venicejpg-075.jpg

Photo by Scott Bourne – click here to see the jpg image at 50% size of the original.

NOTE: You may need to refresh your browser after downloading the larger version.Â

When you spend $8000 on a digital camera body, you have high expectations. And my expectations were VERY high for the Canon 1DS MKIII. Here’s my first look at the full sensor, 21.1 megapixel flagship of the Canon line.

The camera is clearly well-built, rugged and ready for business. Among the first things I noticed…

a. New three-inch rear LCD. Though not as bright as the Nikon D3’s LCD, the improvement is noticeable and appreciated.
b. The new battery is much smaller and lighter than the battery in the previous versions of this camera. Also of note, Canon didn’t cheap out here – they provide you with a battery charger that will charge two batteries at once. (Okay they were a little cheap – they only give you one battery.)
c. You no longer have to hold down two buttons at the same time to make menu changes. The overall camera interface is improved.
d. There are now 19 high-precision autofocus crosshairs.
e. The camera has a new quiet mode that makes it easier to take photos undetected.
f. There are TWO DIGIC – III processors and the camera processes data at 14 bits. Most cameras work at 12 bits so this adds more data for smoother tone transitions.
g. The camera is not as noiseless as the D3, but the ISO 1600 is very usable. While there is noise, it does not appear as noise, rather as grain.
h. The viewfinder is bigger and brighter and offers 100% coverage. Looking through my 40D body’s viewfinder is a painful experience now by comparison.
i. The camera is lighter than the 1DSMKII that it replaces.
j. There are TWO memory card slots – one CF slot and one SD slot. You can set them to perform different functions. You can set it so one card simply backs up the other, or both cards work in conjunction to create more storage.

My preliminary areas of concern revolved around how well the 21.1 megapixel image would compare with medium format backs I’ve tried, and wondering how accurate is the autofocus.

Let me start with the image quality. While not quite on par with a $40k Phase One back, it’s still close enough to make me glad I saved the $32k difference. The image quality is simply stunning. It’s very hard to put into words what it’s like. But essentially – I know that if I get something in the frame, too small or not, I probably can crop down to a usable image.

As for the autofocus, I had no trouble quickly acquiring accurate autofocus. I am running the latest firmware update and right out of the box, the camera focuses as good or better than any Canon camera I have ever used.

In day-to-day use, the camera works very well. It does take some time to master the four pages of custom menus, but Canon has added a new feature I already find myself using regularly called MY MENU. It allows you to position your most often-used custom functions in one handy and accessible place.

While Canon claims 5fps performance in RAW, I was able to get slightly better than 4fps. It all depends on things like shutter speed, autofocus, etc.

This is the most expensive camera in its class. It is often compared to the Nikon D3 since it’s Nikon’s current flagship camera. That’s simply not a good comparison. They are two very different cameras, designed to perform different tasks. The Nikon is more of a sports, photojournalism, events, etc. camera. The Canon is designed for portraits, landscapes, product shots, studio work, etc.

The Canon is a memory hog, requiring between 80 and 100 megabytes of data storage PER SECOND when fired in high-burst mode.

So in addition to the high price tag, potential buyers need to consider adding hard disk and memory storage purchases to accommodate the massive files generated by the 1DS MKIII. Likewise, this camera cries out for “L” glass. So if you plan to buy this body, plan to update your lens collection.

My verdict at this point is simple. I am wowed by this camera. While few of us NEED 21.1 megapixels, we also don’t need Mercedes Benz motorcars or Rolex watches, but they sure are nice to have. Moreover, this technology tends to work its way down the line over the years, so people who want to wait will probably be able to access some or all of these features in the future for less money than I spent.

Join the conversation! 68 Comments

  1. Wow Scott,

    You’re looking good there on your bike…..
    :)

  2. Wow Scott,

    You’re looking good there on your bike…..
    :)

  3. I agree with You Scott. Small note is the charger holds two batteries but charges them sequentially. Thsoe batteries are fantastic, bee getting 2000+ shots out of a charge.

