# HONEST users of Canon Bodies who earn their living with photography



## mingulay (Aug 17, 2012)

Again I find myself in a state of rage and I am cursing all responsible canon managers. Having shot a group of people at a wedding six times I now find out - sitting in front of my 24 inch screen - that the autofocus six times chose the wall behind the group... I accept one can go wrong once or even twice. But not six times out of six. It is clearly a problem of the product. In the particular case a 1D IV paired with a 24-70 2.8. 

Back in 2005 I bought a 5D. It focused well and was a great camera in general. Since then I bought a 1D III which could not autofocus at all. I spent about 7000 $ for a camera that can't autofocus and nobody from canon could or wanted to help me. Then I bought a 5D II. In much too many cases the autofocus just goes wrong. Then I bought a 1D IV. Another 7000 $. And again in much too many cases the autofocus is not working properly (as in the case described above). All in all I spent 17'000 $ on cameras from Canon which can not (or not often enough) autofocus. 

Now I come to the point: I feel like going for a new body but I am not willing (and able...) to spend even more money on cameras that just don't deliver what the are priced for. So I would appreciate feedback regarding the quality of the autofocus from people who use the 5D III or 1DX. Critical, honest and heavy users and people who have to deliver to customers. Is the autofocus in the mentioned cameras good - ore just LESS BAD but still not as it should be with such a price tag? Your feedback would help me a lot!

By the way. If you wonder how stupid one can be to still think of buying Canon gear: I have a wide range of lenses from 14 2.8 up to 500 4 and would like to still use it in the future.

If you want to have a look on what level I work you can have a look here: www.peoplephotography.ch


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 17, 2012)

mingulay said:


> Having shot a group of people at a wedding six times I now find out - sitting in front of my 24 inch screen - that the autofocus six times chose the wall behind the group... I accept one can go wrong once or even twice. But not six times out of six.



Four questions - what AF selection mode were you using (auto, manual, expansion, etc.), what was the size of the face(s) relative to the AF point(s), do you realize that the actual AF point is larger than the little box representing it in the VF (even with Spot AF), and lastly and possibly most importantly, did you AF microadjust your lens (and if so, how - ok, sorry, that was 5 questions)?


----------



## mingulay (Aug 17, 2012)

Thank you for your reaction.

AF selection was manual. The faces were rather large and the group covered about 80% of the frame. The lens is well adjusted and if the background is pitch dark or there is no background at all (close ups), the autofocus even works perfectly. Unfortunately this is a rather rare case.

Your not answering directly lets me think you meet autofocus problems with your 1DX as well?


----------



## wickidwombat (Aug 17, 2012)

I have never had any sort of problem with Af on my 1dmk3 my 5dmk2s well the center point works well enough the outer ones i gave up on.my first copy of the 5dmk3 was a complete dog and could not af to save its life my new replacement one is dead accurate and really really awesome


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 17, 2012)

No problems at all, except for the AFMA bug. My 1D X consistently nails focus, even with close, complex backgrounds. 

Another couple of questions - what lens/aperture, did you focus-recompose?


----------



## vuilang (Aug 17, 2012)

ouch.. 6 out of 6 missed focus?? even my old historic 30D wouldn't do it.
using my 5d3 and the focus is nail on everytime (95%+).. my 1d2 is also very reliable at AF. hitting focus around 85%

I have the 24-70 and i think that lense is horrible at AF, most of my missed AF is from that lense, thus i rarely use it


----------



## Sycotek (Aug 17, 2012)

It's a mixed bag for Me - I was/am pretty close to dumping my canon stock and going over to the dark side. But I don't like their primes (however their zooms are great) and that does stop me tbh.

AF wise I have always found Nikon to be more accurate but noticeably slower.

They are cheaper (at least where I am).

I've bought and dumped 2x5D3s and about to replace my first 1DX - If the new one screws up a wedding like the first (the af locked up in broad daylight...) I'll be over on the Nikon camp come Monday - I don't have room for that kind of machine failure.

I have entertained Canon long enough - there is no quality assurance even with their flag ship bodies.


----------



## Richard Lane (Aug 17, 2012)

Sorry, about your troubles!

I've used the 24-70mm f/2.8L as well as many other lenses with the 7D, MKIV and 1DX and I've never had any problems with Canons AF.

