Mr Galbraith says “No, it's not better”.
I stopped reading his reports about the 1D/1Ds autofocus issues after I couldn't replicate them. 300 2.8's, 500 f/4's, telelconverters… I couldn't make the camera AF as poor as he claims it does. I have no idea what to think really.
Here's his report anyway.
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-8740-9068-10086
cr
Some of our articles may include affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you.
25 Comments
he’s just trying to grab people attention. ignore him if you only do sports once awhile.
I guess if one loves something very much (perhaps as much as his own son?), of course s/he would want the best out of the something/someone, and I guess for us the “spectators”, it takes a few of those like him to push the manufacturers so that we can get better products. (and I would say perhaps it takes tens of thousands of users like us to complain about an issue to get manufacturers’ attention, where it takes a couple of people like Rob to do the job, then why not? Let’s all rejoice! :) )
Yay
Rob very rarely speaks about the 1Ds, usually only to say that he didn’t test a 1Ds…
M
I think a search on the keyword Nikon in his article, and nowhere did he mention any comparison to the D3. In his previous article, RG did mention he was most impressed with the 1D3 images and though the D3 had superior high ISO performance, the latter was not as good at lower ISO (in his opinion). That was it. He never compared the AF performance of the cameras. Or did I leave out something?