-Official- 1D MK III AF Thread.

belmondo wrote in post #6340616
Brides move, don't they?

They do. And if you pinch 'em hard enough,they even fly

(was that correct English?)

My bride was a great little mover but has now turned in to an old bird not suited to being photographed with my 1DmkIII

Does this mean that CDS' new title will be "Photographer of Brides in Flight" ?

belmondo wrote in post #6339903
Apparently the Mk III is now recognized as the ideal wedding camera, so we're all switching to wedding photography.

HAHAHHAHA. I'm sorry, mine is a useless post Sir.
But I read this and burst into laughter.

Brilliant.

My MkIII is in the shop by the way. Due back in a week (felt like staying in topic somehow)

belmondo wrote in post #6339938
Actually, it was a simple spelling error.

Bride vs. bird.

echo wrote in post #6340689
My bride was a great little mover but has now turned in to an old bird not suited to being photographed with my 1DmkIII

Good thing you've already got the mkIII. If the bride/bird reads that, you might have more problems than AF issues to worry about.

Richard_Miami wrote in post #6342203
Does this mean that CDS' new title will be "Photographer of Brides in Flight" ?

First runaway brides, and now flying ones. What's the world coming to?

And remotely on topic, my 100-400 is mounted to my mkIII right now, and it still seems to be a functional combination, so I'm holding out hope for everyone involved and the dramas with their similar combos.

ibdb wrote in post #6342427



Good thing you've already got the mkIII. If the bride/bird reads that, you might have more problems than AF issues to worry about.

She would have glazed over by the time she got past the main page so reckon I'm safe

I fail to see the problem, your bird/bride can fly with sufficient thrust.

chauncey wrote in post #6343577
I fail to see the problem, your bird/bride can fly with sufficient thrust.

I will supply all the thrust needed

belmondo wrote in post #6339903
Not so much. It turns out we were all trying to take bird pictures, and that's not what the camera was designed for.

Apparently the Mk III is now recognized as the ideal wedding camera, so we're all switching to wedding photography.

1Dm3 for weddings
5Dm2 for weddings

I see a trend.

scokar wrote in post #6344670
1Dm3 for weddings
5Dm2 for weddings

I see a trend.

...or perhaps:

1Dm3 for really quick weddings or where the bride wants to hide her face
5Dm2 for high quality weddings
1000D for cheap weddings

I can just see the modifications to the 1DmkIII white paper (page 20):

"Predictive AF can track a bride in flight approaching (or, more likely, retreating) at about 31 mph up to about 26.2 ft away with an EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM lens."

belmondo wrote in post #6339903
Not so much. It turns out we were all trying to take bird pictures, and that's not what the camera was designed for.

Apparently the Mk III is now recognized as the ideal wedding camera, so we're all switching to wedding photography.

Its all a bit of a joke, I can't believe canon are spinning that line. I was reading about the safari trip and although it wasn't ideal but at least you had a backup camera with you. I'm off to vietnam for 2 weeks with only one camera body. I just hope the mk3 keeps on ticking and there are plenty of brides along the way!

kcbrown wrote in post #6347087
I can just see the modifications to the 1DmkIII white paper (page 20):

"Predictive AF can track a bride in flight approaching (or, more likely, retreating) at about 31 mph up to about 26.2 ft away with an EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM lens."

"...What is the airspeed velocity of a laden bride?.."

I keep wanting to type 'bridges'. - _that_ would be poor AF performance tracking bridges.

a great shoot for this thread would be a variation of "the jump" shot of the groom and best men, but featuring brides. truly, "brides in flight".

This would be a crack-up if it wasn't so disturbing!

OK CDS - Lets have the verdict on the replacment MK3
Rob.