1Ds Mark III - Summary Of Experiences And Conclusions

I've written a summary of pertinent experiences and conclusions on the 1Ds3.

 

This is not meant to be a complete review and addresses only certain aspects not

widely known.

 

http://www.vaja.com/tarn/1ds3

 

 

 

tarn

Hi there,

 

The link seems to be going nowhere on my machine...

There is a ".htm" missing at the end of the link

 

Jakob

Hi Ed,

 

See if adding the .htm at the end might help:

 

 

http://vaja.com/tarn/1ds3.htm

 

 

tarn

Yep - that works. Thanks Tarn...

You've gotta be kidding. I smell an idiot. I dont think this guy has ever been pleased by any product he purchased. Why is it if I can get sharp sequences and he cant, then its the cameras fault. Even the unlevel shots of BIF were because of a missaligned VF. Not because he may have dropped an injured elbow during his pan of a BIF with a long lens. Nope..the VF. OH MY GOD! By the way, the 1DsIII is not an action camera so dont expect it to be real fast. Get a 1DIII for that. I got one and it rocks. BIF is not an easy shot and takes alot of technique and knowing your camera and to expect to take a new camera and a slow lens and go right out and achieve perfection is...well I smelled it before.

 

Dude, go by a Nikon D3. Sell all of your Canon gear...right now and do it. You will never be happy unless you do so. On the other hand, I dont think anything can make you happy. Jeez.

Tarn: This is one of this, "oh Dear Lord, not THIS again" things: You've been plastering the web with your posts, I wonder why..? If the camera is defective, talk to Canon (trust me, I have done it many times, and they fixed whatever was wrong with my equipment...) but IMO you are simply suffering "buyer's remorse" and want to return the camera but, as you state elsewhere on the 'net, the dealer wanted restocking fee (so you'd lose a few bucks...) Looks like you have a beef with Canon (and with a Canon dealer), so take it up with them...

<i>the 1DsIII is not an action camera so dont expect it to be real fast. </i><br>The AF speed on 1Ds3 is nothing to snicker at. At normal shooting speeds it easily equals that of the 1D3 and it is faster and <b>much</b> more accurate than the 40D. Given proper technique, you can easliy track a Formula 1 car coming at ya at 200 mph at 5 fps.

David Amerson wrote:

>Why is it if I can get sharp sequences and he cant, then its the cameras fault.

> BIF is not an easy shot and takes alot of technique and knowing your camera and to expect to take a new camera and a slow lens and go right out and achieve perfection is...well I smelled it before.

 

 

I don't see any evidence of your expertise in bif photography:

 

http://www.amberbrookephotography.com/All%20Birds/

 

Separately, please try to keep exchanges civil.

 

Be specific and post the sequences on your web page you would like to submit as counterevidence.

 

Screen capture of DPP RAW shooting information such as I provided in my write up would be greatly appreciated.

 

tarn

Michael Liczbanski wrote:

>the 1DsIII is not an action camera so dont expect it to be real fast.

>The AF speed on 1Ds3 is nothing to snicker at. >At normal shooting speeds it easily equals that of the 1D3 and it is faster and much more accurate than the 40D. >Given proper technique, you can easliy track a Formula 1 car coming at ya at 200 mph at 5 fps.

 

 

The 1Ds3 shares the same AF subsystem as the 1D3 (Canon 1Ds3 White Paper).

 

If it has great difficulty going into and holding focus with 5FPS as I demonstrated you can perhaps start to understand why there are a lot of complaints among 1D3 owners who bought their cameras to do 10FPS.

 

I don't see any sequence of Formula 1 car coming at 200MPH captured by your 1Ds3 at 5FPS in the link on your id page.

 

http://www.photo.net/shared/community-member?user_id=194894

 

Please put it up along with screen capture of DPP showing RAW shooting datal.

 

 

tarn

For sure Michael its faster than the 40D. I didnt say anything about that. And I know the 1DsMarkIII isn't "Slow", but its not the speed machine the 1D III is. And yes, I would hope that the 1Ds is much more accurate than a 40D. I'd be pissed if it was the same. I was just making a point that the 1Ds is not a football camera per say, its mostly for large Portrait/Landscapes/Models and such. You are right though, "Not this again"

 

To Tarn: I never said I was an expert in BIF. I never said I posted any at all. I do know how tough it can be because I have done it. Its not my cup of tea though. I enjoy birds just like the next guy, but I dont do BIF as a main style. If I'm out with family and see one, then yes. And, I'm being as civil as I can. You splattered all this on the internet when its easy to see how it could be user error. As many others here like myself own either 1DIII or 1DsIII some with both dont have these issues. The only ones who report them are ones that dont own the camera. Then you post this mess and never admit once that any of this could be your fault. I mean, An unlevel shot and its the VF's fault. Do you know how many times I've shot with a heavy Camera/Lens combo and cause my right arm to get tired and drop a little. But I dont say its the VF missaligned. Look at your AF point selection in the first shots. The outer points selected and they hit sand and focus sand and you get upset. What do you expect it to do. I use my 1D correctly and it performs correctly when I do so. When I miss, 99% of the time, its my fault. Maybe I wasnt consitent in my Tech. and it started focusing on something else. Despite your claims, my camera is lightning fast.