    You do need to update not only to L glass, but to L 2.8 glass or primes. I found the 24-105 and the 17-40 just didn’t do the camera justice. Get also some primes, the 50 1.2L really does thsi camera justice.

    Regarding low light performance, I find all my night street shooting was much improved, I get a lot more keepers – specially helpful if you are doing street photography in low light.

  4. I agree with You Scott. Small note is the charger holds two batteries but charges them sequentially. Thsoe batteries are fantastic, bee getting 2000+ shots out of a charge.

    You do need to update not only to L glass, but to L 2.8 glass or primes. I found the 24-105 and the 17-40 just didn’t do the camera justice. Get also some primes, the 50 1.2L really does thsi camera justice.

    Regarding low light performance, I find all my night street shooting was much improved, I get a lot more keepers – specially helpful if you are doing street photography in low light.

  5. Nice review Scott. By the way, did you get a model release?

  6. Nice review Scott. By the way, did you get a model release?

  7. @Richard I’d say I have to slightly differ from you on your opinion about glass. I’ve done fine with all my “L” glass. I do use the 50 1.2 and love it. But the above shot was made with my 70-200 f/4 IS “L” and it’s as sharp as can be. No prime or 2.8 required.

    @Ashley I did not get a model release because I don’t intend to sell the photo for commercial use. For editorial use, none is required.

  8. @Richard I’d say I have to slightly differ from you on your opinion about glass. I’ve done fine with all my “L” glass. I do use the 50 1.2 and love it. But the above shot was made with my 70-200 f/4 IS “L” and it’s as sharp as can be. No prime or 2.8 required.

    @Ashley I did not get a model release because I don’t intend to sell the photo for commercial use. For editorial use, none is required.

  9. I would love to hear more about what makes the Canon better at portraits and landscapes, and the Nikon better at sports and photojournalism. I am not implying a comparison between the 1Ds MK3 and the D3, but rather what unique features of each camera put them in the categories Scott mentions.

  10. I would love to hear more about what makes the Canon better at portraits and landscapes, and the Nikon better at sports and photojournalism. I am not implying a comparison between the 1Ds MK3 and the D3, but rather what unique features of each camera put them in the categories Scott mentions.

  11. @Kevin the Nikon is better in low light so it’s better suited for events. Likewise, it has a faster motor drive. The Canon has a bigger sensor and creates better quality detail. It captures more information – albeit more slowly – hence it’s better for portraits, landscapes, etc.

    Just my opinion – your mileage may vary.

  12. @Kevin the Nikon is better in low light so it’s better suited for events. Likewise, it has a faster motor drive. The Canon has a bigger sensor and creates better quality detail. It captures more information – albeit more slowly – hence it’s better for portraits, landscapes, etc.

    Just my opinion – your mileage may vary.

  13. I agree, you don’t need them, but nothing beats them either. You get what you pay for so quality is always best. That is why I love my Rolex as its been running for over 15 years without any issues. Same for all my Nikon bodies back to the film days. If you skimp on glass, you will get lower quality.

  14. I agree, you don’t need them, but nothing beats them either. You get what you pay for so quality is always best. That is why I love my Rolex as its been running for over 15 years without any issues. Same for all my Nikon bodies back to the film days. If you skimp on glass, you will get lower quality.

  15. The image detail is phenomenal. You can see the smallest of hairs on his shoulders. Even lint on his shirt.

  16. The image detail is phenomenal. You can see the smallest of hairs on his shoulders. Even lint on his shirt.

  17. I love the reflection in his glasses.

  18. I love the reflection in his glasses.

  19. Good solid overview, Scott.

    I started off a Nikon man just a year ago when I bought my D40, but TWiP has made me reconsider what the future will hold. Since I will need to upgrade to much better lenses should I step up to a $1000+ camera body (which I would like to do some day), I am now wondering which “glasses” tend to have the highest quality. It sounds like Canon lenses are actually a little more versatile and well-respected these days than Nikon, especially if even the semi-pro L series lenses work great on an $8k body. Considering the image quality of the pictures I keep seeing on TWiP and other sites with Canon cameras, I’m wondering if I shouldn’t consider Canon for the long haul since lenses, more than the camera body, are what’s going to end up costing me the most money.