The 1DX AF is completely redesigned and it's very,very, good and it's also quicker than the MKIV, and the 1DX seems to snap right into focus with confidence.

Maybe you need to send your lens and/or MKIV into CPS.

Rich


----------



## dafrank (Aug 17, 2012)

Well, I'll be as clear as possible. Most of the time I manual focus whenever possible and use the autofocus assist light to confirm my focus if I am having any diffiiculty - as with eyes getting tired from a long day. This system is about 99.8% effective in bringing home proper focus. On those times when I do autofocus, on my previous 1Ds2 and my current 1Ds3, I have found the cameras to be about equal in getting the job done: a little over 90% with dead-on on static subjects and about 70-80% acccurate on moving follow-focus subjects. My new 5D3 autofocus is about 99% accurate on static subjects. However, I have not yet enough experience to give you a figure for the moving follow-focus, but so far, it looks better than my previous cameras and very promising. Also, on both the 1Ds3 and 5D3, manual live-view focus is 100% accurate when you can take the time to use it. 

As for your recent problem witht the group picture, I have no idea what could have caused the specific problem you describe, but here are some possible reasons for the misfocus: light level too low for the autofocus system to work properly without an assist, user error in mis-aiming the focus sensor markings over the subjects, extremely and unusually low subject contrast, lens microadjustment not done or inaccurate, lens or camera focusing systems grossly out of adjustment (needing Canon service repair), accidentally nudging the manual/auto focus switch to "manual" while mistakenly thinking the lens is autofocusing, or even a totally out of alignment glass element from some abuse to the lens. Take your pick.

In my experience, the autofocus capabilities of the higher end Canons, with a few exceptions, are as good as, or better than, the only other autofocus system I'm familiar with - Nikon's. And now - with the 5D3 and 1Dx - Canon's autofcus is at the top of the heap. Do, however, consider the joys of manual focus; it's certainly a technique you could easily use to perfect a group shot of people with very little trouble.

I'm afraid that, in the end, you'll have to figure this one out for yourself.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 17, 2012)

Cameras can go bad, lenses can get out of calibration, there are lots of potential things that can happen. You need to try to see if you can recreate the issue.
1D MK IV Low light with AI Servo, for example, is going to fail, the camera will shoot even if AF is not completely achieved when in AI servo. Use one shot. It may not AF, but will not close the shutter until its focused. That might not be your problem, its just a possibility.
My 1D MK IV had very accurate autofocus, but struggled in low light. Thats pretty well documented. The 5D MK II is a excellent low light AF body (center point).


----------



## Dylan777 (Aug 17, 2012)

Ouchhhhh 6 out of 6????....so far so good with my 5D III here. No issue with AF


----------



## M.ST (Aug 17, 2012)

I don´t have any problems with the AF (1D X, 1D Mark IV, 1 Ds Mark III, 1 Ds Mark II, 1 Ds, 5d Mark III and the rest) in Canon cameras. The only problem I had with th EF 50 1.4 that needs some adjustments after buying it a few years ago.

Even with the old seven point AF build in the 350D in combination with the EF 70-300 IS I shoot very fast squirrels a few weeks ago. With the 5D Mark II the 350D is my "24h in the car" camera for private use. All images are in focus and sharp. The 350D is also my camera with the most shutter releases and antediluvian my first 1 Ds Mark III and 5D Mark II together.

If you shoot with very long supertelephotos or if you shoot under bad conditions it´s advisable to focus manually.


----------



## ishdakuteb (Aug 17, 2012)

i had this problem before and it turned out a camera problem. i found out by using a big newspaper, laid it down on a flat surface, choose a letter and focus on that letter with camera angle to that newspaper at less than 45 degree (wide open and closest to the newspaper to get a great shallow dof, in your case would be around 1.3ft.) i am not sure about your case, it might be a camera problem or lens problem. one thing that i know for sure that when you drop/or bump your lens into something, it can cause your lens element tilt. hope that help...


----------



## keithfullermusic (Aug 17, 2012)

There is no way that 1 series bodies should perform that way. I have a hard time believing that it was user error. I'm assuming you weren't in full auto focus right? If you were having problems that bad canon needs to fix it.

