Q&A: Canon's camera tech guru Chuck Westfall

LAS VEGAS--Two's company, three's a crowd, and Canon's Chuck Westfall is a lot less lonely these days.

Canon once was the sole camera company offering a digital SLR whose sensor is the size of a full frame of 35mm film, a technology that can increase the performance advantage and price penalty that SLR cameras already have compared with compact cameras. In November, though, Nikon began selling its full-frame rival, the D3, and last week Sony said it will launch its own full-frame competitor by the end of 2008.

Westfall is a camera tech guru and the technical adviser for Canon USA's professional products marketing division. In his 25 years at Canon, he's amassed an encyclopedic knowledge not only of official camera specs but also deeply buried engineering details.

Westfall shared his opinions about the full-frame market and other camera trends during the Photo Marketing Association trade show here. He also discussed fuel cells to replace batteries, flash memory technology, OLED displays, and geotagging.

Talking tech might sound like fun if you represent the company that leads market share both for compact cameras and in the higher-end SLRs, but Westfall also has had to deal with unpleasant autofocus trouble that's afflicted the company's US$4,500 photojournalist-oriented EOS-1D Mark III during some shooting conditions. A quality and reputation problem is the last thing a camera maker wants for a model aimed squarely at the professional photographer market that Canon dominates but that Nikon is aggressively courting.

Though Canon is repairing affected 1D Mark III models and has issued a firmware update, the issue still hasn't gone away: Rob Galbraith, the photographer and consultant whose tests brought the problem to light, still believes the 1D Mark III's predecessor has better autofocus, and he reported Monday that Canon is working on yet another fix.

Read on for Westfall's response to the autofocus issue and other thoughts.

CNET News.com: Sony now has said it'll join Canon and Nikon in offering a full-frame camera--its flagship 24.6-megapixel SLR due to launch by the end of the year.
Westfall: It's quite flattering the other companies have recognized what we've known for years--that full-frame is quite a desirable imaging format. I think the full-frame market is set to expand in 2008. There's no doubt about it.

With Nikon and now Sony adding weight to the full-frame market, what role is there for the in-between sensor size, APS-H? (It's about halfway between the full-frame sensors used in the high-end SLRs and the APS-C sensors use in the top-selling models such as the EOS 400D and 40D. The APS-H is used in the 1D Mark III and its predecessors.)
Westfall: When we introduced APS-H in 2001 with the original EOS-1D, the idea was to compete against other professional dSLRs with APS-C. In that respect it has been extremely successful. At that point it was about what the competition had to offer. It's only been in the last six months that there has been an alternative. We've had a good long run with APS-H.

Going forward, it remains to be seen whether it will continue to be a desirable format. We're not ready to say it's over.

Is there a unique advantage APS-H has over full-frame sensors besides price? Nikon's D3 is a full-frame competitor to the 1D Mark III at about the same cost.
Westfall: At this point, no. Price would be the only thing.

Do you think you've resolved the 1D Mark III autofocus issue?
The hardware fix and firmware update has effectively brought the camera within our design specifications. Under the vast majority of study conditions, the camera is functioning exactly the way we expected it to.

So is it better at autofocus than the 1D Mark II N (the camera's predecessor)?
Westfall: Overall, yes. The system has a lot more to it. There are improvements to the Mark III's autofocus sensor, with 19 cross-type focusing points throughout the frame compared to 7 in the center for the 1D Mark II N. This is an area Rob Galbraith's tests did not address. And there are a lot more customization settings to be able to tweak autofocus accuracy according to the way you shoot--focus priority versus release priority for example.

That said, we are continuing to investigate. We're not disputing anything Rob wrote--he's made a fair and objective test. We have no argument except that the 1D Mark III is a lot closer (to the 1D Mark II N's autofocus performance) in overall performance than his severe tests indicate at first glance and that he doesn't test the full range of conditions. There's more to it.