Photogtaphy Forums

Photography Forums > Camera Manufacturers > Canon > More pathetic Canon Q/A problems

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes

More pathetic Canon Q/A problems

 
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
dwight
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      02-11-2009, 12:41 AM

"RichA" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...=2112&id=55659


Two things:

1. "Rare instances"

2. Total, complete consumer support

dwight


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
D-Mac
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      02-11-2009, 03:58 AM

"dwight" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:gmt6vn$ap6$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "RichA" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>
>> http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...=2112&id=55659

>
> Two things:
>
> 1. "Rare instances"
>
> 2. Total, complete consumer support
>
> dwight
>
>


Three things.
Three weeks to fix the problem.
Another two weeks to fix the resulting alteration to the back focus the
repair caused.
Only to discover the 40D bought to "fill in" whilst the 5Ds were being
fixed, cooked it's flash capacitor and died a horrible death.

Only 14 dats to replace it. Then another 3 weeks to re-adjust the back focus
to it averages out to 2" focus tollerance at 1 yard distant.

Canon have a problem with their autofocus system and refuse to change it for
a one that works.

I had two cameras with that "rare instance" of mirrors falling out. One of
the sales people at a leading Canon dealer had the sae mproblem and two
photographers I came across last year who were using 5Ds also had a "rare
instance" of mirrors falling out.

You really do need to aske yourself what Canon's definition of "Rare
instance" actually is, don't you?

D-Mac


 
Reply With Quote
 
dwight
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      02-11-2009, 12:24 PM

"D-Mac" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:gmtid0$g10$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "dwight" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:gmt6vn$ap6$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>
>> "RichA" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>
>>> http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...=2112&id=55659

>>
>> Two things:
>>
>> 1. "Rare instances"
>>
>> 2. Total, complete consumer support
>>
>> dwight
>>
>>

>
> Three things.
> Three weeks to fix the problem.
> Another two weeks to fix the resulting alteration to the back focus the
> repair caused.
> Only to discover the 40D bought to "fill in" whilst the 5Ds were being
> fixed, cooked it's flash capacitor and died a horrible death.
>
> Only 14 dats to replace it. Then another 3 weeks to re-adjust the back
> focus to it averages out to 2" focus tollerance at 1 yard distant.
>
> Canon have a problem with their autofocus system and refuse to change it
> for a one that works.
>
> I had two cameras with that "rare instance" of mirrors falling out. One of
> the sales people at a leading Canon dealer had the sae mproblem and two
> photographers I came across last year who were using 5Ds also had a "rare
> instance" of mirrors falling out.
>
> You really do need to aske yourself what Canon's definition of "Rare
> instance" actually is, don't you?
>
> D-Mac


I don't, no. Sounds like you've had an ungodly string of bad luck. I've
never had a problem with any of my Canon equipment.

No... I take that back. My S1 did develop the LCD screen zotz, but Canon
fixed the problem by sending me an S3.

dwight


 
Reply With Quote
 
D-Mac
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      02-11-2009, 10:53 PM

"Rich" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> "dwight" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
> news:gmt6vn$ap6$(E-Mail Removed):
>
>>
>> "RichA" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed).
>> ..
>>>
>>> http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...ModDisplayAct&
>>> fcategoryid=139&modelid=11933&keycode=2112&id=5565 9

>>
>> Two things:
>>
>> 1. "Rare instances"
>>
>> 2. Total, complete consumer support
>>
>> dwight
>>
>>
>>

>
> Gluing little bits on a badly designed mirror holder.



The problem with arguing with a devotee is that they will inevitably try to
drag you down to their level of ignorance. Canon only make 2 cameras they
claim are suitable for professional use yet the sell dozens of different
models otherwise seemingly suited to Pro use.

I absolutely loved my 5Ds. Canon excluded them from the description of
"Professional" in Australia and in doing so guaranteed any warranty repairs
would take weeks, not days. Seemingly in the USA they are happy to settle
for less reliability as they class 5Ds as "Semi-Pro" cameras there.

