# Firmware 1.2.1 for the 5D Mark III in the Wild



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 21, 2013)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=13366"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=13366">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>5D Mark III’s running the new firmware

</strong>We’ve received <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51317926" target="_blank">various reports</a> that EOS 5D Mark III’s that have come back from Canon service in the last week are running firmware 1.2.1.</p>
<p>So I guess if you can’t wait until the 30th of April, you can drop your camera off to Canon!</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## candyman (Apr 21, 2013)

I just wait and see but looking forward to it.


----------



## Tom W (Apr 21, 2013)

T minus 9 days and counting!


----------



## JonAustin (Apr 21, 2013)

It's curious why, if they're updating bodies in their Service Centers with this new firmware, they haven't already posted it on their website. I have a big shoot coming up this week, and would have liked to run the camera through its paces with this new code. Oh well.


----------



## saizo (Apr 21, 2013)

I received my 5d mark3 yesterday after one week in canon service Qatar with the same 1.1.3 firmware


----------



## candyman (Apr 21, 2013)

saizo said:


> I received my 5d mark3 yesterday after one week in canon service Qatar with the same 1.1.3 firmware




Interesting to see that Canon Service Centers use different policies. I wonder why.


----------



## rpt (Apr 21, 2013)

JonAustin said:


> It's curious why, if they're updating bodies in their Service Centers with this new firmware, they haven't already posted it on their website. I have a big shoot coming up this week, and would have liked to run the camera through its paces with this new code. Oh well.


A very valid point. One can hand off a Beta, but you would not update somebody's software (or firmware) _*without*_ their consent. In fact if a company updated somebody's software without their consent _*even*_ if it was released, they could be sued...

That said, I am sure there are new versions are in the wild. There has to be a larger group doing a Beta test before release. If they shifted the date till the end of this month, there has to be a reason to re-validate the working of a fix (or three).


----------



## East Wind Photography (Apr 21, 2013)

Perhaps the ones that went in for service and came back with 1.2.1 had an issue resolved with that firmware.



rpt said:


> JonAustin said:
> 
> 
> > It's curious why, if they're updating bodies in their Service Centers with this new firmware, they haven't already posted it on their website. I have a big shoot coming up this week, and would have liked to run the camera through its paces with this new code. Oh well.
> ...


----------



## rpt (Apr 21, 2013)

East Wind Photography said:


> Perhaps the ones that went in for service and came back with 1.2.1 had an issue resolved with that firmware.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


In the US of A? I would not even try that in India...


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 21, 2013)

Its very typical that the firmware is first installed on production cameras, then in repair centers, and finally for the millions of users. The gradual introduction allows them to spot any issues that were missed in beta tests. Even years of beta tests can't find issues found by users who make unusual or obscure settings.

I prefer it that way, it gives me a bit of a cushion to see if anything nasty happens. I certainly would not install new firmware just before a big shoot. Thats asking for trouble.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 21, 2013)

saizo said:


> I received my 5d mark3 yesterday after one week in canon service Qatar with the same 1.1.3 firmware


Qatar is a bit slow in getting technology 5D MK III was several months slower to arrive in Qatar than most countries ... I live n Qatar.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 21, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> saizo said:
> 
> 
> > I received my 5d mark3 yesterday after one week in canon service Qatar with the same 1.1.3 firmware
> ...


That seems strange. I believe you, but with the excellent Global Transportation system and 
Communications, there must be a reason that involves the government. Qatar is not some backwater country, even if it is small. It could be something like getting radio intereference approvals. Bureaucrats can slow down things anywhere in the world. Canon probably tends to work issues in countries with the largest sales first.


----------



## JonAustin (Apr 21, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> ... The gradual introduction allows them to spot any issues that were missed in beta tests. ... I prefer it that way, it gives me a bit of a cushion to see if anything nasty happens. I certainly would not install new firmware just before a big shoot. Thats asking for trouble.



For any firmware or software I update, I keep up to two previous versions on file, so I can revert back to an older version if I experience any problems with the latest release. I've rarely had to backtrack, but its good insurance to have, if for nothing else than peace of mind.

If the new 5D3 firmware were available today, I'd download and install it, regardless of my big shoot this week. I have the installer for the current (1.1.3) version on my PC, so I could revert to it, if necessary. Before I did that, however, I would switch to my back-up camera body if I ran into any trouble. 