 

In fact, I wasnt gonna do this, but why not. I went to my dealer this weekend to pick up some prints and I saw a D3 sitting in the case. I asked and he allowed me to install my card and one of their fast Nikkor lenses. I'd swear just as I'm standing here on anything, that POS was so slow at focusing on anything in the store, me and the salesman was laughing. It couldnt touch the 1D3. I'm dead serious. Not even close. It reminded me of a Rebel and kit lens. So then, I jacked up the ISO to do a little noise comparison. When I got home, I was surprised at how close the 2 cameras performed. The D3 wasnt near as sharp as some people post. The 1D3 had just a tad more chromiance noise at 6400, but not enough to matter. They both retain same detail. And after both files were processed in LR, they looked the same. Not impressed. So if you have Nikon stuff, go for the D3, but dont switch and vise versa. If you have Canon and switch to the D3 you will be dissappointed in AF speed. I'd bet money on that.

Tarn: Michael didnt say he did track a Formula 1 car at 200mph. He said it could be done with proper technique. Jeez. Can you post any sequences of any BIF where you were happy at all. With any Camera. I bet you have never been happy.

 

Here is a link to some high speed sequences that I do have.

 

http://www.amberbrookephotography.com/The%20Ridge%20Hare%20Scramble/

 

All 705 of them. The only deletes are the ones that are so close the prior shot it pointless to post all of them. There was already 705. Every one of these are spot on. There are some that look soft due to alot of dust, but even through this, it tracked flawlessly.

You should probably switch to Nikon. Then all your problems would be solved...

<i>>>he first thing I did with it was to use it to test a copy of the Tamron 28-75/2.8 I had received from Tamron Repair Service some months back as a replacement for a copy that could not be adjusted after several attempts then was damaged in the process. It was said to have been ascertained on an optical bench to perform according to spec.<<</i>

<p>

According to TAMRON's spec. Where does CANON say that its AF figures and shoot rates are guaranteed to work with ANY 3rp party lens?

<p>

How can you write "This was the first inkling of the AF difficulty to come!" when you are using a TAMRON lens? Makes no sense to fault ANY camera for that. Especially since you didn't have any issue with the 24-70L.

<p>

There is no guarantee, implied or even reasonably expected that ANY 3rd party lens or accessory will work with ANY camera. It's always a gamble of sort.

<p>

But, as far as the AF I am not sure you have proven anything...except that your shots were OOF.

<p>

IF you say "The focus simply went crazy with the pelicans in the waves and reacted to every movement of water in the periphery as apposed to the bird in the middle of the frame." it only means you picked the wrong group of AF points for your target. Auto AF selection is not a mind reading process. It works for some work, not for every situation. You should either limit to the center group or use one AF point when tracking.

<p>

Give time to learn your camera's features and it will work as you want it to work. AUTO settings are a general compromise but, the fact that the factory setting didn't work for you in that instance doesn't mean the camera's AF is faulty.

<p>

Look, I am not bird photographer whatsoever but, with my lowly 10D and an EF 200 f/2.8L (shot wide open) I was able to <a href=http://www.photo.net/photo/3190404>track birds all day long</a> in Venice Beach, CA. I am sure, in Florida you should have ZERO problems tracking any of the many thousands of birds on and around the beach, once you get the know the AF system of your camera.

If you wonder whether it is or is not worthwhile to encourage this OP, do a bit of

searching and you'll find some other, uh, threads on this topic. Not just at photo.net.

Really, really long threads. On the same thing. Over and over.

 

I recommend just letting this thread die a natural death. YMMV.

 

Dan

David Amberson wrote: >As many others here like myself own either 1DIII or 1DsIII some with both dont have these issues. >The only ones who report them are ones that dont own the camera. >Then you post this mess and never admit once that any of this could be your fault.

 

Well, the write up is there for you to refute pointedly.

 

So far you haven't shown where the supposed "fault" is but repeating the same mantra of how uber super these cameras are supposed to be, that it's the users error, etc. Those are the real same old we've heard before.

 

Even if other professional sport shooters and what not have not reported any AF issues, and they have, quite contrary to your remark, we're quite beyond the brow beating.

 

I have put up some results. Feel free to put together a coherent refutation or better yet counterevidence.

 

Which camera do you own? If it's a 1Ds3 you have what I used. If it's a 1D3 according to you it's even faster. Go achieve superior results and show me that I didn't know how to use the camera. Put up some sequences replete with DPP RAW file and shooting info screen shots like I have done.

 

Show where my test of the view finder not matching the file with simple line test doesn't indicate that the VF is misaligned, for instance.

 

Be logical and rigorous with your argument. Be strong with your evidence.

 

Other lines like the laughing with the salesman at the D3 are completely superfluous.

 

 

tarn

David Amberson wrote:>Here is a link to some high speed sequences that I do have.

 

I don't think you understand what's being presented in the report.

 

There is enough DOF in your shot to cover the entire motorcycle from head to tail.