When these cameras worked, they were incredible image takers but like so
many other photographers who rely on their gear to make a living... I gave
up on Canon and their bloody minded attitude to warranties and what
constituted a "professional" camera deciding on what is acceptable in a
repair and what is done properly.

I bought Nikon gear and put off my holidays because of the expense of it.
The quality of my photographs hasn't changed all that much except they are
lit better when I use a flash. What has changes is the need to sling two
cameras around my neck, knowing one will probably stop working at some
critical point of a wedding.

If I were a lone voice in the woods, I'd seriously look at what I was doing
wrong. I'm not. The queue is growing for people trying to off-load the Canon
gear in favour of Nikon stuff. Canon may never recover, even if they do get
some quality control into their assembly lines.

The first alternative I bought was a Fuji s5. I now have 2 of these and then
I bought a D3. I sold that recently when I bought a "fleet" of D90s.
(Cheaper by the dozen perhaps?). If the D90s took WDR photos like the Fuji,
they'd be a perfect camera. I guess that will come later. I'll be in line
for some when it happens.

D-Mac.info.


 
Reply With Quote
 
dwight
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      02-11-2009, 11:58 PM

"D-Mac" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:gmvku3$cdb$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Rich" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> "dwight" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
>> news:gmt6vn$ap6$(E-Mail Removed):
>>
>>>
>>> "RichA" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:(E-Mail Removed).
>>> ..
>>>>
>>>> http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...ModDisplayAct&
>>>> fcategoryid=139&modelid=11933&keycode=2112&id=5565 9
>>>
>>> Two things:
>>>
>>> 1. "Rare instances"
>>>
>>> 2. Total, complete consumer support
>>>
>>> dwight
>>>
>>>
>>>

>>
>> Gluing little bits on a badly designed mirror holder.

>
>
> The problem with arguing with a devotee is that they will inevitably try
> to drag you down to their level of ignorance.


Devotee. Arguing. Pfeh.

You gave me your own anecdotal evidence, I gave you mine.

Which of us is more the devotee, by the way?

dwight


 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      02-12-2009, 10:00 AM
dwight <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> You gave me your own anecdotal evidence, I gave you mine.


Never forget: *my* anecdotal evidence is proof that it's
always that case, no matter how I mangle the truth in the
telling (let's ask "D-Mac" about the temperature ranges he
used the camera in and what the manual says about that!).
*Your* anecdotal evidence is just an anecdote.

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
dwight
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      02-12-2009, 12:27 PM

"Wolfgang Weisselberg" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> dwight <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> You gave me your own anecdotal evidence, I gave you mine.

>
> Never forget: *my* anecdotal evidence is proof that it's
> always that case, no matter how I mangle the truth in the
> telling (let's ask "D-Mac" about the temperature ranges he
> used the camera in and what the manual says about that!).
> *Your* anecdotal evidence is just an anecdote.
>
> -Wolfgang


My point, exactly. My own experiences and opinion hold no weight when
measured against anyone else's.

dwight


 
Reply With Quote
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      02-12-2009, 03:27 PM
Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
> dwight <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> You gave me your own anecdotal evidence, I gave you mine.

>
> Never forget: *my* anecdotal evidence is proof that it's
> always that case, no matter how I mangle the truth in the
> telling (let's ask "D-Mac" about the temperature ranges he
> used the camera in and what the manual says about that!).
> *Your* anecdotal evidence is just an anecdote.


Well said! {Some will wonder about the absence of a smiley]
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ray Fischer
Guest
Posts: n/a

 
      02-13-2009, 05:35 AM
RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

Still the hardware bigot, troll?

Is that why you ignore Nikon problems?

--
Ray Fischer
(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bit more DOF, bit more light, bit better? Dudley Hanks Digital Cameras 9 03-29-2009 09:46 PM
More TMPGEnc problems... No Such Luck Amateur Video Production 4 07-10-2004 05:58 PM
More Nikon Coolscan problems Alan Nikon 1 09-03-2003 03:06 AM