I completely respect the preferences of some to wait a while before installing an update, but they shouldn't press their conservatism on the rest of us. Personally, I would willingly become an unofficial beta tester, just to be able to put the promised new features through their paces.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 21, 2013)

I waited almost 9 months ... so I can wait another 9 days ... No need for me to send it to Canon service center


----------



## Krob78 (Apr 21, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> I waited almost 9 months ... so I can wait another 9 days ... No need for me to send it to Canon service center


Indeed!


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 21, 2013)

Krob78 said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > I waited almost 9 months ... so I can wait another 9 days ... No need for me to send it to Canon service center
> ...



Indeed.... unless you have something to shoot that will be over in another 9 days. And then no longer indeed. I will try to see if the local Canon service has it. I'm afraid 9 more days will be 4-5 too late for something.


----------



## hjaeger (Apr 22, 2013)

"Various reports" suggest that there are more than one - has anyone heard of other reports of firmware v1.2.1 in the wild? Or is this all based on a post by a single user who then is unable test if any of the new additions really are there (none of the other posters who has received their 5Dmk3 back from a Canon service center in the same period has the new firmware)


----------



## anthony11 (Apr 22, 2013)

rpt said:


> In fact if a company updated somebody's software without their consent _*even*_ if it was released, they could be sued...


Sony FTL


----------



## LarryC (Apr 22, 2013)

rpt said:


> JonAustin said:
> 
> 
> > In fact if a company updated somebody's software without their consent _*even*_ if it was released, they could be sued...
> ...


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 22, 2013)

hjaeger said:


> "Various reports" suggest that there are more than one - has anyone heard of other reports of firmware v1.2.1 in the wild? Or is this all based on a post by a single user who then is unable test if any of the new additions really are there (none of the other posters who has received their 5Dmk3 back from a Canon service center in the same period has the new firmware)


There have been several, including some posted here, and videos taken with the new firmware. Users have reported finding it on their new cameras as well.


----------



## sanj (Apr 22, 2013)

rpt said:


> JonAustin said:
> 
> 
> > It's curious why, if they're updating bodies in their Service Centers with this new firmware, they haven't already posted it on their website. I have a big shoot coming up this week, and would have liked to run the camera through its paces with this new code. Oh well.
> ...



Wondering why you say this. Who would be upset to have a newer/better firmware? 
And how are you and your lovely wife?


----------



## sanj (Apr 22, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> I waited almost 9 months ... so I can wait another 9 days ... No need for me to send it to Canon service center



 
True unless someone was going on a photo trip just this very day..


----------



## eml58 (Apr 22, 2013)

Krob78 said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > I waited almost 9 months ... so I can wait another 9 days ... No need for me to send it to Canon service center
> ...



"This too shall Pass"


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 22, 2013)

sanj said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > I waited almost 9 months ... so I can wait another 9 days ... No need for me to send it to Canon service center
> ...


True ... but I wonder how many Canon service centers actually return the camera in 1 day.


----------



## rpt (Apr 22, 2013)

sanj said:


> rpt said:
> 
> 
> > JonAustin said:
> ...


I'll PM you. Erica and I were talking about you yesterday.

In the software world "newer" is not always "better".

I guess the next time I leave my camera with Canon I will read the fine print _*carefully *_


----------



## macrodust (Apr 22, 2013)

According to the OP over at dpreview who got back his camera with Firmware v1.2.1, the AF points do NOT illuminate...


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 22, 2013)

sanj said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > I waited almost 9 months ... so I can wait another 9 days ... No need for me to send it to Canon service center
> ...



....which will be the case for some.
....or perhaps planning to shoot some natural world event where timing matters to within plus or minus 1-2 days and April 30th falls a few days beyond (and which won't occur again for another 365 days, assuming the person is again even in a location where such event happens a year from now).

So I don't see the need to start getting on the people saying they were urgently wanting it or trying to find out if a drive to their local service center could help. Just because 9 days means nothing to you doesn't mean it means nothing to others.


----------



## Bosman (Apr 22, 2013)

rpt said:


> JonAustin said:
> 
> 
> > It's curious why, if they're updating bodies in their Service Centers with this new firmware, they haven't already posted it on their website. I have a big shoot coming up this week, and would have liked to run the camera through its paces with this new code. Oh well.
> ...


