Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: nemophoto on July 26, 2008, 11:48:28 am
-
I've owned Canons since 1980 -- gone through virtually every high-end model, and owned every EOS 1D version since the introduction. (One of my all-time favorites is still the EOS3 with it's focus system attuned to your eye.) Is it just me, or did they take a huge step backwards with the "new" focusing system? I'm not talking about follow-focus and all the discussion generated by Rob Galbraith, I'm talking about low-light, low-contrast performance.
I just finished a week's shoot and I've been disappointed with the performance and accuracy, especially with longer lenses. (The exception being my "ancient" 20-year old 300/2.8 which is still tack sharp and accurate wide open.) Sometimes, I find it's not eve low light, simply poor performance. Compared with my original 1D and 1Ds, it seems each generation has poorer performance. While the Mark III's are suppose to have 45-focus points, it's really taken a step back to 19-focus points and 26-"helper" or descrete points. If one choses a focus point manually, you now have large "holes" in focus selection that didn't exist on previous models. One thought is, as the resolution becomes higher, does the focus become ever more critical? It seems counter intuitive, but might an image from a 4MP 1D seem sharper than one from a 1Ds3, simply because there is less detail to judge?
I find in low light, I'm actually having to focus manually at times (autofocus, then manual override). I'm thankful my recent Lasik left me with almost 20/10 vision in my left (focusing) eye. Is it just me, or are others having this same problem? Again, I'm not thinking of high-speed sports action, just (for me) a stationary model or someone walking along.
Nemo