For a dissenting point of view from a PROFESSIONAL nature photographer that loves the camera visit:
http://www.andybiggs.com
It's just not appropriate to call this camera a lemon at this point. If you're a sports photographer, I might wait, otherwise, this is a software problem that WILL be corrected IMO. Nothing to stop me from buying the camera (If I had $4,500 lol)
Cheers
James
Humm, I see what you mean <_< ...but still it is a $4500 bucks body and one would expect it to be pretty much on the spot. To what extent these issues are actually relevant to UW photography is a good question [probably here too since the body seems to have problems in focusing on static/quasi-static scenes] but for myself I was considering the 1DMKIII for topside action, replacing my D2x. Also true is that it will likely be fixed by a sofware upgrade tweaking parameters in the Autofocusing algorithm [unless the algorithm itself is flawed, which will complicate matters]. Since an upgrade is already out and the core autofocusing issues seem unresolved, is in itself worrying.
Having said this and for what I have read, I have my doubts if the MkIII [at this point in time] would be able to take this shot for e.g.:

The shot was taken with 70-200 + 1.7x, hand-held on a boat with the whale breaching "somewhere around...there!". The camera has to be pretty quick in acquiring focus (1st or 2nd shot in high-speed mode) otherwise the shot is gone forever.
What I do not understand is how Canon can release a new camera without proper, thorough, user testing? If it had been properly tested these Autofocus issues would have come-up immediately in the prototype/pre-production bodies. These are not random glitches, they are rather consistent and reproducible and should have been ironed out at an early stage, long before the pre-production bodies shipped to external, non-Canon affiliated, persons/organisations for testing. The fact that these issues did happen, openly, and in the public domain does not inspire a lot of confidence amongst potential buyers nor does Canon image brand any good
.
Cheers,
Jorge