    Thanks for the review!

  20. Good solid overview, Scott.

    I started off a Nikon man just a year ago when I bought my D40, but TWiP has made me reconsider what the future will hold. Since I will need to upgrade to much better lenses should I step up to a $1000+ camera body (which I would like to do some day), I am now wondering which “glasses” tend to have the highest quality. It sounds like Canon lenses are actually a little more versatile and well-respected these days than Nikon, especially if even the semi-pro L series lenses work great on an $8k body. Considering the image quality of the pictures I keep seeing on TWiP and other sites with Canon cameras, I’m wondering if I shouldn’t consider Canon for the long haul since lenses, more than the camera body, are what’s going to end up costing me the most money.

    Thanks for the review!

  21. Hi,
    I bought my 1Ds with high expectations, and was initially a little disappointed. First off, I got it last December, and winter in my bit of Yorkshire is less than photogenic. However, over the last few months the wow factor is there. The dynamic range of the camera is stunning; i photographed a few cloudscapes and suddenly realised the much darker foreground didn’t need adjusting in Lightroom – all of a sudden, I don’t care so much about HDR. When I looked at the clouds, the smoothness and range of tones just made me stare to take it in. The level of details on textures is simply gorgeous. The huge sensor allows me to crop to my heart’s content. (Technology once again compensating for my inability!)
    The more I use it, the more features I discover and love. I had toyed with the idea of switching to Nikon because of the D3, but for what I want to do, the 1Ds is a dream. For me, the D3 is a good time girl for guys with fast lifestyles (in dark places)…the 1Ds I want to marry……. :-)
    William

  22. Hi,
    I bought my 1Ds with high expectations, and was initially a little disappointed. First off, I got it last December, and winter in my bit of Yorkshire is less than photogenic. However, over the last few months the wow factor is there. The dynamic range of the camera is stunning; i photographed a few cloudscapes and suddenly realised the much darker foreground didn’t need adjusting in Lightroom – all of a sudden, I don’t care so much about HDR. When I looked at the clouds, the smoothness and range of tones just made me stare to take it in. The level of details on textures is simply gorgeous. The huge sensor allows me to crop to my heart’s content. (Technology once again compensating for my inability!)
    The more I use it, the more features I discover and love. I had toyed with the idea of switching to Nikon because of the D3, but for what I want to do, the 1Ds is a dream. For me, the D3 is a good time girl for guys with fast lifestyles (in dark places)…the 1Ds I want to marry……. :-)
    William

  23. Hi Scott: A British review of dslrs praised your new camera but described the menu as “confusing” and the images as needing “significant internal (in-camera) sharpening”. Is that your experience?
    Thanks, Randy

  24. Hi Scott: A British review of dslrs praised your new camera but described the menu as “confusing” and the images as needing “significant internal (in-camera) sharpening”. Is that your experience?
    Thanks, Randy

  25. @Randal I can see how someone could find the menus confusing but I did not. Of course, I read the manual :)

    As for the second part – I have never made a JPG in the camera so don’t know about the need for additional sharpening. I shoot RAW. Look at the pic above. Does that need more sharpening? I did not extra sharpening other than the basic amount suggested by Apple’s RAW converter.

  26. @Randal I can see how someone could find the menus confusing but I did not. Of course, I read the manual :)

    As for the second part – I have never made a JPG in the camera so don’t know about the need for additional sharpening. I shoot RAW. Look at the pic above. Does that need more sharpening? I did not extra sharpening other than the basic amount suggested by Apple’s RAW converter.