I will say on my 5D3 the AF is outrageous. I am catching sparrows and swallows zooming through the air with my 100-400 with well over a 90% success rate, and I don't know how you can put the AF to a harder test than that. Also, I shot a wedding last weekend and the wasn't one shot that the camera missed. There were a few that I missed, but those were my fault.


----------



## Bruce75 (Aug 17, 2012)

"Do, however, consider the joys of manual focus"

I Still consider manual focus a perfect way to mantain more control ovest the shot and i like to have in me this kind of responsability. 
But wę spend pur money for camera with autofocus so, gong back to your post, i find difficult to understand how for you the 5d mark ii was worse then the mark I. I found then exacty the same. But the 5d mark II, 1d mark III, IV, were more expensive then the 5dc so your disappointment has celar causes.
I love to shoot with e 85L and I know this lens is a difficult one and still I am not sure If I'll have real autofocus advantages with the new bodies..

(story for the spelling. Only one think is worse then not to have autocorrection: to have autocorrection set in the wrong language)


----------



## nda (Aug 17, 2012)

No No No, there must be something wrong with camera(s), I have a 40d, 5d2 & 1d4 no problems sure they miss here and there but not 6 out of 6, have you had the bodies checked from Canon?


----------



## mingulay (Aug 17, 2012)

Thank you all for the variety of feedbacks.

Up to now I see several points. 

The shots described were taken in conditions which were not "ideal". It was indoors, the light was coming in through the windows. Having had the light in the back on the other hand means that it was not the most difficult of tasks. In spending 7000$ for a high end body I would expect it to perform under conditions like that. Maybe I expect too much. But then why spend so much?

There seem to be inconsistencies in the quality of the bodies. Something I find unacceptable in that range of the product line. But again I maybe expect too much.

The remark regarding the poor quality of the 24-70 2.8 is certainly true. But I wonder whether the camera or the lens failed. The shots were not unsharp or soft (as they often are with that lens) but clearly out of focus.

Manual focussing is ok and often a good alternative. But shooting weddings you often can't take that time. And again: Going for the flagships makes me expecting that they can perform.

After all there seem to be some folks who trust in the newest bodies. At least a sign of hope.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 17, 2012)

ishdakuteb said:


> i had this problem before and it turned out a camera problem. i found out by using a big newspaper, laid it down on a flat surface, choose a letter and focus on that letter with camera angle to that newspaper at less than 45 degree (wide open and closest to the newspaper to get a great shallow dof, in your case would be around 1.3ft.) i am not sure about your case, it might be a camera problem or lens problem.



Sounds like a test method problem, in this case. As I mentioned above, the actual AF point is larger than the little box representing it in the viewfinder, even with Spot AF:







So...while you may think you're focusing on a specific letter, the camera can't read your mind - it's going to grab onto the feature with the greatest phase difference (contrast) along the proper orientation for the sensor line, within the actual AF area, even if that's outside the little box you placed squarely over that specific letter. 

This is one reason why I always ask *how* people have done the AF Microadjustment, because if you do it wrong (as you would have likely done with the newspaper test as described), you get an incorrect adjustment, and that leads to a high proportion of OOF shots.


----------



## rumorzmonger (Aug 17, 2012)

<inappropriate comment deleted by moderator>


----------



## mingulay (Aug 17, 2012)

I don't know if rumorzmonger deliberatly tried to offend me? Maybe images tell more than words?


----------



## insanitybeard (Aug 17, 2012)

I think it was to be deliberately provocative...... in any case, I don't know what such remarks are meant to achieve... mingulay, I particularly like the second shot.


----------



## candyman (Aug 17, 2012)

mingulay said:


> I don't know if rumorzmonger deliberatly tried to offend me? Maybe images tell more than words?




Great photos! 
Visited your website as well. Great work!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 17, 2012)

+1. You've got some great work in your portfolio!


----------



## Orangutan (Aug 17, 2012)

Please listen to *neuroanatomist*. I don't always agree with him but, when it comes to technical issues, the guy really knows his stuff.

I see three possibilities:

1. You have had numerous bad bodies over your career
2. You have not done AFMA correctly
3. You have an incorrect understanding of how Canon AF works, and your technique causes the problem

Bad bodies happen, but at a small rate. A simple probability calculation tells us that some random people will see more than one bad body; however, it's now time to consider the other two options. I work in computers (cameras are now computers) and I can tell you that when I find myself frustrated and wanting to scream "but it works for everyone else, why not for me...." that's my cue: I'm probably doing something wrong. When it comes to computers I'm really good at what I do, but I still make mistakes. You're a very good photographer, but you may be making mistakes.