Canon always updates firmware when its is sent in.


----------



## emko (Apr 23, 2013)

Bosman said:


> rpt said:
> 
> 
> > JonAustin said:
> ...



yea someone will sue Canon for giving them the ability to AF at F8.


----------



## rpt (Apr 23, 2013)

emko said:


> Bosman said:
> 
> 
> > rpt said:
> ...


 
I asked for that didn't I.


----------



## sanj (Apr 23, 2013)

rpt said:


> emko said:
> 
> 
> > Bosman said:
> ...



Burst out laughing


----------



## verysimplejason (Apr 23, 2013)

Have they fixed the AF issue when using assist beam? Can someone please confirm? Thanks!


----------



## ems1 (Apr 25, 2013)

Canon Rumors said:


> <div name=\"googleone_share_1\" style=\"position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;\"><glusone size=\"tall\" count=\"1\" href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=13366\"></glusone></div><div style=\"float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;\"><a href=\"https://twitter.com/share\" class=\"twitter-share-button\" data-count=\"vertical\" data-url=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=13366\">Tweet</a></div>
> <p><strong>5D Mark III’s running the new firmware
> 
> 
> ...



Is there any proof of this, or is it just "various reports" ?


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 25, 2013)

verysimplejason said:


> Have they fixed the AF issue when using assist beam? Can someone please confirm? Thanks!


AFAIK, the following is what they are updating:

✔ Uncompressed HDMI Output Support
When shooting video, HDMI Output makes possible the recording of high-definition uncompressed video data (YCbCr 4:2:2, 8 bit) from the EOS 5D Mark III to an external recorder via the camera’s HDMI terminal.

✔ This enhanced capability facilitates the editing of video data with minimal image degradation for greater on-site workflow efficiency during motion picture and video productions.

✔ Video being captured can be displayed on an external monitor, enabling real-time, on-site monitoring of high-definition video during shooting.

✔ Improved AF Functionality – Even when the EOS 5D Mark III is equipped with an extender and lens making possible a maximum aperture of f/8, the firmware update supports AF employing the camera’s central cross-type points (currently compatible with maximum apertures up to f/5.6).

✔ This firmware update will allow users to take advantage of AF when shooting distant subjects, benefitting sports and nature photographers, particularly when using telephoto lenses.

Word on the street is that "Canon 5D Mark III firmware update will also come packed with several bug fixes. *One of them will allow the camera to focus faster when using the Speedlight AF Assist Beam*, while other details remain unknown for now".


----------



## digital paradise (Apr 26, 2013)

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer?pageKeyCode=prdAdvDetail&docId=0901e024807f5f70


----------



## westr70 (Apr 26, 2013)

I just got my camera back from the Irvine Service Center today, 4/25/13, and it still had the same firmware in it........1.1.3. I sent it in for sensor cleaning and asked them to update the sensor and they said they would do it...... I didn't write it in the service request though.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 26, 2013)

OK I was an idiot. Yes! It does deliver full-size clean HDMI out! You need to hit INFO a bunch of times while in video mode to bring up a special full size mode! Thank god.


----------



## rpt (Apr 26, 2013)

westr70 said:


> I just got my camera back from the Irvine Service Center today, 4/25/13, and it still had the same firmware in it........1.1.3. I sent it in for sensor cleaning and asked them to update the sensor and they said they would do it...... I didn't write it in the service request though.


Not surprised.

I believe that even if you did, they would not load it unless it was "released". But then that is just my opinion...


----------



## Krob78 (Apr 26, 2013)

All the same, think I'll wait..


----------



## rpt (Apr 27, 2013)

Krob78 said:


> All the same, think I'll wait..


Just a few more days...


----------



## virsago_mk2 (Apr 27, 2013)

Just to report on the latest firmware 1.2.1 for 5D3, looks like it's no longer able to detect the 3rd party LP-E6 battery level anymore.

When I put my 3rd party LP-E6 (bought from eBay) into the camera, there's a warning screen that says:

*Communication with Canon LP-E6 battery is Irregular. Continue to use this battery?*

If I choose Cancel, the camera will turn off instantly. If I choose OK, the camera will turn on & run as normal, but the battery level will stay at 100% all the time & I can no longer register nor delete the serial number.

