law "bascilly" they must do it. So personally I don´t think that Canon will say in public that Mark III has a problem. In our office we have both very good ones, at servo good frames 95-99%- and very very bad ones only 1 or 2 out of 20 is in focus.

.... it follows ....

interestingly enough, my camera had problems with a 300 f2.8 today (noticeable hunting on a slow moving football player), yet with a 70-200 i got nothing out of focus (when it locked onto something, it followed it very well, even if sometimes it locked onto the wrong subject, that one would be followed). if i remember correctly, RG only had problems with his 300. i'm wondering if this has more to do with a drive issue than an af sensor issue, especially considering the difference in voltage drop between a 70-200 and a 300 (both with IS turned off). surprisingly, with IS on, the 300 worked much better.

IIRC, RG also tested it with his other lenses but i could be wrong. sorry to hear about your experience today..

A word from the wilds of Africa...

As some of you may recall, my Mkiii was particualrly "bad" and was returned to me from service just days prior to my departure.

Service mentioned the "electrical adjustements" to AF system as repair.

I am in an internet cafe a day prior to my return, I have not been able to view any of my images on screen (other than the MkIII's own LCD) so I do not have a good idea of total results,.. but I can offer this re: a "fixed" MkIII

The camera has performed seemingly flawlessly for me for 90% of the shooting I'm doing even in high temps.

However, this aside, I have had oportunity on this trip to shoot it totally side by side with the MkII in the same circumstances on the saem subjects, and there is not doubt in my mind that for BIF shots particulary where the background is busier, the Mk2 still excels. With this one caveat, the repaired MkIII has been a joy to shoot.

When I get back I will be able to reveiw the images, hopefully my assesment will remain accurate.

CDS do you have the 1.1.1 update installed?

Heard that Canon are sending out repaired mk3's with the update.