I have a Blue dot body - have Art's setup and another I found on the web and the current firmware.
I get lots of OFF images and some sharp images - say 70/30. What is your results? What is your CF setup?
Is this Canon a lemon? - I don't mean mine I mean the whole series. Lemon for moving subjects. On May 29th Rob Galbraith posted his latest testing and said that the MKII and MKIIn both get better results. I would like a better in focus rate any ideas. Bob
Bob, there are many here on BPN who have achieved outstanding results with the 1DMK3, so the camera is apparently capable of doing great work. That said, there are many who have had poor experience. My take is that there are some good bodies and good photographers who overcome the issues with the camera. I am one who has passed on the MK3 due to the reports of poor AF. Let's hope the new body is a paradigm shift in technology that sets the new standard.
Let me say firstly, I have been a staunch Canon user for more than 35 years and have invested in a good set of L lenses for the past 10 or more years. Of late, I had 3 1D MIII bodies ranging from one of the first being released, through to both the yellow dot and supposed blue dot versions. I mainly used a 70-200 f2.8 IS, 400 f5.6 and 600 IS (plus 1.4 Tc's) with the ID MIII bodies. My in-focus BIF (ie accurate AF) shots were in all three cases well below 50% and counting (note I do not refer to keeper rate but only to accurate AF shots). Outside of AF inaccuracy, I also had a lot of problems with images that showed a lot of noise even when I tried to maintain exposure to the right (histogram). The last body improved a lot in image quality when I had the AA filter replaced (as part of the very last "upgrade" recall from Canon) but AF accuracy remained a critical non-performing issue.
I have been very disappointed/unlucky with the 1D MIII camera to such an extend that I become very apprehensive of my investment in time and costs whenever I venture out to do photography. I eventually got so frustrated with the body and Canon itself for non-performance in fixing the problem, that I traded my whole Canon set-up lock, stock and barrel for Nikon D3, 600 f4 VR and 24-70 f2.8, a SB900 flash and some small stuff. Now, after about 6 weeks of frequent use, it is becoming clear to me that I now have a system that I can trust in terms of AF accuracy and consistency and also general image quality whenever I venture out into the field.
In terms of AF accuracy I am very, very impressed with the D3 and 600 VR combination. It is early days yet for me with this set-up but at least I now have a 100% trust in an accurate AF system that will deliver as long as I do my thing. I cannot put into words for you the difference in AF accuracy that the D3/600 combination VR has. Also, I perceive that the VR in the Nikon 600 is so much better than the IS in the Canon 600. I cannot show you a substantiated set of test results as I do not have access to Canon equipment to compare apples with apples under controlled conditions but I do have enough experience to say that I perceive it better and for once in a long time I am 100% satisfied with my photographic equipment.
Cheers
Last edited by Geurt Bloem; 08-11-2009 at 03:11 AM.
I am still a Canon supporter and have been so for years but I am starting to get a bit dejected with my Canon 1D3. I just hope that the 1D4 will be better.
I think that I have a far better focus result than Geurt, but there are times that I struggle to get and keep focus with my 500f4, depending on the light and BG.
I have not been as happy when I use the 70-200 f2.8 IS.
I have had problems with err 99 messages and the camera has been to the Canon for repairs 3X, with the mirror box being changed twice.
The cost to change systems is just too much for me.
PS I never had the same problems with my trusty 30D. This is a super workhorse. If only it could shoot at 10FPS and have a better sensor.
Cheers.
Last edited by Dave Barnes; 08-11-2009 at 02:48 AM.
Thanks Group, Be sure that I am not trying to start a back fire with this but what I want is better results and at times blame myself for poor technique - in my life I have found the 80/20 rule to be the RULE and most times the machine gets blamed but when looked at closer I not always sure.
I can not afford to make a switch to Nikon but have little hope for a MK4 being better.
I will do some more tests and micro adj my tele Xs again and tighten up my technique.
Again thanks for your time,
Bob
I was just going to ask if it was safe to buy a Mark III, but I guess I have my answer. My 2n is in for repairs (ironically, it can't track a moving object), and I was thinking of taking a chance and picking up a Mark III.
Bob, I have used my MKIII with many lenses and it DEFINITELY seems to like certain lenses.
Its favorite is the 400 f/5.6 with or without a 1.4X and it loves the 300 f/4 without the 1.4X, it also shines with the 300 f/2.8 and it does not like the 500 f/4 or the 100-400.
As regards CFs the world is your oyster even Artie changes his preferences and I change my CF setups every day of the week with a "Y" in its name, but I have discovered one thing for BIFs and that is to achieve and hold focus I place the center focus point under the bird and not in front or on the bird.
It is a fantastic camera but will test your patience from time to time but it is just keeping you on your toes.
Airshows, NFL, NBA, MLB, Auto racing, MX, Hockey, greyhound and horse racing has never been a problem for any of the MKIII's I have used. BIF flying perpendicular to the focus plane using the center focus point seem to confound it at times under a array of conditions.
Last edited by Mike Tracy; 08-12-2009 at 08:05 PM.
Reason: Spelling
I was one of the ones leaving Canon for Nikon but returning after a year and a half.
Decided to give it another try and can't be happier. My Mk3 is (I believe) a yellow dot and working perfectly.
Most discussion regarding the MK3 tend to get emotional and become irrational. Main reason for changing back was that I was missing some Canon focal lengths and missing the 1.3 crop factor.
My main camera while I was using Nikon was the D3 and only miss the amazing clean ISO. AF wise I like the Canon better, the initial acquisition is faster and focuses just fine.
I was doubting to do the purchase, but I got my yellow dot MKIII a few months ago. I am very happy with the images it produces and the AF works better than any other body I used. (I never had a chance to try the D3 or other Nikon bodies or the 50D that many claim has the best AF from Canon). As you can on this forum many fantastic images come from the MKIII, so it is a good body in good hands.
I've bought my MarkIII from Fredmiranda and used it with sigma 150-500mm OS. It was a garbage combination and all of my images were OOF. I thought that the camera was faulty and asked the seller if the sub-mirror was fixed and he replied that it was fixed and had no problems with it.
Then i sold my sigma 150-500mm and acquired a canon 400mm f5.6. It works really well. i get fantastic images with this combination. The only problem is with my mark III is that i cannot capture the Birds-in-flight or precisely the AF tracking and locking is very poor in MKIII. I get all of my images blurr and OOF.
Then i bought a Nikon D300 and have been using it for bird in flight and have gr8 results. Below are couple of pictures with nikon d300 and 85mm f1.8
Auto Focus and the 1D MKIII
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote