Previous news story    Next news story

LensRental's Roger Cicala examines Canon EOS 5D Mark III light leak 'cover-up'

By dpreview staff on May 2, 2012 at 18:29 GMT

The ever-inquisitive Roger Cicala at LensRentals has dismantled a light-leak-fixed Canon EOS 5D Mark III and compared it to an unmodified version. The solution, as proposed by every tool-shed tinkerer, appears to be a piece of black electrical tape, which Cicala says successfully stops stray light reaching the camera's metering sensor. When asked if he'd send his own Mark III back to be modified, Cicala points out that he doesn't 'do long exposure night photography with autometering.' But, in the unlikely event that you do, you can rest assured that Canon can fix your camera for you.

The 'light-leak' issue for the 5D III involved light from the camera's top-plate LCD illuminator reaching the metering sensor and skewing the results. The metering errors caused by this stray light only came when trying to photograph extremely low-light scenes (a situation in which it's unusual to use the camera's metering).

Comments

Total comments: 255
12
Devon Krige
By Devon Krige (May 3, 2012)

Ok, so Im not trying to sound like a dick hear, and as much as i love my Canon 5dmk2 which has never given me problems, i do find paying for something that is a work tool for some and a hobby for others, were does one draw the line? Yes if you shoot at AV and are shooting in the pitch dark...which most of us don't do, and MOST of us aren't dumb enough to shoot in the dark WITH a lens cap on.....but why is it that black tape which costs nothing being used on a camera that cost's something?? Do i rock up to a fashion shoot with a hole in my pants and then tape it up with black tape? No, do i try fix plastic cups with holes in it with black tape, no! I mean imagine there was a light leak on a 70-200... every one would be walking around with black tape on a white lens! Why is it that we allow our selves to put up with this? Is it because we cant do anything?

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (May 3, 2012)

There is electrical grade tape all over the camera, just as there is in Nikons and probably most other brands. Just as there probably is in the iPad and a dozen other electronic devices. Why is one more piece suddenly a let down?

4 upvotes
Devon Krige
By Devon Krige (May 3, 2012)

Here is a link of a 5Dmk2, don't see any electrical tape in this camera http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.camera-repair.co.uk%2F&h=jAQHns8o4AQH6hGYBh3PpN-a0N3btHue38P5s6Do5-M5tUA

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
CFynn
By CFynn (May 3, 2012)

Nothing new here. When cameras had bellows people fixed light leaks with tape.

2 upvotes
ZEROrhythm
By ZEROrhythm (May 3, 2012)

Are you kidding me Devon Krige? you must be blind if you can't see that most of the ribbon cables on the camera are held down by tape.
Tape might not be the prettiest fix, but it does solve the problem. Only problem with using tape is the adhesive can melt making it stickly and messy if the tempurature in the camera gets hot.
People need to go out and take more photos than worrying about some silly tape.

0 upvotes
JaFO
By JaFO (May 3, 2012)

This is a hotfix for the products that have been released/sold already.

I'm sure Canon is thinking of a more permanent/proper solution that solves this at the factory before it reaches the consumer.

0 upvotes
Thorbard
By Thorbard (May 3, 2012)

Not a hotfix, the article says it was brand new Canon stock that he took apart.

0 upvotes
Stollen1234
By Stollen1234 (May 3, 2012)

we do trust Canon..

problems are common and a good company like Canon can find a great effective solution most of the times..

any question?

4 upvotes
KAllen
By KAllen (May 3, 2012)

Once you get over the shock that tape is used in every make of camera for one reason or another it sounds quite a reasonable solution. No engineering costs , durable, lightweight, easy to apply and works.
I am a bit surprised that tape is used as an umbrella to keep things dry inside a camera. There are nano coatings available designed to cover electronics that make them submersible, you would think cameras, mobile phones iPads would be ideal candidates for this technology.
So Canon have found a quick easy small cost solution for a problem hardly anybody would of known they had, now that is a win win situation.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
Peet van den Berg
By Peet van den Berg (May 3, 2012)

@mantra: Logical and effective.

0 upvotes
Peet van den Berg
By Peet van den Berg (May 3, 2012)

I just read what Roger Cicala wrote and I qoute "Some people seem to think tape is bad or cheap fix. It’s not. Actually, I can’t think of any camera that doesn’t have a bunch of tape inside. Nor can I remember any high quality zoom lens that doesn’t have tape inside (some of the cheaper consumer grade lenses don’t). This stuff lasts for the life of the camera and then some. Trust me, I’ve taken some water soaked equipment apart where the only thing still working was the tape.

In a previous post, I praised the broad sheets of the same tape used to cover all of the circuit boards: it obviously provides added protection. This solution seems silly, but it’s logical and effective.

Roger Cicala"

Looking at his article on the MKIII that had a loose screw the whole camera is covered inside by this black tape. Problem solved!

Comment edited 30 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
cxsparc
By cxsparc (May 3, 2012)

Reading the comments in this thread, it makes it almost impossible to either buy a Canon or Nikon camera, if that means belonging to these clubs of fanboys going for each others throats.
Here, sane voices are few or silent.

3 upvotes
BaldCol
By BaldCol (May 3, 2012)

We're silent... there's no point getting involved.

3 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (May 3, 2012)

And just check how many of them just create new IDs to attempt to blow up this non-issue.

1 upvote
mantra
By mantra (May 3, 2012)

may i know how canon will fix the production of the future 5d mark3??

with the tape? or the tape is a fix for the first cameras sold

thanks
cheers

Comment edited 30 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Thorbard
By Thorbard (May 3, 2012)

This is the modified design for future brand new cameras.

0 upvotes
mantra
By mantra (May 3, 2012)

for a camera of 3500€??

0 upvotes
JaFO
By JaFO (May 3, 2012)

Changing the body itself would involve quite a bit more cost for Canon.
That's not even mentioning the fact that they would have to scrap all of the parts already produced.
There's no way Canon is wealthy enough to afford that, especially when the current fix works.

0 upvotes
CLEANSHOT
By CLEANSHOT (May 3, 2012)

For those of us deciding between Nikon D800 and Canon 5D Mark iii, Canon has probably lost hundreds if not thousand's of potential sales with their "tape fix". Just not acceptable, considering the price tag.

1 upvote
Akin Koksal
By Akin Koksal (May 3, 2012)

If this issue and the fix is what will make you decide between D800 and 5D m3, I just feel sory for you!!!

8 upvotes
CLEANSHOT
By CLEANSHOT (May 3, 2012)

That's fine, if you not into quality control. At this level, it should be a priority. And then to fix it with tape... come on!!!

0 upvotes
snake_b
By snake_b (May 3, 2012)

Stop being a baby. Cars that cost six figures have electrical tape throughout.

Do you want some super expensive space-age fix? It would have been nice if this was worked out before, but it wasn't, so they found a solution and as long as it's more or less permanent, who cares?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
4 upvotes
Peet van den Berg
By Peet van den Berg (May 3, 2012)

CLEANSHOT - read Roger Cicala's article over at LensRentals and you will see that you disdain for the "tape fix" is unfounded.

3 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (May 3, 2012)

There's tape in the Nikon. It's orange. So unless you prefer orange to black, better just forget buying a DSLR.

5 upvotes
PeterK70
By PeterK70 (May 3, 2012)

Why don't you just buy a phone and use a phone camera. It surely has no tape in it.

0 upvotes
u007
By u007 (May 3, 2012)

I think the 5d3 costing more and having worse image quality in every measurable way was what decided it for me.

0 upvotes
PeterK70
By PeterK70 (May 3, 2012)

Lots of people take their photos with their 1Ds class cameras so that nobody would actually notice they were taken with a phone camera.

0 upvotes
kimvette
By kimvette (May 3, 2012)

> Stop being a baby. Cars that cost six figures have electrical tape throughout.

As do aircraft costing nine figures, almost every laptop made and almost every AV receiver, Blu-Ray or DVD player, or television. Some of the tape is mylar, some is kapton (for withstanding high temperatures), and some is foil tape, depending on the purpose.

It is a perfectly valid fix and is nothing to be concerned about.

0 upvotes
Camera Nuts Jim
By Camera Nuts Jim (May 3, 2012)

Consider as well, the chance of voiding your LIMITED MAUFACTURERS warranty by doing any self or technically friend administered self modification.

1 upvote
Thorbard
By Thorbard (May 3, 2012)

Given the manufacturer is the one installing the tape, I'm not sure what the concern is?

0 upvotes
Jun2
By Jun2 (May 3, 2012)

That's what they will tell you. Just put black tape on it

0 upvotes
FastFisher
By FastFisher (May 3, 2012)

Also depends on who did the taping job, amount of your light leak "prevention" may vary :)

A (tragic) Comedy show by Canon

1 upvote
FastFisher
By FastFisher (May 3, 2012)

Now that I look at the picture one more time

Looks like the tape will "melt" in extremely hot conditions.

1 upvote
Jun2
By Jun2 (May 3, 2012)

change the tape

0 upvotes
AmaturFotografer
By AmaturFotografer (May 3, 2012)

Melted tape sticks better!

1 upvote
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (May 3, 2012)

Canon is very good at inventing retro fit gadgets.

I remember the weird looking clips they stuck on the 5D Mk1 Mirror Assembly.

In future assembly for the 5DMk3, they would come up with a pre-moulded black patch with adhesive on one side to just plop on the surface by tweezers. I just hope the glue they use won't be the same one they did on the 5D Mk1 mirror...

...and speaking of "Light Leak Fix"...

in terms of future resale value: Canon 5D MK3 for sale, "Light Leak Fixed" later model.

.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 8 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Breitling
By Breitling (May 3, 2012)

interesting would be to know, how else they could fix this? stick gold plate instead? if it is normal to use such paper why not?

0 upvotes
bborowski000
By bborowski000 (May 2, 2012)

Cool pay $5000 for a camera and they don't even use duct tape to fix it tsk tsk

1 upvote
nravindra
By nravindra (May 2, 2012)

Does this mean the black tape fix will only be seen in the cameras with serial number xxxxx1xxxxxx and xxxxx2xxxxxx? How about cameras with other serial numbers?

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (May 2, 2012)

The people most worried by the "light leak" issue and "solution" are mostly Nikon users.

6 upvotes
raincoat
By raincoat (May 2, 2012)

Because for Canon users any plastic box with the label "Canon" is enough?
You make professional Canon users look bad.

1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (May 2, 2012)

Not at all. And how did Nikon suggest fixing the 24 - 70N light leak again?

The fact is that if you open up many current DSLRs you will find plenty of such tape.

And this has always been a non issue to most of us who actually use the camera.

As you spend most of your time here in the Nikon forum, thanks for bolstering my point.

And while you are there, check this out:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=35767278

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 14 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
raincoat
By raincoat (May 3, 2012)

It seems the only thing Canon fanboys can say is 'Nikon did this' 'Nikon did that'.

It may be a bit over a fanboy's head, but Nikon making a mistake doesn't give Canon free reign to make mistakes in the future. Also, apart from Canon and Nikon there are other brands of DSLR, there are people that use more than one brand. The mere fact that Canon fanboys assume anything short of praise for the light leak is from the 'enemy Nikon troops' shows how foolish they are.

Since I spend NO time in any forum, it's clear you comments are all BS. Any time anyone has any queries you claim they "spend most of your time here in the Nikon forum"

I guess if Canon sold you a pinhole camera for $5000 you'd still be happy.

4 upvotes
Akin Koksal
By Akin Koksal (May 3, 2012)

You are one sad and angry person aren't you? I think you should grow up. Toyota messed their vehicles and recalled millions of them for a simple fix... Toyota's are still great cars, no matter how much you jump up and down on your seat...

0 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (May 3, 2012)

http://www.dpreview.com/members/6692422485/forums

Oh, and the part that zinged right over your head was: "The fact is that if you open up many current DSLRs you will find plenty of such tape."

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (May 3, 2012)

.

Comment edited 45 seconds after posting
1 upvote
YetiYeti
By YetiYeti (May 2, 2012)

So besides dust and water resistant cameras, now we have light resistant camera too. Neat. Must be first time on any camera ever.

5 upvotes
spirel
By spirel (May 2, 2012)

Can''t wai the REVIEW...

1 upvote
Ben Raven
By Ben Raven (May 2, 2012)

What's all the fuss about ??

So there's a light leak in your brand new $3500 camera--BFD.

Try to remember, it's still only 2012, people !
Eventually technology will evolve to the point where we will finally be able to have light proof cameras.
Be patient, the big breakthrough could happen any minute now.

Until then,
shut up, and follow the Prime Directive for any problem in the universe:
SLAP SOME DUCT TAPE ON IT . . . and start shooting -- SHEESH !

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (May 2, 2012)

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=35738212

Not new.

4 upvotes
raincoat
By raincoat (May 3, 2012)

@GaryJP so it makes it fine right? If Canon designed every body/lens from now on to need duct tape it'd all be roses cuz it's not new.
Yep, because a lens on a competing brand will get some flare when you point a laser into its distance window, I'd like to buy a camera that's not light proof. OK right. You don't actually own a camera, do you?

2 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (May 3, 2012)

It isn't hard to find what cameras I own. Unlike anonymous trolls, I actually post shots from them from time to time.

And the part that zinged right over your head was: "The fact is that if you open up many current DSLRs you will find plenty of such tape."

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Biowizard
By Biowizard (May 2, 2012)

Someone at Canon obviously works backstage in theatre ... you can fix ANYTHING with a little Gaffa Tape - even a £1595 DSLR body, it seems! :-)

Brian

1 upvote
Lenny L
By Lenny L (May 2, 2012)

"When asked if he'd send his own Mark III back to be modified, Cicala points out that he doesn't 'do long exposure night photography with autometering.'"

Out of curiosity, didn't someone mention that this also affects auto metering when shooting in sunlight? I haven't observed this problem myself, but I haven't been looking out for it either. If it does under-expose when shooting under full sun, the effect is not pronounced.

Another reason for sending it in for the fix is if you care about resale value.

0 upvotes
Kinematic Digit
By Kinematic Digit (May 2, 2012)

It doesn't affect it in normal operations in direct sunlight... only when you have a body cap on the camera:

http://vimeo.com/40740050

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (May 2, 2012)

Some people have said so, mostly people too ignorant to know that light entering DSLRs through the viewfinder and affecting exposure has been happening for 50 years. That's what viewfinder shutter and covers are for.

5 upvotes
raincoat
By raincoat (May 2, 2012)

@GaryJP So Canon are idiots because they think this is an issue and are offering a fix?

1 upvote
Lenny L
By Lenny L (May 3, 2012)

@raincoat Canon is offering a fix because some customers think that this is an issue and demand a fix. Making customers happy, when there is not a serious downside, is rarely idiotic.

1 upvote
AmaturFotografer
By AmaturFotografer (May 3, 2012)

@GaryJP

+1 for EVF!

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (May 2, 2012)

How long will that tape stay on for.. 5-10 years?? These things last a long time.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (May 2, 2012)

Tape lasts a long time too. I have photos that I attached to mat board using tape that is now ~15 years old. I'm pretty sure the're using pretty decent tape to make these fixes.

0 upvotes
raincoat
By raincoat (May 3, 2012)

the tape is inside the camera, there's no reason it wouldn't last forever.
lots of stuff inside the camera is taped anyway

1 upvote
vadims
By vadims (May 3, 2012)

> How long will that tape stay on for.. 5-10 years??

That should be enough.

By that time, the user will grow up and stop worrying anyway...

2 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (May 3, 2012)

The tape will last longer than the camera. I can't think of a single DSLR from ten years ago I'd still shoot.

3 upvotes
Rubenski
By Rubenski (May 2, 2012)

It's always the pathetic fanboys shooting and screaming over a minor isue because it gives them the feeling their gear is better. And when their gear is better they are better. Like this they can pump up their little ego's. The same goes for all the negative comments on almost everything. There's always someting to nag about. Get a life! Start shooting, who cares what gear you've got. Let's see some pics instead of BS talk all day long!

7 upvotes
Damo83
By Damo83 (May 2, 2012)

I think that most people are laughing more than they are screaming.

5 upvotes
GaryJP
By GaryJP (May 2, 2012)

You may be right, if you are talking about fanboys for competing brands. Nikon users have been spreading FUD over this issue, which very few Canon users with it in their hands could care less about.

3 upvotes
Five Piece
By Five Piece (May 3, 2012)

Only problem is these FBs do not actually own any photographic gear, check their profiles....

0 upvotes
Nismo350Z
By Nismo350Z (May 2, 2012)

Kudos to Canon for admitting the defect and providing a solution so quickly. The same, however, can't be said for the Fuji X10 orb issue.

