Canon USA's written response re 1D MKIII focus issue (unacceptable IMHO)

After reading the news here, I sent Canon an e-mail last night regarding the repair program. The following is from the response I received:

"After thorough research, Canon has found that some EOS-1D Mark III cameras have an issue with the sub-mirror mechanism which is part of the autofocus optical system. This issue may cause unstable focus prediction performance with moving subjects in AI-Servo AF and continuous shooting modes particularly in higher than normal temperatures. The process for repair of the EOS-1D Mark III cameras, for those customers who are dissatisfied with the focus prediction performance, will be announced on the Canon USA Web site in late October.

If you are not currently experiencing this issue with your EOS-1D Mark III then it will not happen in the future. Cameras with this problem manifest it from the time the camera is purchased. However, we will contact you as soon as the repair program is finalized."

So Canon expects me to remain satisfied with the Camera even if I personally haven't experienced problems. That means if and when I go to sell the Camera, buyer will have to take my word that I haven't experienced problems.

I don't shoot with fast, long lenses. What if the potential buyer does? I could offer him no reassurance that the camera (at that point out of warranty) doesn't have problems.

I find this response from Canon USA unacceptable. I will be sending my camera in, even if I have not experienced specific problems (which I haven't but I've only had it two weeks with limited use in cool temperatures).

It seems to me that Canon ought to be falling all over itself to accommodate people at this point. And, yes, I was aware of the problem when I bought the camera, but was confident Canon would rectify it. I was just hoping for a little more "tact" in the way they went about it.

--
Phil Tower

And no mention of single shot issue that I and others have experienced. Your points are well made and entirely valid.
Tony

I don't know what more you could expect under the circumstances...

a. You knew about the potential problem when you purchased the camera.

b. Canon has admitted what they believe the problem to be and will soon be putting a system in place to rectify it. This is a major thing, as they've been pretty much mute on the subject since the camera was released.
c. There is a warranty on the camera and the service work.

What more can you expect?

--
Visit me at

http://www.have-camera-will-travel.com/

ah what do you expect them to say? they would want to prioritize the repair process somewhat and not flood the service centers with ones experiencing the problem and ones that are not. there's what .. around 60,000 or so DIII's out there right now?

canon like any in this regard, want to fix the ones experiencing the issues first and foremost.

if you're experiencing the issue - I'm sure you don't want canon flooded and rushed through the servicing of your camera because they are getting hit with ones that don't work and ones that do.

Phil Tower said:

"Cameras with this
problem manifest it from the time the camera is purchased."

Click to expand...

Can they still be trying to dodge the bullet...?!...This is not accurate from our experience reading the accounts here and elsewhere on the Net.

At this price point I feel entitled to have my camera checked, calibrated and repaired if necessary, regardless of me being able to locate and borrow a fast/long prime and talk one of my 2 teenage sons into put on a pair of sneakers and make fools out of themselves by running at a tripod mounted camera in a public place.

Checking all the cameras free of charge is the minimum they can do about this colossal blunder.

So, falling the decency to recall all the cameras, the solution is very simple:

We just tell them our camera IS experiencing the problem and they will have to sort it out.

PK

--
“Loose praise may feed my ego but constructive criticism advances my skills”
************************************************************
-------------------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/photokhan
(Pbase Supporter)

What about Paul Pope and others who had had problems in One Shot?

Phil Tower said:

After reading the news here, I sent Canon an e-mail last night
regarding the repair program. The following is from the response I
received:

"After thorough research, Canon has found that some EOS-1D Mark III
cameras have an issue with the sub-mirror mechanism which is part of
the autofocus optical system. This issue may cause unstable focus
prediction performance with moving subjects in AI-Servo AF and
continuous shooting modes particularly in higher than normal
temperatures. The process for repair of the EOS-1D Mark III cameras,
for those customers who are dissatisfied with the focus prediction
performance, will be announced on the Canon USA Web site in late
October.

If you are not currently experiencing this issue with your EOS-1D
Mark III then it will not happen in the future. Cameras with this
problem manifest it from the time the camera is purchased. However,
we will contact you as soon as the repair program is finalized."

