Canon 1D Mark III- Full Review (Expanded and Updated)

Canon 1D Mark III- Full Review (Updated and Expanded)
drew strickland


Click here to read the entire article

You mean other than one of the many Mark III's that are reported to be working just fine?

Nill

You guys are talking apples and turkey.

Yeah, I know where and when the peak action is going to occur, as well. I'm pretty good at getting it, because I do it thousands of times every week, and my images don't sell if they're boring, so it's pretty much a requirement.

If I only had to get 250 images on a race day, I could afford to focus manually, too.

Let me paint this picture of the challenge I face each Sunday: 600 kids on motocross bikes. Each one is on the track for three to five laps, and therefore I have three to five opportunities to photograph each of them. I need multiple photos of every rider; I generally aim for five or six. This means that I have to get at LEAST one good frame of EVERY rider, EVERY time he comes by. So - doing some math: 600 riders x 5 frames each = 3000 frames. Considering a "keeper rate" of about 90%, and this means I'm shooting 3300 frames or so in a day.

I'm mainly shooting 3/4 frontal views of the riders and bikes as they fly over jumps on the track. As I'm shooting from the "landing side" of the jump, the rider is usually completely obscured from view until he is about to go airborne. I'm using long lenses and need to frame very tightly as I don't have the luxury of individually editing each image before showing it to the customer, who will base a purchase decision on the initial visual impact of the photo, not how it looks after I've cropped and edited it. Often two or three bikes will leave a jump at (nearly) the same time, with all of them in the air at once, and they're all moving towards the camera, and not at the relatively snail-like pace of stage performers or pantomimes or lovers or what have you - they're moving quite fast. The air is dusty, and I'm usually dealing with strong backlighting, meaning I have to chase exposure as well. And since the bikes are moving towards me, and since I'm using big apertures for shallow DOF, and since the peak action occurs at different times for every rider (depending on his or her ability/altitude/amplitude/speed), it would be entirely unacceptable to pre-focus on an area and shoot when the subject enters the in-focus zone.

As the photographer, I have to see a bike as it pops up over the lip of a jump; I have to frame it tightly; achieve focus; and fire off a frame or two. And if there is more than one bike in the air at that time, I need to find, frame, and focus on the next subject and fire a frame or two, and the same for a third or fourth bike. And I end up with about 3000 "sellable" images - shots that are well-composed, with the subject in focus and shallow depth-of-field, and which show speed/movement/action or drama.

I don't care what kind of old manual stuff you have, nor how good it is, nor whether WWII had yet to be fought when it was created. It would be beyond worthless to me even if it was the best manual-focus system in the world. No one could get the number of quality images that my event business DEMANDS using any manual focus system, and I'd put money on that assertion. Maybe they could manage 250 frames, like one of our old-timers. Now, while that would be pitifully short of my needs, I'd still love to see someone try!

...as I would like to see one of you even try to explain how my work could be done with a manual-focus system...

EDIT: I do not mean to imply in any way that the experience of you older guys is not valuable. Mark, you have some decent and interesting images on your site. (Although I can't help but observe that they are of very slow-moving subjects.) As I am a mere 35 years of age, I dare say that most of what you seem to have posted was taken before my birth. You did a nice job with the equipment you had available, perhaps better than I could do myself, although neither of us knows for sure. Now, I will also say that using that older manual equipment, you simply could NOT do as adequate a job as I could, if trying to photograph the same subject matter, and I assure you that's in no way an oversight or underestimation of your vast experience or your skills. But your implication that those of us modern action photographers who rely on high technology to help capture the images we're after have no concept of or appreciation for older equipment or the skills it took to master them is both unfounded and irrelevant to the matter at hand, which is making quality images of the chosen subject matter.

I don't even think that Canon would be happy to have someone say that only "many 1DIIIs...are working just fine."

That is not even a majority.

Furthermore, I'm not willing to concede that I'm not part of the problem. The 1DIII and I have to spend a lot more time together before I conclude that mine is defective...not that I'm just not experienced enough with it. I have no prior 1D(anything) experience to fall back on.

I did run 2 brief headon AI Servo series of a cyclist in both 5 fps and 8 fps modes and the results weren't what I had hoped for.