  27. There’s a lot of nonsense talked about the need for sharpening, as though it were a bad thing. Fact is, the higher the resolution the more sharpening is required. When you scan film at very high resolutions and produce 30 megapixel or even 50 mp files, they can soak up massive amounts of sharpening: say 250 with a radius of more than 2 in photoshop. The 1DSmkiii at 21 MP has more pixels than any other FF or APSC DSLR; so of course the files can soak up more sharpening!

  28. There’s a lot of nonsense talked about the need for sharpening, as though it were a bad thing. Fact is, the higher the resolution the more sharpening is required. When you scan film at very high resolutions and produce 30 megapixel or even 50 mp files, they can soak up massive amounts of sharpening: say 250 with a radius of more than 2 in photoshop. The 1DSmkiii at 21 MP has more pixels than any other FF or APSC DSLR; so of course the files can soak up more sharpening!

  29. One question, don’t take it the wrong way :)

    I see a lot of (IMHO distracting) blown highlights on the chrome. What’s the story there? Was it intentional? Unavoidable? Did the camera give you the ability to avoid this up-front?

    I suspect that to get those highlights “down” to a reasonable state you’d lose the black shirt detail (then need to do HDR, which would be painful with a not-overly-happy-looking biker in front of you). Just wondering if this was a conscious decision and how much the camera helped you in making it.

  30. One question, don’t take it the wrong way :)

    I see a lot of (IMHO distracting) blown highlights on the chrome. What’s the story there? Was it intentional? Unavoidable? Did the camera give you the ability to avoid this up-front?

    I suspect that to get those highlights “down” to a reasonable state you’d lose the black shirt detail (then need to do HDR, which would be painful with a not-overly-happy-looking biker in front of you). Just wondering if this was a conscious decision and how much the camera helped you in making it.

  31. “Looking through my 40D body’s viewfinder is a painful experience now by comparison.”

    Exactly how my 40D makes me feel about the 300D’s viewfinder :) I tend to look at viewfinders as highly addictive drugs. Just one moment of weakness looking through a more-expensive-than-I-can-possibly-afford camera’s viewfinder and I’ll spend the rest of my life looking for that same kind of high.

  32. “Looking through my 40D body’s viewfinder is a painful experience now by comparison.”

    Exactly how my 40D makes me feel about the 300D’s viewfinder :) I tend to look at viewfinders as highly addictive drugs. Just one moment of weakness looking through a more-expensive-than-I-can-possibly-afford camera’s viewfinder and I’ll spend the rest of my life looking for that same kind of high.

  33. @Tom Dibble – On one monitor it’s blown – on another it isn’t. In short, even if it were blown, the places where it is hot are not important to the picture. It seems that some folks make a religion out of protecting the highlights. That only matters when there’s detail there you need to preserve. These were specular highlights that I wasn’t worried about.

    Now PLEASE let’s not turn this into a “Looks blown on my monitor,” or “Doesn’t look blown on mine” thread. The point of the pic is to show the detail available from the 1dS MKIII.

  34. @Tom Dibble – On one monitor it’s blown – on another it isn’t. In short, even if it were blown, the places where it is hot are not important to the picture. It seems that some folks make a religion out of protecting the highlights. That only matters when there’s detail there you need to preserve. These were specular highlights that I wasn’t worried about.

    Now PLEASE let’s not turn this into a “Looks blown on my monitor,” or “Doesn’t look blown on mine” thread. The point of the pic is to show the detail available from the 1dS MKIII.

  35. @Scott: I did extrapolate from the two F4’s I had to the whole F4 L Line :-) The 17-40 I never really liked on the 1D either, and the 24-105 Is now owned by a 5D owner that speaks wonders of it.

  36. @Scott: I did extrapolate from the two F4’s I had to the whole F4 L Line :-) The 17-40 I never really liked on the 1D either, and the 24-105 Is now owned by a 5D owner that speaks wonders of it.