So Canon expects me to remain satisfied with the Camera even if I
personally haven't experienced problems. That means if and when I go
to sell the Camera, buyer will have to take my word that I haven't
experienced problems.

I don't shoot with fast, long lenses. What if the potential buyer
does? I could offer him no reassurance that the camera (at that point
out of warranty) doesn't have problems.

I find this response from Canon USA unacceptable. I will be sending
my camera in, even if I have not experienced specific problems (which
I haven't but I've only had it two weeks with limited use in cool
temperatures).

It seems to me that Canon ought to be falling all over itself to
accommodate people at this point. And, yes, I was aware of the
problem when I bought the camera, but was confident Canon would
rectify it. I was just hoping for a little more "tact" in the way
they went about it.

--
Phil Tower

Click to expand...

It's not surprising that any corp. would attempt to limit the losses in repairs, but they're not asking for proof, so anyone can send in their camera. But they do say that they won't replace a unit that doesn't appear to be one of the inferior assemblies.

The question is, do they track which components are received in various lots, and which cameras (by S/N) receive such components. You'd think they would, and should be able to post the range of S/N's that are affected.

It remains to be seen, when the instructions for resolution are offered, if they will ID affected bodies by S/N, as is typically done with recalls (maybe not typical for Canon, but in general).

--
...Bob, NYC

http://www.pbase.com/btullis

You'll have to ignore the gallery's collection of bad compositions, improper exposures, and amateurish post processing.

also, I'm sure the the company like Canon must be able to match the bad subassemby units mounted with the S/N ranges of the final products. They must have the record of the particualr batches being produced and distributed, so no guessing and user checking should be allowed here.

Now in half of the world the summer is gone and no more high temps. so we should not be left waiting half a year to check if the camera does or does not act as affected.

Either you have the bad one or you have a corrected one and this should be stated clearly by S/N range.

--
Bartek

Before we grab out pitch forks and shovels let's wait for Canon's official announcement. Mine appears to be OK, but I would like them to check it out and give it a clean bill of health. To those that are having other issues, this camera unfortunately requires some study to master. Experience with the IIn can actually be a negative if you use that experience to setup the Mark III. Anyway, Canon has now made their initial response and has admitted there will be no firmware work around and I for one am pleased.
Jeff

Radio Denver said:

I don't know what more you could expect under the circumstances...

a. You knew about the potential problem when you purchased the camera.
b. Canon has admitted what they believe the problem to be and will
soon be putting a system in place to rectify it. This is a major
thing, as they've been pretty much mute on the subject since the
camera was released.
c. There is a warranty on the camera and the service work.

What more can you expect?

Click to expand...

Canon didn't know if I was aware of the problem when I bought the Camera, so (even though I mentioned it in my post) that is irrelevant to the quality of Canon's response.

I am sure the response I got is a standard response that has been fully vetted at the very top. It is clear to me from the language of the response that Canon is attempting to discourage people from sending in a camera that has not experienced the focusing problems.

That seems to me no different that a car manufacturer who has issued a recall due to a brake defect that only occurs in sub-zero temperature discouraging people who live in a climate that never drops below freezing from participating in the recall.

Should the desert-dwellers settle for a car that could not be used for a vacation in Maine without risk. Should I have to live with a $4,500 1D level camera that stands a good chance of not working properly while birding in warm weather?

Is it reasonable for Canon to expect me not to return my camera for repair and live with a camera that may not cause me problems but will certainly not carry the resale value that would otherwise be expected of such a camera? I don't think it is reasonable. Yet that it what the response is suggesting I should do.

Canon is the one who (intentionally or otherwise) put a very expensive camera on the market with (at the very best) a serious quality control issue. Yet they don't seem to want anyone sending the camera back for repair without first having done extensive field testing that Canon should have done in the first place. I think that's a fair assessment of Canon's response to me, and (personally) it just doesn't sit well with me. YMMV.

And, BTW, wouldn't you have thought that Canon would have had the common courtesy of informing Rob ahead of time before going public - considering the degree of yeoman's work he put into this issue and the public skepticism he endured for all of his efforts?
--
Phil Tower

If the sub-mirror assembly is not working properly it would likely affect one-shot mode too, as the mirror has to move between each shot.

This would be the perfect explanation as to why one-shot performance can be so inconsistent.

Additionally, it's likely that the factor influencing performance is not the focusing mode at all - it's just that in servo mode one tends to have the camera in continuous shooting mode, which will mean that the sub mirror will be moving around more and will have less chance to settle back into its correct alignment.

Maybe you should think before "engaging brain" in future!

You know who you are!!

I have found that Canon does not ask many questions when you send stuff in. I just returned my 5D and an imported 24-105 (no US warrenty). The lady on the phone just gave me an address and said to send it in.

If it is in warrenty, they just fix it, if not, they send an estimate for repair before starting work.

They will check the camera to factory specs with regard to the issues you claim. If it meets spec, nothing will be done. If it does not meet spec, they will adjust, calibrate or repair as required.

So if you send in a good MK3, they will send it back and you now have Canons word that it is good. If it has a bad sub mirror, they will repair it.

I probably choose a bad time to send in my 5D. They will be swamped with Mk3 repairs.

--
http://www.pbase.com/roserus/root

Ben

I'm think you are taking a very negative view on what appears to me to be a very helpful reply.

I read it as -

a) we know there is a problem with SOME cameras
b) if you have a problem we will fix it

c) if you haven't experienced the problem the chances are your camera is not affected and will continue to be OK

It does not say I CAN'T send it in if I haven't experienced the problem, but I can decide. After shooting all summer in a variety of conditions which tested the AF with a variety of subjects, lenses and temperatures, I'm pretty sure my camera is OK. I'm delighted to read that I'm unlikely to suddenly develop the problem and can now choose to avoid the inconvenience of repair with some confidence.

It also means those who need it might get it done a bit quicker.

Surely this is much better than a blanket recall?

Cheers,

Colin
--
Colin K. Work
[email protected]
http://www.ckwphoto.com

I've spotted this on the FM forum. Here's the quote:

"I Called the Canon repair center in Europe and asked which serial numbers are included in the need to replace the mirror unit. I was told ALL!! Yes all. The rep on the phone said that Canon have lately conducted many rigorous tests with the new unit and in the mean time production went on with the "defect" unit. He went on to say that up to date no replacement have been made in 1D3 bodies as the unit is in production. So, here we are. According to Canon, all 1D3 bodies, currently out there, have a corrupt unit installed in them and it should be replaced."
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/581009/6

From a resale point of view maybe these cameras need a log book from canon if they do not already have one ...so the modification can be done and the owner can sell at his or her leisure and the potiential purchaser can buy in confidence knowing the work has been carried out as per a log book.

I'm not sure I have an autofocus
problem, but I'm sending my camera in
also. I want it to work as perfectly as possible.

It is interesting that Canon is acknowledging
that not all cameras are affected.

maljo

Shane Pope said:

From a resale point of view maybe these cameras need a log book from
canon if they do not already have one ...so the modification can be
done and the owner can sell at his or her leisure and the potiential
purchaser can buy in confidence knowing the work has been carried out
as per a log book.

Click to expand...

Canon always includes a repair order when they return the camera, and it states what was done even if it is brief. You can always keep this and produce it for a buyer.

I am sure it will say something like:

Sub mirror assembly checked: and either found to factory spec or replaced.

Now if you sent it in before the fix was known, your repair will say something else, and not be proof of anything useful with regards to AF issues.

--
http://www.pbase.com/roserus/root

Ben

This is more like a recall or service advisory bulletin.

If you sold you camera in 18 months let's say...and the new guy needs it for sports. He could still get it repaired.

I just had a new CPU installed in a 95 Cavalier (my computer died) because a recall to the CPUs wiring harness was never done (they checked my VIN for outstanding service bulletins.) 13 year old car!

If there is a defect....Canon must fix it. I'm sure they log all the serial #s of the units they fix and keep track of it...so if yours is never fixed, it would be later.

If it doesn't bother you, then I would wait because there is going to be a flood of sports shooters sending their in all at the exact moment the repair program starts! You'll be waiting a while for your camera.

sean

All you have to do is participate in Canon's mitigation program, REGARDLESS of whether your body has the problem or not.

It really is that simple. ;-)