Rob Galbraith posts 1D Mark IV AF report

Very confusing - those conditions should be exactly the sort of conditions that you would have expected Canon to test the camera out in before release. If they didn't, shame. If they did, then did they simply not encounter the same things that Rob has? You'd have thought that after the 1D3 nonsense they would have tested every possible permutation of subject and condition. All academic to me (I'm not getting one), but will be interesting to watch.
 
py6km said:
You'd have thought that after the 1D3 nonsense they would have tested every possible permutation of subject and condition. All academic to me (I'm not getting one), but will be interesting to watch.
Click to expand...

There's a huge difference between testing something and being able to rectify any faults this testing uncovers. There's huge cost involved in extending the time to market of any product like this, and at some stage Canon will have to have decided that they would have to go with what they had. Time will tell whether these findings are replicated or not.
 
Blimey, guess he's never getting a Christmas card from Canon ever again. Looking at the Nikon logos emblazened on his website though, I guess the cheques from Nikon are softening the dissapointment he might have at the lack of the Canon Christmas cards....

To be fair though, I am starting to think he has unreasonable expectations. How many of us who shoot sports believe that we are so god like that any errors in not 100% sharp photos are down to a bug in the cameras AF system?

Even if you accept that you are godlike and 100% perfect everytime can anyone realistically expect that under varying light and colour conditions with rapidly moving subjects that there is an AF system on the market that can nail it everytime?
 
Since getting my mkIV last friday (6 days ago) I ahve shot one superleague rugby, 3 daytime football.. 3 night time football, one basketball and one ice hockey match
My conclusion would be that the whole experience from friday to tonights womens cup final could quite easily make me cry... yes I am that happy...

I purposely tracked a hockey player for quite a while .. first half depress then tracked him passing other players and just followed him around the game then fully pressed and took a shot... perfect :)

At football I had one odd moment where the focus jumped to a player on the right who was closer to me rather than the players furthur farward... no idea why...but it was an odd moment..

I didnt even get my flash out of the case tonight when it came to presentations and lifting the cup.... floodlit football and using the mkIV at high iso meant i could take a lot more shots than the boys with flash and my pics are easy as good.. no noise and good clear pics.

After having 2 mkIIIs for quite some time now I was looking forward to the IV and its not let me down.. its everything I wanted it to be :)
 
desantnik said:
To be fair though, I am starting to think he has unreasonable expectations. How many of us who shoot sports believe that we are so god like that any errors in not 100% sharp photos are down to a bug in the cameras AF system?

Even if you accept that you are godlike and 100% perfect everytime can anyone realistically expect that under varying light and colour conditions with rapidly moving subjects that there is an AF system on the market that can nail it everytime?
Click to expand...

Those were my thoughts exactly. It will be interesting to see if people using the camera in the real world experience these issues. If there's a real problem with the camera then it's fair enough, but if there isn't then this review will do untold damage.
 
desantnik said:
Blimey, guess he's never getting a Christmas card from Canon ever again. Looking at the Nikon logos emblazened on his website though, I guess the cheques from Nikon are softening the dissapointment he might have at the lack of the Canon Christmas cards....
Click to expand...
Laudrup said:
Yeah saw that too, it's a reason I take all reviews with a pinch.
Click to expand...

Isn't it a chicken and egg thing?

If he has been critical of Canon in the past, would you expect them to advertise there?

If he has given Nikon good reviews in the past, do you think they would advertise there to try and influence the people reading the good reviews and comments?

It will be interesting to see whether others see the same results. The forthcoming Winter Olympics will show up any problems I think. ;)

The Canon AF on the 1D Mark IV has to be a lot better than Nikon's, not just equal to it, to make up for the problems of the past imho. If it ends up having problems, then Canon may be in for a rocky time. They couldn't make the same mistake again could they? :shrug:

Not that it affects me, even if I used a Canon DSLR, I wouldn't be getting near that technology for quite few years. :'(:lol:
 
Well you can guarantee one thing - he'll have some superb unique visitor clicks to his website to help along the advertising rates.:D

Id like to know what is regarded as unacceptable for an action shot as far as soft goes. The resolutions in question mean that even magazine print is unlikely to show a shot as being useless unless it is in fact out of focus and nit just soft.

Still it'll keep the fires burning between the N & C camps for a while longer... and no doubt my shooting buds will take the opportunity to rib me about changing kit!

B->
 
KIPAX said:
After having 2 mkIIIs for quite some time now I was looking forward to the IV and its not let me down.. its everything I wanted it to be :)
Click to expand...

not had a real chance to do anything tough with mine yet, only taking the dog out - but I do know the tracking of a dark dog running towards me at high speed has produced the best shot of her in 11 years!

I'd post it but don't have access - will try to do it later

I also agree with the comments from others. Who ever gets 100% of action shots in focus - is he suggesting he's perfect and keeps the camera rock steady on a moving target - he should go and join the army as a sniper!

- and if he's shooting at 10kISO that suggests its dark - so if you get a few more missed shots I wouldn't be surprised


One thing I will agree on though - I updated my firmware before I heard the rumours it makes AF worse - can't say I've noticed any problems at all
 
BLZeebub said:
Id like to know what is regarded as unacceptable for an action shot as far as soft goes. The resolutions in question mean that even magazine print is unlikely to show a shot as being useless unless it is in fact out of focus and nit just soft.
Click to expand...

Indeed Mr. B - the action in the frame and capturing the moment is more important than the thing being suitable for some arts accademy panel's critique with a magnifying glass.

Perfection is probably a few more models (from anyone) away yet, I'm pretty confident that whatever the label on the body that these days we can get the shots sports publications want providing the reasonably skilled operator can keep judge the action, be in the right place and know when to press the button.
 
I read the report and it was pretty interesting. I couldn't see any detail on the settings he was using, but I did find my camera performed significantly better on "surrounding assist points" rather than "all 49 assist points".

With all 49 set to assist, I had similar results to Mr Galbraith. Since changing it to "surrounding", the focus has been just stunningly good. Gobsmacking in fact. I came away from the England Wales match extremely happy as it nailed all pics except for where I forgot to press the focus buton :D, and all the "money" shots were spot on. Same again at basketball the following day.
 
Tobers said:
I read the report and it was pretty interesting. I couldn't see any detail on the settings he was using, but I did find my camera performed significantly better on "surrounding assist points" rather than "all 49 assist points".
Click to expand...

45 :) But mines on disable.. I dont do much tracking at all..
 
I agree Tobers, I am using surround too for some wildlife stuff, found it better than 45 points.

There is another setting which dictates whether it focusses on the closest object or tracks!? Can't remember off the top of my head which one but might be worth double checking Kipax!?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top