  37. @Ricardo I guess we’ll just have to disagree on this one.

  38. @Ricardo I guess we’ll just have to disagree on this one.

  39. So Scott should I run out and buy one tonight? Just kidding. Great review though, through and straight to the point.

  40. So Scott should I run out and buy one tonight? Just kidding. Great review though, through and straight to the point.

  41. @Scott: Do we need to settle this over a beer?

  42. @Scott: Do we need to settle this over a beer?

  43. @Scott:

    I’m curious about your comment regarding the model release. Could it be argued that this site is commercial because it is ad supported (Lensbabies)?

    I ask because lots of sites we post photos to are ad supported and even though you might be making editorial use out of the photo couldn’t it be argued by a person in a photo that you are in fact making money off their image?

    Much thanks, love the show.

  44. @Scott:

    I’m curious about your comment regarding the model release. Could it be argued that this site is commercial because it is ad supported (Lensbabies)?

    I ask because lots of sites we post photos to are ad supported and even though you might be making editorial use out of the photo couldn’t it be argued by a person in a photo that you are in fact making money off their image?

    Much thanks, love the show.

  45. Hi Scott,

    That review was wonderful..but makes me feel also bad at the choices that I’ve got for buying my camera gear. As a student interested in Photography I’m no match for the Pro series of cameras that you guys talk about on the podcast! D3 & Mark series, ya sure..in my dreams. Anyway would be great if you guys can give your opinions on cameras for mere mortals ;-) aka entry/mid level digital SLRs.

  46. Hi Scott,

    That review was wonderful..but makes me feel also bad at the choices that I’ve got for buying my camera gear. As a student interested in Photography I’m no match for the Pro series of cameras that you guys talk about on the podcast! D3 & Mark series, ya sure..in my dreams. Anyway would be great if you guys can give your opinions on cameras for mere mortals ;-) aka entry/mid level digital SLRs.

  47. Ricardo, if you have a problem with a particular lens on the MKIII, check out AF Microadjustment (Custom Function III-7, page 169 in your manual). One of the coolest things about this camera is its ability to customize its relationship with up to 20 lenses (adjusted for the absolute best focus).

    I know I never thought about it much, but if there are differences between lens #1000 and #4500 (and there will be, even with up-to-date manufacturing processes), then a camera that can automatically correct itself every time I mount it is fantastic! I originally picked Canon for its lens quality over 30 years ago, and am glad they’re still making it possible to eke out every gram of quality.

  48. Ricardo, if you have a problem with a particular lens on the MKIII, check out AF Microadjustment (Custom Function III-7, page 169 in your manual). One of the coolest things about this camera is its ability to customize its relationship with up to 20 lenses (adjusted for the absolute best focus).

    I know I never thought about it much, but if there are differences between lens #1000 and #4500 (and there will be, even with up-to-date manufacturing processes), then a camera that can automatically correct itself every time I mount it is fantastic! I originally picked Canon for its lens quality over 30 years ago, and am glad they’re still making it possible to eke out every gram of quality.

  49. @HollywoOd you can argue anything – in this case you’d be on the losing side. If your position held true, then no commercial newspaper could ever run a news photo without getting a model release. Since the newspaper sells ads, they profit.

    I am not a lawyer but I employ several. I receive great advice from them and have operated on that advice in this regard for decades. Nobody has ever successfully sued me.

    You can research this on your own many places online.

    There is a difference between editorial and advertising photography. Since we’re WAY off topic here, I am going to ask you to post this in the Flickr group and to help me keep this thread focused on a review of the 1DSMKIII.

  50. @HollywoOd you can argue anything – in this case you’d be on the losing side. If your position held true, then no commercial newspaper could ever run a news photo without getting a model release. Since the newspaper sells ads, they profit.

