Topic: Rob Galbraith comments on 1d3 AF (Read 9697 times)

Tim Gray · « **on:** June 19, 2007, 02:45:37 pm »

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_p...cid=7-8740-9006

An update on his original publication where he noted AF issues on a pre-production model.

francois · « **Reply #1 on:** June 19, 2007, 03:18:19 pm »

Quote

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_p...cid=7-8740-9006

An update on his original publication where he noted AF issues on a pre-production model.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123792\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Tim,
Thanks for the article. It'll be interesting to see how Canon solves this issue.

Tim Gray · « **Reply #2 on:** June 19, 2007, 06:54:22 pm »

This is particularly interesting since RG indicated that Canon were fully aware there was an AF glitch in the pre-production model he was given, which apparently hasn't been rectified in prodouction. With any luck it will be a firmware upgrade.

MarkKay · « **Reply #3 on:** June 19, 2007, 07:25:30 pm »

I think this is the real issue.. Can it be fixed with firmware? I just wonder why they did not change the firmware before the release of the final production units or at least post the firmware before shipping.. At least to let people know there is a fix.

Quote

This is particularly interesting since RG indicated that Canon were fully aware there was an AF glitch in the pre-production model he was given, which apparently hasn't been rectified in prodouction. With any luck it will be a firmware upgrade.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123832\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

BernardLanguillier · « **Reply #4 on:** June 19, 2007, 08:26:22 pm »

It would seem that there is no correction available today.

My guess is that Canon was faced with a dilema like all the other brands before:

A. further delay the release of the camera - with the risk of being overtaken by Nikon or some other competitor
B. release a faulty product and try to fix the issue asap after the release.

It would seem that they have selected option B.

Regards,
Bernard

MarkKay · « **Reply #5 on:** June 19, 2007, 10:02:04 pm »

What about C) it cannot be fixed

Quote

It would seem that there is no correction available today.

My guess is that Canon was faced with a dilema like all the other brands before:

A. further delay the release of the camera - with the risk of being overtaken by Nikon or some other competitor
B. release a faulty product and try to fix the issue asap after the release.

It would seem that they have selected option B.

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123846\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

plawrence · « **Reply #6 on:** June 20, 2007, 02:04:26 am »

It looks that Canon might have selected Option C: Put head in sand, pretend problem doesn't exist.

I doubt further delay would have run the risk of a competitor, like Nikon, overtaking Canon. Canon has a too commanding lead to be overtaken that easily. But selling a defective camera to pros whose livelihood depends on the camera is a sure way to lose it.

Quote

It would seem that there is no correction available today.

My guess is that Canon was faced with a dilema like all the other brands before:

A. further delay the release of the camera - with the risk of being overtaken by Nikon or some other competitor
B. release a faulty product and try to fix the issue asap after the release.

It would seem that they have selected option B.

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123846\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

djgarcia · « **Reply #7 on:** June 20, 2007, 03:39:54 pm »

And might further explain why the 1Ds Mk III isn't out yet ...

matt4626 · « **Reply #8 on:** June 20, 2007, 05:07:56 pm »

Let's see...
5D Dirty viewfinders
24-105 Missing baffle
1Diii poor auto focus

Do I see a trend?

jani · « **Reply #9 on:** June 20, 2007, 05:09:35 pm »

Quote

But selling a defective camera to pros whose livelihood depends on the camera is a sure way to lose it.

If so, then the market is flooded with "defective" cameras. :-/

Calling the camera "defective" may be too strong a statement.

Certainly, the autofocus problems mentioned by Galbraith are appalling, but there are so many other attractive "corrections" of earlier "defects" that it's still a very, very attractive camera.

My take on this is that Canon's new autofocus sensor is breaking some new ground here, and that Canon is still trying to find a way to use it best. It's a shame that they couldn't settle for the older autofocus system in the 1D MkIII while they ironed out the creases.