This is kinda bummer for me as I just bought 18 DSTE-branded LP-E6s & I'm expecting it to arrive next week. If the DSTE-branded LP-E6s can't show the battery level, I'll be very disappointed.

Anyone else have this problem as well?


----------



## liondor1969 (Apr 27, 2013)

NEW FRIMWARE CANON

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/2602-canon-5d-mark-iii-uncompressed-hdmi-firmware-update-v121-now-available/



https://www.wetransfer.com/downloads/f1ec39c00766fbe44a5a2d22a4307d4820130426180027/1dfdb0


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 28, 2013)

Argggghh! I hope the 1.2.1 leak is not the final release.

It doesn't seem to recognize using the 1.4x TC III with the 70-300L! (and it fits perfectly at the long end)

It doesn't seem to recognize the TC is on .

It doesn't report it as a lens + TC combo for micro-adjustment and it says f/5.6 instead of f/8 .

The AF is awful! It does a hyper oscillation before settling in (only 1/3 of the time is it actually in focus  ) and it's so slow.

It seems like they decided the 1.4x TC III is not compatible with the 70-300L so they don't let it work with the new f/8 AF mode . Even though it fits perfectly fine if you keep it at the long end.

Even if they don't official claim support for the combo for fear of someone crying that they tried to go to 70mm and it hit it would be nice if they would just let it work even without being on the official list!

It was precisely with this lens that I cared about f/8!! I have my 300 2.8 that works fine with either 1.4x or 2x III TC already but that is so heavy so it would'be been nice to get f/8 out of the 70-300L for the times I don't wanna lug the beast around which can be a real pain.

Ironically, now I guess I need to spend another $250 and get a kenko? Maybe I should dump the canon 1.4x TC to pay for it. 

But people say the Kenko is not as sharp with the 70-300L (or other lenses) and that they notice a bit of a quality difference with the 70-300L. What a shame.

I hope the final release version firmware is different or they allow for a patch. 

It's quite a tremendous shame since the 70-300L actually maintains pretty solid quality with the Canon 1.4x TC III. At f/6.3 (f/9) the quality is relatively solid and it is definitely better than upscaling the bare lens, absolutely. It would be soooo useful! COme on Canon THIS is exactly the kinda scenario we wanted f/8 AF for! But seemingly being locked out of the new f/8 mode the 70-300L + 1.4x TC III AF is such an utter colossal wreck . But the optical output is solid enough to be usable so it's frustrating.


----------



## East Wind Photography (Apr 28, 2013)

I dont think that was ever in the cards. The risk to Canon is too high to have people zoom back to 70 with the xtender on and damage the lens. 

I wonder if the 2XIII now works with the 100-400 zoom?



LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Argggghh! I hope the 1.2.1 leak is not the final release.
> 
> It doesn't seem to recognize using the 1.4x TC III with the 70-300L! (and it fits perfectly at the long end)
> 
> ...


----------



## rpt (Apr 28, 2013)

East Wind Photography said:


> I wonder if the 2XIII now works with the 100-400 zoom?


Wouldn't that go to f11?


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 28, 2013)

BTW, which time zone will Canon follow for this release? Japan time? or GMT? or EST? ... coz if its Japan time, 30th is just about a day away.


----------



## rpt (Apr 28, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> BTW, which time zone will Canon follow for this release? Japan time? or GMT? or EST? ... coz if its Japan time, 30th is just about a day away.


Japan - my guess...


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 28, 2013)

Yeah but they could simply leave it off the supported list but have it still work anyway. It's not like someone couldn't give a try now anyway, people are anyway, so what is the difference. They could make it work but also say it is not supported.

Really stinks.




East Wind Photography said:


> I dont think that was ever in the cards. The risk to Canon is too high to have people zoom back to 70 with the xtender on and damage the lens.
> 
> I wonder if the 2XIII now works with the 100-400 zoom?
> 
> ...