    I am not a lawyer but I employ several. I receive great advice from them and have operated on that advice in this regard for decades. Nobody has ever successfully sued me.

    You can research this on your own many places online.

    There is a difference between editorial and advertising photography. Since we’re WAY off topic here, I am going to ask you to post this in the Flickr group and to help me keep this thread focused on a review of the 1DSMKIII.

  51. But you have a 21.1 MegaPixel Camera and a Mercedes… Do you also have a Rolex Scott? ;-) Great photo BTW!

  52. But you have a 21.1 MegaPixel Camera and a Mercedes… Do you also have a Rolex Scott? ;-) Great photo BTW!

  53. @Scott You said that the menu was customizable, are any of the buttons customizable as well?

  54. @Scott You said that the menu was customizable, are any of the buttons customizable as well?

  55. @Joshua some of the buttons are customizable. Not all of them are. Just basics like whether or not you want the back wheel to control this function or that function. Stuff like that.

  56. @Joshua some of the buttons are customizable. Not all of them are. Just basics like whether or not you want the back wheel to control this function or that function. Stuff like that.

  57. Scott,

    I think you have written a very fair review. Upgrading from the 1Ds MkII to MkIII has been worthwhile for a number of reasons. The new menu system on the MkIII, although pretty vast is so much easier than the MkII and can hardly be called confusing as mentioned earlier in the comments. Sensor cleaning hardly seems to get a mention in reviews of this camera but it’s a huge plus that saves a lot of time later in the workflow. The ability to manually select the focus point with the 8 way multi controller is pure joy. I do agree with comments relating to lens quality – to say this camera is revealing is an understatement and I too do not like the 24-105 on this body. The debates will rage on about sensor size and what people need but let’s not forget the fact that Canon have already stated that 21+ sensors are in the pipeline. I too agree that having the ability to crop images taken with camera lends great flexibility. The camera may not be perfect and it’s certainly not cheap but it’s great photgraphic tool that will give any owner years of good service

  58. Scott,

    I think you have written a very fair review. Upgrading from the 1Ds MkII to MkIII has been worthwhile for a number of reasons. The new menu system on the MkIII, although pretty vast is so much easier than the MkII and can hardly be called confusing as mentioned earlier in the comments. Sensor cleaning hardly seems to get a mention in reviews of this camera but it’s a huge plus that saves a lot of time later in the workflow. The ability to manually select the focus point with the 8 way multi controller is pure joy. I do agree with comments relating to lens quality – to say this camera is revealing is an understatement and I too do not like the 24-105 on this body. The debates will rage on about sensor size and what people need but let’s not forget the fact that Canon have already stated that 21+ sensors are in the pipeline. I too agree that having the ability to crop images taken with camera lends great flexibility. The camera may not be perfect and it’s certainly not cheap but it’s great photgraphic tool that will give any owner years of good service

  59. I was admiring the stunning sharpness of the photograph, and then I saw it! The dreaded BACK FOCUS!!! The shirt and the midsection of the hat is tack sharp, but the face & eyes (sunglasses) are soft.

    It’s the same problem that caused me to return several 10D’s before I got a 1DMk2 that has been spot-on for several years, but may be faltering recently, especially with focusing points other than the center. (I switched from Nikon so I could, someday, have a full frame sensor – – – THANKS, NIKON!)

    At this point, I’m not sure what to do — much to consider – – – still love my L glass!

    I’m hoping you might check your other shots & see if this is a camera problem.

    Also, have other readers have had focusing issues with Canon, or for that matter, Nikon?

    Thanks,

    Bob

  60. I was admiring the stunning sharpness of the photograph, and then I saw it! The dreaded BACK FOCUS!!! The shirt and the midsection of the hat is tack sharp, but the face & eyes (sunglasses) are soft.

    It’s the same problem that caused me to return several 10D’s before I got a 1DMk2 that has been spot-on for several years, but may be faltering recently, especially with focusing points other than the center. (I switched from Nikon so I could, someday, have a full frame sensor – – – THANKS, NIKON!)