8 upvotes
idbar
By idbar (May 2, 2012)

The Canon solution, while admittedly quick, doesn't seem to be one tenth of complexity compared to the Fuji X10. And there it's Fuji still making efforts to fix it. Kudos to both for trying to satisfy their customers.

7 upvotes
raincoat
By raincoat (May 2, 2012)

Kudos to Canon but no kudos for rabid Canon fanboys trying to Jedi mind trick "there is no issue here"

2 upvotes
Nismo350Z
By Nismo350Z (May 3, 2012)

Initially, I had plans to purchase the X10. Yes, they're still working on the issue but I wasn't impressed when they attempted a band-aid approach by releasing a firmware to an obvious hardware defect, thus causing further delay. I just wished companies did not beat around the bush.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
walliswizard
By walliswizard (May 2, 2012)

Seems like quite a logical fix to me.

3 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (May 2, 2012)

The responses here are astonishing.

3 upvotes
JaFO
By JaFO (May 3, 2012)

I guess you're new to the internet ? ;)

ok ... so I did expect a little more maturity here, but that's life on-line.

0 upvotes
onlooker
By onlooker (May 2, 2012)

To those screaming they will never buy anything from Canon, I hope you never buy anything from Nikon, because that was their recommended solution for the light-leaking aperture window in 24-70.

11 upvotes
roy5051
By roy5051 (May 2, 2012)

What a BODGE UP!

1 upvote
Donglei
By Donglei (May 2, 2012)

Cool, tape of high tech.

3 upvotes
stanginit
By stanginit (May 2, 2012)

Canon-Gate As long as it works. No biggie.

0 upvotes
villebon
By villebon (May 2, 2012)

For those who think that the megapixel race has outdistanced the lens, see myth # 4.

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/02/d800-megapixels.html

1 upvote
SheikYerbouti
By SheikYerbouti (May 2, 2012)

Here's a rather subjective but nonetheless interesting comparison between the Canon 5D Mark III and the Nikon D800 ...

http://www.fredmiranda.com/5DIII-D800/

... which comes to the same conclusion regarding the D800's ability of resolving even finer details. Very recommended reading.

0 upvotes
MarkByland
By MarkByland (May 2, 2012)

Good to see it's a quick easy fix. Every one can unbox all their Canon gear they were about to sell and breathe easy.

Now back to the regularly scheduled megapixel internet fight with 12Mp in between ...

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (May 2, 2012)

I wonder how many lenses exist that can actually resolve as much detail as the sensor can. And how much do those lenses cost? And how many people have no idea what I'm talking about?

Comment edited 47 seconds after posting
1 upvote
MarkByland
By MarkByland (May 2, 2012)

@howardroark - exactly - the physics of Optics was explained to me long ago in Astrophotography. There are scope focal lengths and apertures that make sense for certain cameras. There is definitely a fall-off for resolution/sensor match. There is no blanket solution and every one has an opinion about how to solve it. The one thing that keeps coming around is the math. The math says every thing about physical properties of light and how the sensor reacts to them. Gotta have the glass to be able to resolve it to the sensor or else it's all just fancy wording.

0 upvotes
pwilly
By pwilly (May 2, 2012)

There is an easy answer to the resolution question. More MP always produces more resolution. Go to http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos compare any two tests of any Canon lens on 8 and 15MP. Every time the 15MP resolves more line pairs.

0 upvotes
MarkByland
By MarkByland (May 2, 2012)

@pwilly - right, so what you're saying is that I can use my vintage f/4 glass with 49mm openings on high megapixel rate cameras and nothing will be different. Got it.

Incorrect. In Astrophotgraphy, Aperture equals more resolution, period, not focal length. End of mathematically, scientifically, field tested, proven fact. More data making it to the sensor equals a higher resolution image with better DR. Proportionately speaking, unless lenses are able to focus down to both original pixel layout and 'new' super-mega-monster pixel layout (within the same physical area), there will some how be a mathematical anomaly in the form of light that is either being captured incorrectly, or not at all.

0 upvotes
pwilly
By pwilly (May 2, 2012)

Mark,
If you put that old f/64 lens on a 5Dc and a 5DmkIII, it will resolve more line pairs on the mkIII. It will also look like garbage on both. Your astro expert was correct re f/l and apertures that make sense. This is the reason why modern 35mm lens do not go to f/64 any more. Did you go to photozone and look at one lens test? Pick any one, they all prove my point correct. Higher sampling rates (more MP) always produce more line pairs at the same aperture and focal length with the same lens.