 

I can prefocus a manual camera and stay in the same spot and snap each bike as it comes by and the result will be the same.

 

Reread the presentation again and see how limited DOF and size of subject and distance are central to the AF test.

 

 

tarn

Bob Atkins wrote:>You should probably switch to Nikon. Then all your problems would be solved...

 

 

Are you suggesting that Nikon is superior?

 

Are you telling people who need accurate high speed AF to all switch to Nikon to solve their problems?

 

 

tarn

Giampi wrote: >Look, I am not bird photographer whatsoever but, with my lowly 10D and an EF 200 f/2.8L (shot wide open) I was able to track birds all day long in Venice Beach, CA. >I am sure, in Florida you should have ZERO problems tracking any of the many thousands of birds on and around the beach, once you get the know the AF system of your camera.

 

 

These were done with dog slow AF Fuji S2 and screw focus Nikkor 80-200/2.8D Push/Pull.

 

http://vaja.com/tarn/1041.htm

 

http://vaja.com/tarn/1033.htm

 

http://vaja.com/tarn/1025.htm

 

They don't have anything to do with the points presented in the summary.

 

I do all kinds of photography and it is my evaluation that there are serious issues with the 1Ds3/1D3 AF. The illustrations for those are in the summary and relavant to the points presented.

 

If anybody has any convincing sequences, atleast 800x533 pixel size, replete with the DPP RAW shooting info screen shots, I'd like to study them.

 

Anybody?

 

 

tarn

gdanmitchell wrote:

 

> I'm not playing moderator, but I do have an opinion on this thread

> and its value. And expressing said opinion is what such threads are

> for, even if the opinion is that that obsessively posting gigantic

> posts on such topics is, well, odd.

 

 

As I have responded to you before in a thread that got deleted:

 

People may find their own utility in each thread.

 

One musn't feel compelled to read every thread and respond to every post, replete with their own rating of the utility.

 

That would be truly obsessive and megalomaniac.

 

I, for instance, only read a few and respond to a few when I feel like I have something meaningful to share.

 

An empty negative one liner opinion only disrupts others' discussion with no added value.

 

That can not be difficult to understand.

 

When you want to say something negative, be prepared for a good argument, what you call "gigantic."

 

You apparently have it backward.

 

A good opinion is considered a compliment and may be brief.

 

A negative opinion usually calls for development and support for such.

 

Or one would be thought of as a jerk.

 

 

> If I were playing moderator I might ask you to go ahead and post your

> extraordinarily long missives on your own web site - as you did in

> one other case - and simply point a link there. Take comments on your

> site if you want.

 

 

You already did in a thread that got deleted.

 

And posting the summary with illustrations and pointing to the link is what I did here on this very thread.

 

I don't have time to run a web board on my site.

 

On your own site I note that you have a web board with no participation or you wouldn't have time to be here making spurious comments.

 

 

> And...

>

> I'll "stand behind what have to say."

>

> And...

>

> I'm not going "try... to get this and that thread deleted" though it

> would be no great loss to the photographic community.

 

 

That would be a start.

 

You tried to kill one of the two threads that got deleted posting that people should not respond to my thread. Remember?

 

As to the value of this thread, do you particularly post on threads you deem of no value?

 

That is the opposite of what mot normal people who value their time do.

 

 

> Have a happy day.

>

> Dan

>

>

> --

> ---

> G Dan Mitchell

> SF Bay Area

> Blog: http://www.gdanmitchell.com/

> Gallery: http://www.gdanmitchell.com/wpg2-3/

 

 

Thank you.

 

Have a good evening yourself.

 

 

 

tarn

The response that the above post deserves follows:

Tarn

 

Because I'm such a magnanimous guy, I'll take the 1dsMkIII off your hands.

 

Just to make it all work out I'll even send you my Canon PowerShot, which to the best of my knowledge doesn't have any focusing problems at all.

 

It would take nice pictures of birds all day.

 

Let your problem now be my problems.

G Dan Mitchell wrote:<The response that the bove post deserves follows:

 

Thank you. As I requested before. That would be a start.

 

When you have anybody on your own web board you can rate everyone and every post if you like.

 

Elsewhere please refrain and let other people form their own judgement based on evidence and presentation.

 

 

tarn

BTW, despite including a huge and out of context quote from a discussion at another web site in

his "reply" to my message, our Dear OP "forgot" to include the part of his post from said other web

site in which he invented a story that I had deleted one of his threads.

 

I'm not going to reply to his strange post, but I thought that others here might wonder what the

heck is going on.

 

BTW: It looks like the post from which he extracted this mangled quote has been deleted by the

other web site. And, no, I had nothing to do with it. The further this thread goes the more likely

others will understand how this typically evolves...

Richard Wang wrote:<I'll take the 1dsMkIII off your hands.

 

As stated in the write up, the second copy of the 1Ds3 was returned due to the view finder misalignment.

 

Don't get me wrong, if it's free like what you're asking, I would keep it and use live view everytime if I have to.

 

The problem is it's $8K +/- and will likely be replaced in a hurry due to the hobbled AI Servo AF (limited to center focus point only) in my estimation.

 

 

tarn