Please see if there are other pros in your area who would work with you on AF technique, or search the web for all the info you can get. Do a bunch of careful test shots. At this point it's likely something you're doing.

I like your photos, and hope you can resolve this difficulty.


----------



## canon816 (Aug 17, 2012)

I am sorry that you are having these issues.

I am sure that you are a fully capable photographer (and your work is very nice) however the fact that you have been having such difficulty with AF on several different bodies leads me to suspect that there is more user error here or lens issues rather then camera hardware error.

I have a 1DIV and shoot wildlife. I shoot all the time and have fired off tens of thousands of frames and I must say that it has the most responsive and accurate AF system I have ever experienced. It is dead on with birds in flight even when the birds represent a small portion of the center AF point. Even when I stray from the Center AF point the camera locks onto subject extremely fast and reliably.

I also own the 5DII which in my opinion does have a poor AF system. However, this is only an issue when shooting fast moving subjects. For event photography I find it to be 100% reliable. The AF is not the fastest, but it is very reliable.

To answer your question about the 5DIII, I just bought one and have only taken about 1000 images. I will say that it is much advanced over the 5DII and as good as my 1DIV.

Do you notice that you have more problems with one specific lens? Maybe that is the problem. 
Have you ever sent in your camera body to be serviced by Canon?

Good luck!


----------



## Meh (Aug 17, 2012)

mingulay said:


> I don't know if rumorzmonger deliberatly tried to offend me? Maybe images tell more than words?



Clearly a definite intention to offend you... so just ignore it. Very nice shots in your portfolio.


----------



## Studio1930 (Aug 17, 2012)

vuilang said:


> ouch.. 6 out of 6 missed focus?? even my old historic 30D wouldn't do it.
> using my 5d3 and the focus is nail on everytime (95%+).. my 1d2 is also very reliable at AF. hitting focus around 85%
> 
> I have the 24-70 and i think that lense is horrible at AF, most of my missed AF is from that lense, thus i rarely use it



I agree. My 24-70 is the worst lens in my bag for AF. With that being said, my 1DX nails the focus 98% of the time after I learned how to use it properly. My 1D4 nails the focus about 75% of the time. All of my lenses are calibrated using ReiKan FoCal software which also validates all of my focus points (a few points are not that good). I also have determined where the sweet spot is for the aperture on my lenses by using this software. Most are around f/8 and no higher.


----------



## Northstar (Aug 17, 2012)

Orangutan said:


> Please listen to *neuroanatomist*. I don't always agree with him but, when it comes to technical issues, the guy really knows his stuff.
> 
> I see three possibilities:
> 
> ...



+1

With what you've described, the odds are in favor of user error. With that said, it's obvious that you are a great photographer(I went to your website - very nice) So the conclusion is that you are just "missing" something (from a technical standpoint) about the AF system/capabilities that when combined with a certain situation (group in low light) leads to OOF shots.

My 5d3 AF works very well....fast and accurate.

I'm curious though...when you took these photos, did you use single point? And if yes, are you saying that you locked on a subject with single point and then the AF system selected the wall behind?