0 upvotes
jamesfrmphilly
By jamesfrmphilly (May 2, 2012)

i have been using canon since 1990 and i have never had a failure….

0 upvotes
DioCanon
By DioCanon (May 2, 2012)

lucky man!, lucky!
I have had Canon video cameras since 2002 and cameras since 2006, almost everything I had had problems.
I must be a masochist to stick to the brand, but I have to admit that image quality is the best.

0 upvotes
szlevi
By szlevi (May 2, 2012)

Priceless. :)

0 upvotes
FastFisher
By FastFisher (May 2, 2012)

I will never buy from Canon. Period.

3 upvotes
MarkByland
By MarkByland (May 2, 2012)

As if no one has ever screwed any thing up ... ever.

2 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (May 2, 2012)

How odd that you only post on Canon forums touting the greatness of Nikon. If you think that sealing an internal light source from light sensitive components in this way is a poor solution, then you're a fool. But I'd wager your comment has more to do with your preference for Nikon than any objection you have to the solution to an extremely minor Canon problem.

9 upvotes
FunkyELF
By FunkyELF (May 2, 2012)

Canon admits to and fixes what others would call nit-picky things. That is a reason to buy from them, not to stay away from them.

2 upvotes
CG33
By CG33 (May 2, 2012)

Some people would say Nikon is better built than Canon and vise versa. I am not a Canon or Nikon or whatever brand guy, but I have a question for FastFisher: Have you observed the Nikon to Canon ratio in the refurbished department of any good Photography store? The reason why Nikon has more photography equipment in the Refurbished department is due to more manufacturer's defects or problems than any other brand. If I base my judgment on that data, I can say that Nikon is the worst and most prone to failure photography manufacturer in the world... But I have never had a problem with Nikon, I like their equipment and I buy it if it fits my needs...
See the following example:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Used+Condition_Refurbished&ci=2891&N=4294182648+4291093763

6 upvotes
idbar
By idbar (May 2, 2012)

I haven't disassembled my (Nikon) camera, but as an engineer, I remember seeing the top performer graphics cards from silicon graphics, having cables soldered from side to side of the board. Given that the consumer is not meant to see those "engineering fixes". And they work quite well, I don't see what the whole fuzz about them fixing the stuff their customers complain about.

If it were my camera and it was a feature I was requiring, and they offered to cover the "fix" whatever it is, and returned me the device (with its warranty of course). I wouldn't mind... at all. Not like a Cyphre router I bought that has a bug, but it has been completely impossible to contact customer service. What a piece of ****

@CG33 : Do you base your conclusion on your own pulled statistic or in factual values? I can find many reasons why "refurb" of a product has longer listings other than the one you're coming up with.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
GaryJP
By GaryJP (May 2, 2012)

Then why do you spend so much time trolling on their forums?

0 upvotes
Akin Koksal
By Akin Koksal (May 3, 2012)

I keep telling myself, don't reply troll... Just can't help it...

0 upvotes
AmaturFotografer
By AmaturFotografer (May 3, 2012)

"I will never buy from Canon"

Not even printer? Hahaha

0 upvotes
SamirC
By SamirC (May 2, 2012)

Oh, that is the reason for extremely high price....

6 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (May 2, 2012)

Electrical tape ain't cheap.

8 upvotes
Damo83
By Damo83 (May 2, 2012)

And people were joking about using tape to block the passage of light...

1 upvote
jamesfrmphilly
By jamesfrmphilly (May 2, 2012)

i wasn't joking…….

0 upvotes
brentbrent
By brentbrent (May 2, 2012)

The term "cover-up" as used in the headline to this story has a negative connotation, as in, for example, "Watergate cover-up." I think "fix" might be better, as it does not misleadingly convey that negative connotation that Canon is somehow trying to cover up a problem.

I'm not a Canon fanboy. That's just how I first interpreted the headline. If that negative connotation was recognized by DPR but used anyway in an attempt to be clever, bad judgment IMO.

8 upvotes
Kinematic Digit
By Kinematic Digit (May 2, 2012)

Well if Rupert Murdoch can cheapen the news, why can't DPReview.... Nothing grabs more views than a Tabloid style headline.