Fortunately for me, though, my living does not depend on the 1D MkIII. (If so, I'd be out of luck anyway, because of the very limited availability!) And if my living depended on being the kind of photographer who need the kind of autofocus precision that the 1D MkIII doesn't deliver in those circumstances, I'd probably be using the 1D MkII N.

djgarcia · « **Reply #10 on:** June 20, 2007, 07:28:37 pm »

HEY! Let's show a little respect here! My camera isn't defective, it's quirky, OK?

fennario · « **Reply #11 on:** June 20, 2007, 08:19:43 pm »

Quote

HEY! Let's show a little respect here! My camera isn't defective, it's quirky, OK?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124032\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'd say it's "circle of confusion is confused", or perhaps that it is "sharpness challenged," "differently abled," or "that it's a 400D trapped in a 1 series body"

The last one is a bit much, but wanted to run with the PCisms

MarkKay · « **Reply #12 on:** June 21, 2007, 08:29:28 pm »

Rob has updated his article... TOday June 21

Quote

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_p...cid=7-8740-9006

An update on his original publication where he noted AF issues on a pre-production model.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123792\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ray · « **Reply #13 on:** June 21, 2007, 11:09:09 pm »

I get the impression here that the release of the 1D3 was to mark some special celebratory event (can't remember what it was, though).

In such circumstances, one could expect there would be even more pressure than usual for the people working on the project to deliver on time. Failure would mean loss of bonuses.

If this is true, then any admission that the 1D3 has faulty focussing could affect the bonus payments of a number of Canon staff.

Tricky situation really .

nemophoto · « **Reply #14 on:** June 23, 2007, 08:07:33 pm »

Quote

And might further explain why the 1Ds Mk III isn't out yet ...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123990\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hmm. . . got mine two weeks ago.

What I've noticed is not a problem with the focus. Rather, there s a different logic to the camera's focus selection points. Previously, if I raised the camera to someone's face 9 out of 10 times, the points would select eyes/mouth, etc. to focus on. With the Mark III, it seems the camera will still try to use the lower points on the body.

djgarcia · « **Reply #15 on:** June 23, 2007, 09:39:04 pm »

Quote

Hmm. . . got mine two weeks ago.

You got a 1Ds MkIII last week??!!

Can we see a picture of it, even if it's in front of a mirror? You're doing pre-production testing? Give us the lowdown ...

Ray · « **Reply #16 on:** June 23, 2007, 10:32:19 pm »

He obviously got his 1D MkIII, but his point about a different logic to the 1D3 focus points is interesting.

Rob Galbraith has a lot of credibility, but there may well be a question mark about the non-scientific evidence he's presented. He's appealed to the 'real world shoot' concept, which is fine, but perhaps paid insufficient attention to the different focus settings that the 1D3 might require, compared to the 1D2.

jani · « **Reply #17 on:** June 24, 2007, 07:16:43 am »

Quote

I get the impression here that the release of the 1D3 was to mark some special celebratory event (can't remember what it was, though).

The EOS system is 20 years this year, and the Canon name is 70 years this year, which at least has something to do with the expectations.

I can hardly wait until 2012 and 2037.

jani · « **Reply #18 on:** June 24, 2007, 07:21:40 am »

Quote

He obviously got his 1D MkIII, but his point about a different logic to the 1D3 focus points is interesting.

Rob Galbraith has a lot of credibility, but there may well be a question mark about the non-scientific evidence he's presented. He's appealed to the 'real world shoot' concept, which is fine, but perhaps paid insufficient attention to the different focus settings that the 1D3 might require, compared to the 1D2.

As I read the article, they tested this quite thorougly.

Quote

We shot most things using the centre AF point only, though at times we switched to a couple of the outer AF points or all 45 AF points. The result? The only setting that had any real impact on the basic character of the autofocus was C. FnIII-2, AI Servo Tracking Sensitivity. We'll talk about it next.

(An analysis of EOS-1D Mark III autofocus performance , Q. How do you know the autofocus settings dialed into the camera aren't the problem?)

tbonanno · « **Reply #19 on:** July 01, 2007, 01:33:57 pm »

I got my 1DIII last week and so far it appears to be everything I could want for 75% of my shooting. The other 25% will fall on my 1DsII and its replacement in the Fall. My first impressions of the 1DIII are very good and the LOW NOISE at higher ISO's is a huge benefit for my work .

This AF issue I've been hearing about has me concerned. I've not been able to determine if my sample has the problem yet. Need to do some testing soon on the AF. Hopefully Canon will get the issue addressed SOON.

Author Topic: Rob Galbraith comments on 1d3 AF (Read 9697 times)