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 28, 2013)

I don't know if the focus was perfect on this since it wasn't done with 10x liveview and the AF is very dodgy since they locked out the new f/8 AF for this combo but one of the better looking frames produced this, not exactly THE sharpest thing in the world, but plenty useful and usable and with more noticeably more detail than an upscale:







I mean damn why do they have to lock out the f/8 for the 70-300L?!! It's such an awesome lens for hiking/walk-around/long landscape and to be able to use it at 300mm and pop on a 1.4x TC is one of a few of the main reasons people cared about f/8 AF ability! That would be so awesome. The results are plenty usable optically, if only it would AF! This is what we were waiting for.

Sure don't say that it is officially supported, fine, but don't lock it out either. That doesn't prevent anything. People can still pop on that combo and having it hit at the short end whether the firmware works with it or not. Stinks they locked it out.

Someone on another board claims it works with the 1DX but that they removed it from the official compat list. So why did they have to go and fully remove it from the 5D3 and not just done the same thing (assuming the story is true)?


----------



## rpt (Apr 28, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> I don't know if the focus was perfect on this since it wasn't done with 10x liveview and the AF is very dodgy since they locked out the new f/8 AF for this combo but one of the better looking frames produced this, not exactly THE sharpest thing in the world, but plenty useful and usable and with more noticeably more detail than an upscale:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just two days man! Just two days. Hang in there.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 28, 2013)

rpt said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know if the focus was perfect on this since it wasn't done with 10x liveview and the AF is very dodgy since they locked out the new f/8 AF for this combo but one of the better looking frames produced this, not exactly THE sharpest thing in the world, but plenty useful and usable and with more noticeably more detail than an upscale:
> ...



The messed up AF was with the 1.2.1, it did no better with that combo than with the old firmware and it didn't report it properly. I already put the new firmware in. Unless you are hinting that the official version will be say 1.2.2 and offer more support? And put the 70-300L back in? That would be nice.


----------



## rpt (Apr 28, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> rpt said:
> 
> 
> > LetTheRightLensIn said:
> ...


Hinting? Not me. Hoping is where I am at...


----------



## MarkII (Apr 28, 2013)

FWIW, the Kenko 1.4x converter (DGX Pro 300) is working much better with 1.2.1. The 5DIII seems happy with lenses that would previously have caused the camera to lock up with the converter attached.

(And it still works with the 70-300L - it is a bit slow but it seems to work, ok even in low light)


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 28, 2013)

MarkII said:


> FWIW, the Kenko 1.4x converter (DGX Pro 300) is working much better with 1.2.1. The 5DIII seems happy with lenses that would previously have caused the camera to lock up with the converter attached.
> 
> (And it still works with the 70-300L - it is a bit slow but it seems to work, ok even in low light)



Is the Kenko sharp enough to get enough out of the 70-300L? On another site someone said it wasn't as crisp when using the Kenko instead of the 1.4 III.


----------



## East Wind Photography (Apr 28, 2013)

What we dont know is how many 70-300s were sent in for warranty that were screwed up from someone trying what they shouldnt. If it's not supported why should they bother writing firmware and lens profiles to support the combo?

Anyway, likely that it wont ever be supported until they make a design change to the 70-300....or the 1.4x. 

You can roll back to the old firmware but you better download it now as it wont be an option to DL after the 30th.



LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Yeah but they could simply leave it off the supported list but have it still work anyway. It's not like someone couldn't give a try now anyway, people are anyway, so what is the difference. They could make it work but also say it is not supported.
> 
> Really stinks.
> 
> ...


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 28, 2013)

Well it's not like there is a hard lock. People are trying the 1.4x TC III with it anyway, regardless of whether the firmware works well with it or not. If some slammed the zoom in so hard it stripped gears or something you'd think it wouldn't covered under warranty anyway.






East Wind Photography said:


> What we dont know is how many 70-300s were sent in for warranty that were screwed up from someone trying what they shouldnt. If it's not supported why should they bother writing firmware and lens profiles to support the combo?
> 
> Anyway, likely that it wont ever be supported until they make a design change to the 70-300....or the 1.4x.
> 
> ...


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 29, 2013)

East Wind Photography said:


> What we dont know is how many 70-300s were sent in for warranty that were screwed up from someone trying what they shouldnt. If it's not supported why should they bother writing firmware and lens profiles to support the combo?
> 
> Anyway, likely that it wont ever be supported until they make a design change to the 70-300....or the 1.4x.
> 
> You can roll back to the old firmware but you better download it now as it wont be an option to DL after the 30th.