    At this point, I’m not sure what to do — much to consider – – – still love my L glass!

    I’m hoping you might check your other shots & see if this is a camera problem.

    Also, have other readers have had focusing issues with Canon, or for that matter, Nikon?

    Thanks,

    Bob

  61. Bob first of all the obsession with sharpness has no correlation to good images, images that sell or images that get published. That said, I don’t see what you see, but then again, I am not looking at the image with an electron microscope.

    In any event, it is a snapshot. I spent five seconds making it and was on the run to boot. If there is backfocus, it’s photographer error not the camera. I tested this camera lens combination and find no flaw in its sharpness.

  62. Bob first of all the obsession with sharpness has no correlation to good images, images that sell or images that get published. That said, I don’t see what you see, but then again, I am not looking at the image with an electron microscope.

    In any event, it is a snapshot. I spent five seconds making it and was on the run to boot. If there is backfocus, it’s photographer error not the camera. I tested this camera lens combination and find no flaw in its sharpness.

  63. Wow!

    This may be the first time in photographic history that a photographer with an $8,000 1Ds Mk3 felt it necessary to give the owner of an humble 1D Mk2 the “all the obsession with sharpness has no correlation to good images, images that sell or images that get published” lecture.

    But, I am sorry, Scott! My purpose was not to offend you.

    I’m just trying to make some equipment decisions, and your review was very helpful — especially the last sentence of your reply: “I tested this camera lens combination and find no flaw in its sharpness.”

    That’s exactly the information I was looking for, and I am grateful!

    Oh, and I don’t actually own an electron microscope. I just clicked those little blue words beside your photograph.

    Enjoy your camera!

    Bob

  64. Wow!

    This may be the first time in photographic history that a photographer with an $8,000 1Ds Mk3 felt it necessary to give the owner of an humble 1D Mk2 the “all the obsession with sharpness has no correlation to good images, images that sell or images that get published” lecture.

    But, I am sorry, Scott! My purpose was not to offend you.

    I’m just trying to make some equipment decisions, and your review was very helpful — especially the last sentence of your reply: “I tested this camera lens combination and find no flaw in its sharpness.”

    That’s exactly the information I was looking for, and I am grateful!

    Oh, and I don’t actually own an electron microscope. I just clicked those little blue words beside your photograph.

    Enjoy your camera!

    Bob

  65. @Bob WOW yourself. It seems that if I respond at all to the comments people think I am offended. If I was offended would I have admitted to possible photographer error?

    And I wasn’t lecturing – trying to teach – Which is what I do here.

    Given the fact that you were the only person to say the words “Back Focus” (a religious phrase used by Pixel Peepers everywhere) or mention a lack of sharpness my alarm went off.

  66. @Bob WOW yourself. It seems that if I respond at all to the comments people think I am offended. If I was offended would I have admitted to possible photographer error?

    And I wasn’t lecturing – trying to teach – Which is what I do here.

    Given the fact that you were the only person to say the words “Back Focus” (a religious phrase used by Pixel Peepers everywhere) or mention a lack of sharpness my alarm went off.

  67. @Bob I should also mention that the 1DS MKIII also has a lens calibration feature designed to help people who think they are suffering from back focus to tune each individual lens they own to avoid the problem.

    One last thought. I’ve tested more than 100 camera/lens combos for clients looking for “back focus” problems and in about 96% of the cases, the error was the photographer’s alone. The cameras and lenses were fine.

  68. @Bob I should also mention that the 1DS MKIII also has a lens calibration feature designed to help people who think they are suffering from back focus to tune each individual lens they own to avoid the problem.

    One last thought. I’ve tested more than 100 camera/lens combos for clients looking for “back focus” problems and in about 96% of the cases, the error was the photographer’s alone. The cameras and lenses were fine.

Comments are closed.

Category

Reviews

Tags