-=1D Mark IV Owners Thread! (it's time)

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17946925
Now YOU have a 1D

I won't be that bad...

...after the first week.

Have a ever shown you any of my 1000's of photos of Herons hunting for fish?

Beautiful work.

Wow! Great shot!

Sand Hill Cranes Moving about.

CB

First image from the 1D Mark IV. She wasn't happy about having to be my test subject. Well... she wasn't happy that I said she couldn't have my 7D. She's still stuck with her 450D.

The camera isn't the one they had sent me pictures of or a shutter count on. I think I clicked on the wrong one when actually ordering. This one is 97k, which I'm still happy with. Cosmetically, it's in better condition.

What concerns me is that I wasn't able to get good focus, at first. I had to MFA my 70-200 all the way to +20. I then used Focus Tune and a LensAlign to fine tune it and it came out to +20 again. I've never had one max out. I'm going to check the other lenses tomorrow. Hopefully they're not all that far off. If so, this camera may be way out of spec. I think (too lazy to swap lenses and see) I was only at +4 or 5 for the 70-200 on the 7D.

I also checked out some of the high ISO shots (in camera only, so not really) and it definitely looks like I'll by happy with my choice.

I've never MFA'd a lens.
1, why should I have to MFA a 2-9K lens to a 1.7-6K body? Unless some trauma happened to either?
2, I'm getting old, my eyes older, maybe I need to

MedicineMan4040 wrote in post #17949017
I've never MFA'd a lens.
1, why should I have to MFA a 2-9K lens to a 1.7-6K body? Unless some trauma happened to either?
2, I'm getting old, my eyes older, maybe I need to

Meh... sometimes the body is on one extreme end of tolerance and the lens is on the other. In any case, I never did either, until I had the capability to do so. It did make a difference. Maybe.

On the other hand, your second point is very valid. My uncorrected vision is 20/600. So.... yeah. If my contacts are old (change every two weeks? Are you kidding? They're good for at least six!), then my vision may not be completely at 20/20.

Back to the first point... there may have been some internal trauma to the body, prior to me getting it. I'll never know. Nothing obvious on the outside anyway. My 7D went through quite a few scrapes, bangs, and bumps, though, and I've never had to MFA that extreme. I'll reevaluate it again later. Going to play with it some more tomorrow and see what happens.

Great response.
I think why I have the attitude I do is that over the years I've seen too many get completely
obsessed with MFA, maniacal even. So many possible contributing factors and they always run back
to MFA and consume huge numbers of hours MFAing all they lenses over and over.

I've seen the same thing. I'm reading up, tonight, on the focus system to make sure I'm not missing something there. And then, I still have to test shoot with my other lenses. They may be fine, or they all may be out. Either way, I'll get an idea of whether or not it's the body or the lens.

Maniacal. I've always loved that word. I used to belong to an in-game guild (nerd alert) called Maniacal Havoc.

I did MFA all of my lenses with my 7D. I've only ever had to repeat it with one lens and I eyeballed it instead of going through the whole process.

I know what you mean, though. If they have to do it over and over, they're not doing it right. But, that then gives them a reason to believe that it's not user error, it's manufacturer error and then they feel warm and fuzzy.

Me? I'm an idiot. Most of my issues can be traced back to user error. Ask my wife, she'll tell you.

MedicineMan - This is what I'm talking about with this body and lens. The first image has no MFA applied. 1/1250, f/3.2, ISO 1600. The second has +20 MFA applied. 1/1250, f/3.2, ISO 1600. The first is extremely front focused, as evidenced by the closest edge of the nest that the bottom bird is sitting in.

The second still isn't tack sharp, and that's my fault. I'm hand holding and am not very steady. I'm sure the actual size of the focus point in the camera plays a part, as well.

And, to make sure I'm staying on topic, since this thread is about actual pictures and not relationships between camera and lens.... here's a heavily cropped image of a heron (I think).