Well I've now had two people insist that 1DX + f/8 firmware + 70-300L + 1.4x TC III is a go even though not officially supported. So why the heck couldn't they do the same for 5D3? Let it work but don't officially support it?

Seems like all they did during the last few months was make sure to clean out all sorts of useful but unofficially stuff still left in the updated 1DX firmware. 

Just hoping that what arrives on the 30th is more than 1.2.1.


----------



## Click (Apr 29, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> BTW, which time zone will Canon follow for this release? Japan time? or GMT? or EST? ... coz if its Japan time, 30th is just about a day away.



It's CST ... Canon Standard Time ;D


----------



## virsago_mk2 (Apr 29, 2013)

400mm f4 DO + extender 2x II now can AF on my 5D3. But sharpness suffers alot.


----------



## East Wind Photography (Apr 29, 2013)

You take a big IQ hit with the doubler. I rarely use it (2XIII) anymore except on my 70-200 2.8L IS II. I find I can crop without it and get better IQ. I believe the added "feature" is not worth all of the hype. Might prove useful with the video folks where the loss if IQ is also lost in the downscale to HD. For stills, cropping is still better than using the 2XIII.



virsago_mk2 said:


> 400mm f4 DO + extender 2x II now can AF on my 5D3. But sharpness suffers alot.


----------



## msowsun (Apr 29, 2013)

East Wind Photography said:


> You take a big IQ hit with the doubler. I rarely use it (2XIII) anymore except on my 70-200 2.8L IS II. I find I can crop without it and get better IQ. I believe the added "feature" is not worth all of the hype. Might prove useful with the video folks where the loss if IQ is also lost in the downscale to HD. For stills, cropping is still better than using the 2XIII.



That was also my experience with the 70-200mm 2.8IS II. Cropping a 200mm image to match the 2x III 400mm image showed almost no difference. For me it made no sense in having $500 worth of glass sitting in my bag when I could just crop the image instead. 

On the other hand the 1.4x II or 1.4x III both show a noticeable improvement over just cropping.


----------



## grimson (Apr 29, 2013)

Currently in Japan ..... (30th of April)


----------



## rpt (Apr 29, 2013)

grimson said:


> Currently in Japan ..... (30th of April)


You beat me to it 
I was going to make the exact same comment!


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 29, 2013)

East Wind Photography said:


> You take a big IQ hit with the doubler. I rarely use it (2XIII) anymore except on my 70-200 2.8L IS II. I find I can crop without it and get better IQ. I believe the added "feature" is not worth all of the hype. Might prove useful with the video folks where the loss if IQ is also lost in the downscale to HD. For stills, cropping is still better than using the 2XIII.



Depends on the lens. The 2x III is MUCH better than upscaling from a bare a 300 2.8 IS or 300 2.8 IS + 1.4x TC III. At first I was all oh no my 300 2.8 IS looks like a tamron 70-300 vc now when I used the 2x TC but I learned to get over that since in the end you put so much more detail on birds and such that when compared in a fair way you see the 2x does so much so it's almost permanently locked on my 300 now for birds (even often enough for surfing, but basically never for soccer or football) unless I am in a close blind or something.

It even brings a bit more detail on a 70-200 f/4 IS than upscaling (compared to bare lens or with 1.4x TC III on)! Although the image does suffer in some ways that makes me think it is not worth it so much in that case despite a tiny bit more extra detail.

The 70-300L definitely does better with the 1.4x TC III than upscaling, not even close. Just hope they enable the AF like they did, unofficially, for the 1DX!!


----------



## Vicente (Apr 30, 2013)

Available now. I had tested the f8 feature and it works great! Fast and reliable. 
http://support-au.canon.com.au/contents/AU/EN/0400079902.html


----------



## East Wind Photography (Apr 30, 2013)

For those that downloaded and installed the leaked version earlier in the week, it has the same MD5 hash as the released one on Canon's site. There is no need to re-install. They are the same FIR file.


----------



## rpt (Apr 30, 2013)

OK, the 5D3 firmware is at version 1.2.1! 

YAY! The f8 focus works!

At 100*1.4=140mm it did not seem slow. However at 400*1.4=560mm it is a bit slow. Need to test it with BIF. I still need to AFMA it. So that is the task for tomorrow. I also need to test the focus with the flash.


----------