----------



## awinphoto (Aug 17, 2012)

Thought I would chime in... As far as the mis-focus, there are so many possible things going on... First of all, the 5d2's AF isn't the best, in fact, it's just not even average... Granted, Back in the day when I used to shoot xxd cameras that had the same (similar) 5d2 AF and configuration I thought it was OK... but really the latest generation of AF in the 7d, 5d3 and 1dx are really hands down, to me, superior. They do require some relearning as they are vastly different beasts and takes practice to master, but once you do, they are hard to miss with. As far as the 1d bodies, and in general, you mention specific situations where focus was off, but what percentage of shots were off? Was it merely in specific situations on challenging lighting conditions and so on and so forth where every camera you used just bad in, or was certain cameras better than others, or...? You give a rough idea of your plight, but really if your getting 70-80% keepers and the tough situations let you down, then it may be your asking for too much... for what it's worth, 5d2 isn't the best low light camera, 1d4 have had complaints of low light tracking, the same with 1d3 and 5d classic... The 1d3 had a recall on the AF if my memory serves me right... The 1d4, in low light with single shot and manual point select, to me, should AF quite well... but I would suppose if you have it in Ai Servo in low light, It might be tough going... Also some lenses focus faster than others, which means they can lock focus faster but then if the camera for a split seconds breaks contact with the point it was focused on, could, in ai servo, quickly jump off the focus plane.. As far as my advice, if your pocketbook can afford the 1dx, get it... worst case scenario, if you dont like it, you can sell it for almost no loss in $$... If your budget is a big tight, get the 5d3... give either or both a chance for you to test, learn and relearn the system... you dont know how many threads have been started here with 5d2 and 1d series shooters moving to the 5d3 and 1dx and not being able to figure the AF out... There is a learning curve so take your time. Once mastered take them on a paid shoot and sink or swim... I think you would be blown away, but then again if you go into the shoot halfway jaded, you may leave the shoot just as critical. So anyways those are my suggestions from an honest user of Canon bodies who earns their living with photography for the last 10 years.


----------



## ishdakuteb (Aug 17, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> ishdakuteb said:
> 
> 
> > i had this problem before and it turned out a camera problem. i found out by using a big newspaper, laid it down on a flat surface, choose a letter and focus on that letter with camera angle to that newspaper at less than 45 degree (wide open and closest to the newspaper to get a great shallow dof, in your case would be around 1.3ft.) i am not sure about your case, it might be a camera problem or lens problem.
> ...



that is the reason why i am saying "a big newspaper", which also means that the newspaper must have big letter for me focus on. yes, you are right... i was using AF microadjustment method to test my camera. i do not have enough tools during that time, so i choose that way for a quick test to find out my camera problem (missed focus all the time).

note: many thanks for the picture, this is the pix that i have been looking for... to know about spot AF and single spot AF dimensions (need to know this to perform accurate measure light instead of zoom in). however, i am still in learning time...


----------



## RLPhoto (Aug 17, 2012)

I shot with the 5Dc for along time. Its AF was adequate for what it was, but the MK3 is just a whole different animal. Its the best AF I've ever used on any camera.


----------



## Richard Lane (Aug 17, 2012)

mingulay,

Absolutely stunning images! 

Lets try and sort this out, between AF settings vs. faulty equipment.

1) Were you using AI Servo or One Shot Mode?
2) If you were using AI Servo, then what is the tracking sensitivity set too?
3) Were you using Single AF Point or Single Spot AF point?
4) If you use regular Single point AF, then do you have AF expansion on or off?
5) Do you use half shutter-button press to focus or AF-On back button?
6) Were your red AF points on the subject or on the wall when viewed on your computer?
7) If the red points were on your subject, were they on a low contrast solid color, or on a higher contrast edge, or transition area?

Rich


----------



## awinphoto (Aug 17, 2012)

Richard Lane said:


> mingulay,
> 
> Absolutely stunning images!
> 
> ...



If i'm not mistaken, he doesn't have the 1dx or 5d3 so the single AF or spot AF/ expansion doesn't apply.


----------



## Richard Lane (Aug 17, 2012)

awinphoto said:


> If i'm not mistaken, he doesn't have the 1dx or 5d3 so the single AF or spot AF/ expansion doesn't apply.



The MKIV does have Single AF point, Single AF point with expansion and Spot AF, however the 24-70mm f/2.8L doesn't allow Spot AF to be enabled, so you are correct that Spot AF will not apply for his lens. Thanks for pointing that out. 

My 300mm f/2.8L IS (has Spot AF) is permanently attached to my MKIV, and both my 7D and 1DX also have Spot AF, so it seems that whichever camera/lens combo I pick up, I always have Spot AF. For those that are interested, the only other lenses that do offer Spot AF for the MKIV are the (200 f/2 IS, 300 f/2.8 IS, 400 f/2.8 IS, 400 f/4 DO IS, 500 f/4 IS, 600 f/4 IS and 800 f/5.6 IS)

As far as I know, no Canon Camera offers Spot AF with expansion, as that would defeat the purpose of the precise Spot AF.

Cheers,
Rich


----------



## mingulay (Aug 17, 2012)

Today I prepared a wedding that I will join from 9 am until 2 am Saturday/Sunday and now I need to get some sleep to be ready for that task. I want to thank you all for your supporting comments and contributions to my problem. There are some open points and questions and I will come back to them on Sunday, when I will be back at my computer again.