Even Drew seems to have altered his initial take. If you were tuned in after the first 24 hour quickie review with accolades you might recall that I questioned his methods and conclusions. (An opinion that was not greatly appreciated, either.) I haven't read the entire update, but what I have read is much more critical than the first.

Since there are reports that Canon has sent many shooters into the field to unearth the problems they are hearing about and seeing from the submitted CDs what seasoned pros are reporting and making lists of those with AF complaints...I don't think Canon is still clueless...or needs any moral support.

I think were only in the bottom of the 3rd inning right now.

Joe Sesto
Nipomo, CA

I cannot speak for Mark...but you are correct we are not talking about the same subject...at least I wasn't.

I was talking solely about and only mentioned auto races, just one of the 3 racing activities that you listed.

In my case, I've been going to the same turns on the same corners for decades at auto races and we seem to agree that even with digital there might not be the need for more than a few 100 shots today in some auto racing situations. It soon just gets to be a deja vu experience. It's kind of like flying...hours of boredom interrupted by a few moments of real excitement. As you say...you have to know where and when that excitement is most likely to take place.

Your situation is entirely different...and there is no way the old ways could do it as well. We could hardly tether via wi-fi to a notebook...we barely had desktops. The first 20 or 40 meg HDDs and dot matrix printers were never part of the photo equation. It was a pure chemical & silver halide era.

Shooting chromes simply was the cheapest and fastest way to get color images. It has always been a hobby for me. If I got anything I thought might be of interest to a driver...I just duped the slide and sent them the copy. I co-owned a camera store, so the expense was minimal.

Our real challenge was to keep in step with the different classes. It was one thing to keep up with 1500 cc (or under) open wheel formula cars and another with CHAMP/CART on the same road course.

There is no question that your shooting requirements for motocross demand the 1D capability. In the film era you'd need 2 motordrive cameras both with 50 ft. bulk film cartridges at least 2 assistants...and some way to keep track of all the shots...with riders names, addresses and some way to pitch them for the unseen photos.

You guys really have it made today.

Hope your 1DIII works out...it is a fascinating instrument. (Sure beats cocking the shutter of that Exakta with your left hand and shooting with the right...made it mandatory to leave focusing to the last split second.)

Cheers..

Joe Sesto
Nipomo, CA

Joe, it may in fact be a majority — perhaps even a large one — or not, but be that as it may, I was reacting to your statement that "the sad thing is that Canon has nothing to offer them in replacement." That's only true if (a) the problem affects 100% of Mark III's and (b) it's not readily fixable. User reports (majority or not) would appear to indicate that (a) is not the case, which in turn suggests that (b) must almost certainly not be the case either. Or so we may hope.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Nill, that was awhile back and I think what I had in mind is that if you had a defective model...Canon did not have a supply of tested and/or certified units to rush into the service centers to replace the ones coming in with proven AF defects, but of unknown cause.

I'm reasonably certain that it never has taken a 100% defective rate to issue a product recall...it is a much lower probability of failure that triggers recalls. But I suspect it varies by product and is much, much lower if there is an injury potential. The greatest injury potential resulting from the 1DIII issue is only to Canon's reputation and the income of those that let loose of their 1DIIs too early.

Granted, at this writing we do not know what the problem is, what it takes to fix it, or how many cameras are effected.

You would hope that Canon would be doing some pre-shipping testing by now to determine if the 1DIIIs being sent out are up to spec (whatever that might be.) That alone would be a recall of sorts...not letting anything into the market that didn't meet tested spec. (Very expensive, though but cheaper than some alternatives.)

We'll never know if that is going on...as it would be an admission of some error in design, components, testing in real world applications or poor QC practices.

As I said before, we're still in the bottom of the 3rd inning...there have been a lot of hits but more than a few errors.

Joe Sesto
Nipomo, CA

Joe,

Great comments. As for the portion I've quoted, we may as well state the obvious here: Responsive/fast digital SLR cameras like the 1D (and its successors) have essentially created this entire (event photography) industry. Sure, I realize people were doing similar stuff with film - shooting and running off to a one-hour lab and showing/selling 4x6's and such - but nowhere near the same way as it's done now. We can have customers walking away with 12x18 prints from the race that just ended 30 minutes ago.

In this case, the new camera technology is not only essential, but it has actually been the key to making that facet of my business possible.