Must be a slow news day too... seriously, this is the biggest camera news we can get?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
jmaster
By jmaster (May 2, 2012)

I'm pretty sure that phrase was meant as a joke.

I liked it! (and I am an owner of one of those "faulty" 5D3's)

6 upvotes
FastFisher
By FastFisher (May 2, 2012)

"but used anyway in an attempt to be clever, bad judgment IMO."

So using the black tape and saying there is no problem is a good judgment? These days it's so amusing to see how far consumers will go to "protect" corporations.

We are not asking for free cameras. We pay for these. Not three dollars but $3500

0 upvotes
ssweng
By ssweng (May 2, 2012)

Though "cover-up" is in quotations (i.e. it must be intentional), I had the same feeling the first-time I read it.

0 upvotes
Samuel Dilworth
By Samuel Dilworth (May 2, 2012)

I have little patience for people who defend Canon's design error here, but I agree with brentbrent that DPReview's 'cover-up' pun was badly judged, since Canon is covering up nothing except a hole in the top cover.

1 upvote
Vadimka
By Vadimka (May 2, 2012)

The "cover up" means the problem solved by black tape cover.
Nixon and his crew did not think of this.

0 upvotes
brentbrent
By brentbrent (May 2, 2012)

I could be wrong, but I don't think the headline had quotes around cover-up when I first viewed it, so perhaps they were added in response to my comment, which is a better way to try to make the pun.

And I wasn't trying to protect Canon as to the problem being there in the first place.

0 upvotes
idbar
By idbar (May 2, 2012)

I read the headline with the quotes, already thinking they would have use something to "cover" the leak. After I read the summary, I was reassured it was a word game for the tape cover of the light.

1 upvote
CFynn
By CFynn (May 3, 2012)

Don't take things so seriously. They used "cover-up" in the headline to be a little humorous.

Headline writers do this all the time.

0 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (May 2, 2012)

They should just send us a roll of black tape.

2 upvotes
steelhead3
By steelhead3 (May 2, 2012)

In camera talk, that roll is $75.

2 upvotes
FastFisher
By FastFisher (May 2, 2012)

Canon will make L version of the Tape and charge $750

21 upvotes
KonstantinosK
By KonstantinosK (May 2, 2012)

LMAO!

0 upvotes
BryMills
By BryMills (May 2, 2012)

Will the L version have a red stripe ???

3 upvotes
Steven Blackwood
By Steven Blackwood (May 2, 2012)

No, but, strangely, it will be beige.

0 upvotes
EvokeEmotion
By EvokeEmotion (May 2, 2012)

And how do you propose the average consumer should go about dismantling the camera so they can get to the part where the tape should be placed?

0 upvotes
Brad121
By Brad121 (May 2, 2012)

I've gone off the idea of spending big bucks for this shoddy piece of work.

1 upvote
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (May 2, 2012)

Really?

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/04/5d-iii-strip-tease

3 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (May 2, 2012)

R.B., he'd already decided he didn't like it. Why else would someone make that kind of comment about a scenario that almost zero people would ever find themselves recreating? Really, using the camera's meter to do extremely long, virtually no light photographs? Who would EVER do that??? Such a tiny amount of light wouldn't affect the metering of even somewhat dark images (proportionally it would be insignificant and not even register).

2 upvotes
Dan Victory
By Dan Victory (May 2, 2012)

Black 'Band Aid'. What a disgrace.

0 upvotes
JstarImaging
By JstarImaging (May 2, 2012)

If tape works then great. It probably would have been the solution in the first place if it had been found out inhouse without the world hearing about this issue. Any way if you think this is bad I would advise you never to purchase a new car thinking that is a magnificant piece of engineering. They are filled with tape, foams, expanding foams, staples, recycled coffee cups. The more expensive the car the more sticky tape is used as well :>

7 upvotes
Ivar Dahl Larsen
By Ivar Dahl Larsen (May 3, 2012)

There shouldn't be a light leak in the first place. How they solved it is irrelevant as long as it works. The new batch should hopefully have no leak.

0 upvotes
Jarkko Lehtinen
By Jarkko Lehtinen (May 4, 2012)

Hilarious. We are all laughing like when car-giant Toyota run into quality problem. Hilarious - a fixing tap used.
By the way I am not using Canikon gear.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 255
12