Story   Photographer   Editor   Student/Intern   Assistant   Job/Item

SportsShooter.com: The Online Resource for Sports Photography

Contents:
 Front Page
 Member Index
 Latest Headlines
 Special Features
 'Fun Pix'
 Message Board
 Educate Yourself
 Equipment Profiles
 Bookshelf
 my.SportsShooter
 Classified Ads
 Workshop
Contests:
 Monthly Clip Contest
 Annual Contest
 Rules/Info
Newsletter:
 Current Issue
 Back Issues
Members:
 Members Area
 "The Guide"
 Join
About Us:
 About SportsShooter
 Contact Us
 Terms & Conditions


Sign in:
Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features.

Name:



Password:







||
SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board

EOS MARK II N FOCUS ISSUES
Serafin Martinez, Photographer
Carolina | PR | | Posted: 10:38 PM on 05.25.09
->> Question to all of you how many of your photos either sports, portrait etc are either soft or out of focus, it seems to me that in AI or one shot there seems to be quite to many, I was using a Nikon D3 and I would say excellent results with the focus issue in low lighting conditions and excellent in Daylight and or with strobes,What is your opinion, do you think that Canon doesn't care. They really havent been able to fix the issues with the Mark III and I read and heard that lots of photographers are making the switch to Nikon,My HO I think that the horse has left the barn, and Canon cant and wont address this issue and will never beat Nikon in quality, dont get me wrong I am a Canon shooter and have to much invested but dam It's an expensive switch. I have even compared with fellow Canon user our custom functions, I use the SI Custom Functions, they use there own CF but we have the same problems.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 11:10 PM on 05.25.09
->> When I was using Canon I felt that the IIn produced the sharpest images and had the most consistent AF performance out of all of their DSLRs I used---especially compared to the 1D Mark III.

As to weather Canon "cares" ...they obviously do but at this point in time is it worth putting in R & D money into finding a cure for the Mark III's problems? And doing probably costly (i.e. hardware) fixes to the thousands of bodies out there?

You have to keep in mind that the MIII is over two years old and is approaching (or even exceeded) the usual life span of this kind of hardware.

Patience by Canon users will most likely be rewarded with a new pro level DSLR in the future. It's anyone's guess as to when because a lot goes into determining a release date including marketing and how big an inventory of older cameras are on dealer shelves and warehouses around the world.

I would also think that Canon Japan will have a pretty stringent testing program for whatever they are developing to replace the Mark III.

Mahalo!
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

David Seelig, Photographer
Hailey | ID | USA | Posted: 11:38 PM on 05.25.09
->> I never had a problem with my mk 11n . I have had my mk 111's to canon for last fix, although had no problems in the past but now they are better then any camera I have ever used. Prior to the last recall I only used my continuous shooting on center spot. Now I use any spot or on any spot with help from the focus points around that point. I am getting glorious sharp photos.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jack Arent, Photographer, Assistant
Alameda | CA | | Posted: 12:13 AM on 05.26.09
->> If you have CF 17 set to 2 that's the problem, I believe SI recommends it but it doesn't work well.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Serafin Martinez, Photographer
Carolina | PR | | Posted: 12:19 AM on 05.26.09
->> Jack what do you set CF 17 at.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

William Maner, Photographer
Biloxi | MS | USA | Posted: 12:33 AM on 05.26.09
->> The SI site recommends CF 17 be set to "1"...

I purchased a pristine Mark IIn per Bert's recommendation last October.. It's worked well.

I have had situations at football games where a player of interest cuts, zig-zags, stutter steps, etc.. and I might lose focus, then blow a couple of frames trying to reacquire the focus..

To be honest, I don't know how much difference these CF settings make.. It's not easy to assess the difference between setting 1 or setting 2 in CF 17..

Seems like it's the same way with CF 20--the AI Servo tracking sensitivity setting..
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Serafin Martinez, Photographer
Carolina | PR | | Posted: 12:40 AM on 05.26.09
->> Thats true William I closed my last post, forgot to tell Jack it says CF 1 which is were I have mine, CF20-0 for ALservo Standard.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jack Arent, Photographer, Assistant
Alameda | CA | | Posted: 12:40 AM on 05.26.09
->> Hold on I'll check.....
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

William Maner, Photographer
Biloxi | MS | USA | Posted: 12:48 AM on 05.26.09
->> CF 20 is the one that confuses me the most.. Perhaps there are hardware differences as well as firmware control differences, but the SI site recommends a setting of 2 (extremely slow) for the AI Servo tracking sensitivity for the classic 1D.. But on the Mark IIn, the recommended setting for CF 20 is 0, standard sensitivity..

I have my Mk IIn CF setting set at 1, but I'd be hard pressed to tell you if it's better than either the 0 or 2 setting..

It could be that the lens you use and the shooting distance might affect the performance for a particular CF setting...
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

William Maner, Photographer
Biloxi | MS | USA | Posted: 12:51 AM on 05.26.09
->> Jack.. The SI site had recommended a CF 17 setting of 2 for the original 1D.. Then it was changed to 1.

The Mk IIn recommendation has always been setting 1..
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jack Arent, Photographer, Assistant
Alameda | CA | | Posted: 1:40 AM on 05.26.09
->> I believe the correct CF 17 setting to use is 0.... I have mine set to 2 right now, and yes SI recommends setting 1, but 1 is more problematic than setting 2. I wish I wrote down my original settings before I changed them a while ago because it would have saved me a great deal of time figuring out that I changed CF 17 (I too tried the SI settings).

What I have figured out over the last month of shooting a lot of baseball is that the 2nd setting has less soft focus issues than the first setting, although I am still having soft focus images more often than I like to see. I am going to try setting 0 tmw, I have a feeling single point is going to be the best option, it's probably the setting I originally used.

As of recent I have shot a lot of baseball players running straight at me down the base line coming out of the batters box, and the adjustment I recently made of setting CF 17 to setting 2 has shown a noticeable decrease in soft focus images compared to setting 1. For example, while shooting a player leaving the batters box for first base I noticed in my pictures my AF would grab onto the back foot of the runner, and since I was shooting wide open my faces would be soft even though my AF point was on the center of the players body.

My speculation is that setting 1 and 2 in CF 17 just makes the camera work too hard to grab onto action, and easily slips and grabs faster moving body parts while shooting in servo. I believe the same goes for CF 20, if you set it too fast you can feel the motor constantly jittering much faster than the old 1V bodies, and those were the best.....

I should have a solid answer tmw.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Serafin Martinez, Photographer
Carolina | PR | | Posted: 1:50 AM on 05.26.09
->> Thanks Jack for the info I'll put mine in 0 also and I'll shoot some basketball tomorrow to see how focus mine are, its just upsetting to see to many frames out of focus.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Serafin Martinez, Photographer
Carolina | PR | | Posted: 12:37 AM on 05.27.09
->> Tonight I shot a basketball game, dark gym can't put strobes and the results were alot better, I did the following changes in my CFn 13-0 CFn 17-0, so now I have to see in a Different lighting.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Add your comments...
If you'd like to add your comments to this thread, use this form. You need to be an active (paying) member of SportsShooter.com in order to post messages to the system.

NOTE: If you would like to report a problem you've found within the SportsShooter.com website, please let us know via the 'Contact Us' form, which alerts us immediately. It is not guaranteed that a member of the staff will see your message board post.
Thread Title: EOS MARK II N FOCUS ISSUES
Thread Started By: Serafin Martinez
Message:
Member Login:
Password:




Return to -->
Message Board Main Index
Want to know which shooter is majoring in Chemistry? Click here to find out! ::..