----------



## awinphoto (Aug 17, 2012)

Richard Lane said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > If i'm not mistaken, he doesn't have the 1dx or 5d3 so the single AF or spot AF/ expansion doesn't apply.
> ...



Thanks for the clarification... I haven't shot with the 1d4 and only played with it shortly after it was first released. After reading reviews and a brief hands on, I assumed it was like the 1d3 and prior cameras to date just with much better tracking. That being said, with the latest rendition of AF modules, I've heard and believe both the 5d3 and 1dx has better AF engines and performance than the 1d4?


----------



## 1255 (Aug 18, 2012)

seems all the possibilities are being covered already, so i'd just like to say, mingulay, great work ++


----------



## mingulay (Sep 18, 2012)

To round up: I questioned the AF capabilities of Canon cameras in general and asked for experiences in this regard - particularly from users of the 1DX and 5DIII.

In the meantime a dared going for a 5DIII and can say that the autofocus problem is indeed solved. Tests with different lighting situations and most of the time very open apertures (2 and less) led to sharp images in nearly every case. Very convincing. It is a joy to TRUST your tool (and not need to shoot every situation 10 times just to make sure to hit at least once.

So thanks to all who convinced me going for this camera Apart from the well working AF system it may be mentioned that the camera as a whole is a very good piece of work. Maybe somewhat pricey but very reliable and well equipped.


----------



## AprilForever (Sep 18, 2012)

Sorry, bro, but this seems to be some sort of technique issue, or something... I cannot figure it out otherwise...


----------



## Quasimodo (Sep 18, 2012)

mingulay said:


> To round up: I questioned the AF capabilities of Canon cameras in general and asked for experiences in this regard - particularly from users of the 1DX and 5DIII.
> 
> In the meantime a dared going for a 5DIII and can say that the autofocus problem is indeed solved. Tests with different lighting situations and most of the time very open apertures (2 and less) led to sharp images in nearly every case. Very convincing. It is a joy to TRUST your tool (and not need to shoot every situation 10 times just to make sure to hit at least once.
> 
> So thanks to all who convinced me going for this camera Apart from the well working AF system it may be mentioned that the camera as a whole is a very good piece of work. Maybe somewhat pricey but very reliable and well equipped.



I am happy that your problem was solved, albeit in a fashion that made you aquire new gear, thus circumventing the original problem.

I have nothing to contribute with that have not been mentioned by these very skilled commentators. 

However, I just wanted to say that I love your work (from what you posted in this thread, and from your portfoliopage). Apart from brilliant compositions and creativity on your shots, I am particularly impressed with your lighting (and particurlarly in your akt/seminude shots), and I would love to see you open a thread on lighting, or even a youtube video for us other to learn from


----------



## bdunbar79 (Sep 18, 2012)

Is this thread opposed to DISHONEST users of Canon Bodies who earn their living with photography?


----------



## canon816 (Sep 18, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> Is this thread opposed to DISHONEST users of Canon Bodies who earn their living with photography?



Oh crap... I didn't notice the honest part. You should disregard my previous statements....


----------



## nightbreath (Sep 18, 2012)

Quasimodo said:


> ... Apart from brilliant compositions and creativity on your shots, I am particularly impressed with your lighting (and particurlarly in your akt/seminude shots), and I would love to see you open a thread on lighting, or even a youtube video for us other to learn from


Just look at the subject's eyes and you'll see the answer


----------



## Quasimodo (Sep 19, 2012)

nightbreath said:


> Quasimodo said:
> 
> 
> > ... Apart from brilliant compositions and creativity on your shots, I am particularly impressed with your lighting (and particurlarly in your akt/seminude shots), and I would love to see you open a thread on lighting, or even a youtube video for us other to learn from
> ...



You have some beautiful pictures on your site

I am not sure if I follow your thought? Look at the eyes? The photos I was referring to (akt) on his page are many where you can't even see the eyes, but the lighting is beautiful.


----------



## Jakontil (Sep 19, 2012)

for a wedding, MKIII does everything....

until i get a 1DX, which was a clear winner all the way...


----------



## nightbreath (Sep 19, 2012)

Quasimodo said:


> You have some beautiful pictures on your site
> 
> I am not sure if I follow your thought? Look at the eyes? The photos I was referring to (akt) on his page are many where you can't even see the eyes, but the lighting is beautiful.


Thank you for the comment on my photos 

If you can't tell how one picture was made, look at another one of the same author. You'll see lighting setup (softboxes, umbrellas, reflectors) if they were used. The next step is to try it out by yourself, to feel the difference by viewing your own pictures and to continue researching. I believe that understanding photography is tightly bound to research and practice.


----------



## Zlatko (Sep 19, 2012)

mingulay said:


> So I would appreciate feedback regarding the quality of the autofocus from people who use the 5D III or 1DX.


I use Canon (mainly 5DIII and 5DII) and earn my living with photography. The problems of the 24-70 f/2.8L version 1 have been debated by photographers for years now. I believe that many have found that the AF is just not reliable for photographing a group of people with a detailed background, regardless of the camera used. The AF will too often choose the background. Moreover, the original 24-70 tends to go out of adjustment more easily than other zoom lenses. For a while, I had switched to the 24-105 f/4L for such photos and found it to be more reliable. More recently, I have usually done group photos with the 35 f/1.4L or the 50 f/1.2L, and have found both to be more reliable than the original 24-70.

Generally speaking, the autofocus of the 5DIII is more accurate and reliable than that of the 5DII, but I'm still not sure I would trust it with the original 24-70. I'm hoping the new 24-70 II is much more reliable.


----------



## AudioGlenn (Sep 19, 2012)

I shot a wedding last weekend with a 5D mark ii and a 5D mkiii. I used the center focus point and recomposed every time. No problems. Forgive me if this sounds rude (I'm really not trying to be rude... promise) but if you're getting paid for your work, wouldn't you check a critical shot to make sure it was nailed with a quick preview. I understand this might take a second or two and those seconds add up but if they were all setup and you shot it 6 times, I'm assuming it was an important shot and that you would have a half second to quickly make sure... again, not trying to be rude. I know the pace of a wedding and how you've got to keep moving. It's hectic. but for that shot... hmmm. I would say it was the photographer's responsibility to check.

as far as quality control, no company is perfect with that one. you might need to have your body checked at a repair center


----------



## marekjoz (Sep 24, 2012)

Maybe some of you haven't heard the joke I've read recently:

- How to make money having a good photo gear?
- Sell it


----------



## Stickman (Sep 24, 2012)

mingulay said:


> So I would appreciate feedback regarding the quality of the autofocus from people who use the 5D III or 1DX. Critical, honest and heavy users and people who have to deliver to customers. Is the autofocus in the mentioned cameras good - ore just LESS BAD but still not as it should be with such a price tag? Your feedback would help me a lot!
> 
> [/url]



I shoot professionally using a variety of Canon cameras, including the 7D, 1D3, 1Ds3, and 1DX. I am more than a little familiar with traveling several thousand miles to do a photoshoot which can not be shot a second time. 

The 1D3 and 1Ds3 were good bodies for me until it came to a shallow DOF. I could not rely on them to be tack sharp where I needed, and it was not a matter of front or back focusing. However, in my case it was a matter of inches at worst, never of several feet as you describe. Thankfully much of my work is at higher Fstops, so the issues were typically not of concern.

When I received my 1DX, it was like I had found a new style of photography. I must have been simply used to working with the older AF systems, because the 1DX locks on in low light, and hits with ALL lenses at ALL apertures. My glass suddenly seems new, and I am more than a little impressed with how well the AF works. 

I could be bitter at the AF of previous generation bodies, but it worked well enough for what I needed. The newer AF system is simply stunning. While I didn't enjoy the price of the 1DX, it is all part of business, and at the end of the day it is making me money and allowing me to shoot in conditions I would not have been able to previously. 

I debated heavily getting rid of my other bodies and picking up a 5D3 to go with the 1Dx. I'm keeping my 1Ds3 for studio work and product photography, and the 1D3 is being kept because there is little value in it. The 7D is a "beater" camera, and is taken up into or under the mountains and in other conditions where I need a light camera and top notch images are less important (though still able to be sold). Being able to keep a supply of similar batteries on hand is another big plus. 

I've never owned or used a 1D4, so I can't help you with a comparison, but the 1Dx does everything Canon claims in my opinion.


----------

