Reading mode: Light Dark

My 10D saga update

Go to last post
P

Pekka Saarinen

Senior Member
Messages
1,826
Reaction score
0
Location
Helsinki, Finland, FI
Today the repairman took my 10D on the table and tried to calibrate its autofocus system with their EF 200mm f/2.8 L USM II (which he said was good reference they used for calibrating).

He was not able to tweak my 10D to even near the correct point. The chart they used showed still back focus of +2.5 even when all calibration room was totally used.

He contacted Canon Europe and asked them to send a new unit for comparison, because the reason for inability to calibrate seemed to be "wrong body thickness": lenght from lens back to sensor was not correct, according to specs. Testing the new unit's calibration range should tell if my unit is simply a flawed one. If the new unit is off as well the next step would be try to get info from Canon how to proceed.

If the new unit's calibration room is ok, then it is most likely that I will get that new body and the old one will remain at Canon for investigation.

He tested all my Canon lenses and they seemed all back focus some. So when body is ok my lenses should be quite ok, too. He added that I can of course bring those lenses in for final calibration when we have got the body in order so that all will be secured.

On monday he will contact his contact persons at Canon Europe for more details on my 10D's body thickness issue and if there is any knowledge about that.

It is great to see that this person is dedicated in finding a reason from problems and also in getting me a well calibrated camera.

I got a D60 from them so I'll have a camera while 10D is in repair. Excellent service.

--
Pekka
http://photography-on-the.net
 
Pekka Saarinen said:
Today the repairman took my 10D on the table and tried to calibrate
its autofocus system with their EF 200mm f/2.8 L USM II (which he
said was good reference they used for calibrating).

He was not able to tweak my 10D to even near the correct point. The
chart they used showed still back focus of +2.5 even when all
calibration room was totally used.

He contacted Canon Europe and asked them to send a new unit for
comparison, because the reason for inability to calibrate seemed to
be "wrong body thickness": lenght from lens back to sensor was not
correct, according to specs. Testing the new unit's calibration
range should tell if my unit is simply a flawed one. If the new
unit is off as well the next step would be try to get info from
Canon how to proceed.

If the new unit's calibration room is ok, then it is most likely
that I will get that new body and the old one will remain at Canon
for investigation.

He tested all my Canon lenses and they seemed all back focus some.
So when body is ok my lenses should be quite ok, too. He added that
I can of course bring those lenses in for final calibration when we
have got the body in order so that all will be secured.

On monday he will contact his contact persons at Canon Europe for
more details on my 10D's body thickness issue and if there is any
knowledge about that.

It is great to see that this person is dedicated in finding a
reason from problems and also in getting me a well calibrated
camera.

I got a D60 from them so I'll have a camera while 10D is in repair.
Excellent service.

--
Pekka
http://photography-on-the.net
Click to expand...
 
One being that your camera body confirm a problem which they may be able to nail down to a serial number series (Hugo's group test also) and the second that at least you won't be without a camera ..

Mine front focusses on my F1.8 50mm Mk1 prime, but then both mine and her D60s do with that lens too..

Keep us posted and what was the serial number BTW, was it a 220 series by any chance?

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855

 
Pekka Saarinen said:
Today the repairman took my 10D on the table and tried to calibrate
its autofocus system with their EF 200mm f/2.8 L USM II (which he
said was good reference they used for calibrating).

He was not able to tweak my 10D to even near the correct point. The
chart they used showed still back focus of +2.5 even when all
calibration room was totally used.

He contacted Canon Europe and asked them to send a new unit for
comparison, because the reason for inability to calibrate seemed to
be "wrong body thickness": lenght from lens back to sensor was not
correct, according to specs. Testing the new unit's calibration
range should tell if my unit is simply a flawed one. If the new
unit is off as well the next step would be try to get info from
Canon how to proceed.

If the new unit's calibration room is ok, then it is most likely
that I will get that new body and the old one will remain at Canon
for investigation.

He tested all my Canon lenses and they seemed all back focus some.
So when body is ok my lenses should be quite ok, too. He added that
I can of course bring those lenses in for final calibration when we
have got the body in order so that all will be secured.

On monday he will contact his contact persons at Canon Europe for
more details on my 10D's body thickness issue and if there is any
knowledge about that.

It is great to see that this person is dedicated in finding a
reason from problems and also in getting me a well calibrated
camera.

I got a D60 from them so I'll have a camera while 10D is in repair.
Excellent service.

--
Pekka
http://photography-on-the.net
Click to expand...
and this post is a testament to that.
 
Honda does it all the time and it doesn't adversely effect their sales. It's the public facade of their not being a problem that's effecting their reputation.

Jaz

--
http://www.jackzucker.com
 
They acquitted themselves VERY badly on the issue of the soft camshafts and bad geartrain design in the VF750 in the early 80s , they denied that it was a problem and blamed the owners, later they backpedalled a bit and offered a special lube to add to the oil and finally new cams etc .. luckily by then they redesigned the engine as the VFR750 with gear driven cams and all was well again..

The VF750 and it's "Chocolate" camshafts will NEVER be forgotten though - I doubt the "fall apart at the swivel" Nikon 900 will be either, my old one is STILL held together with duct tape

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855

 
Adam-T said:
They acquitted themselves VERY badly on the issue of the soft
camshafts and bad geartrain design in the VF750 in the early 80s ,
they denied that it was a problem and blamed the owners, later they
backpedalled a bit and offered a special lube to add to the oil and
finally new cams etc .. luckily by then they redesigned the engine
as the VFR750 with gear driven cams and all was well again..

The VF750 and it's "Chocolate" camshafts will NEVER be forgotten
though - I doubt the "fall apart at the swivel" Nikon 900 will be
either, my old one is STILL held together with duct tape

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855

Click to expand...
--
Keith
http://www.pbase.com/dod1011/galleries
(More images to come...)
(See my profile for gear)
' Be respectful to your superiors, if you have any.'
Samuel L. Clemens
 
I doubt that many 10D's are having Pekka's problem. This sounds more like a Q/C problem than a design problem that would require a recall.
Jack A. Zucker said:
Honda does it all the time and it doesn't adversely effect their
sales. It's the public facade of their not being a problem that's
effecting their reputation.
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
 
but there's going to a lot of people with some major egg on their faces when it comes out that there was truly a serious problem. To oversimplify it, my lowly EOS-IX locks right on to •whatever• it is pointed at and the pics are in focus regardless of who's holding the camera, be it me, my wife, my kid, the neighbors kid, etc. The 10D is technology that's newer by 7 or 8 years. My E-10, E-20, D60 and (obviously) 1D •all• focus better than both 10D's that I have had. Somethings not right (speaking of •my• particular unit).

This "body thickness" thing is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. Both the 10D's that I have had have acted as if the sensor was in the wrong place, even though everything appeared to be ok through the viewfinder. I'm wondering if the 10D's are not being manufactured in mutiple factories and that one of them is mis-assembling them or has a serious QC problem. If my shots had been coming out correctly from day 1, I would not let some people posting problems on a forum sway me in any way and would not •assume• that the problem was inherent in •all• 10D's and go running to check mine. This happened with the D60 and I got a great one. I'm sure some people got some problem ones, but I didn't bother checking mine any further because it worked. However I didn't think that those who had a problem were imagining it. Now I have a camera with a problem and you can be damn sure that I want it resloved.

Mark
PearlRider said:
and this post is a testament to that.
Click to expand...
--
Mark Currier
 
Jack A. Zucker said:
Honda does it all the time and it doesn't adversely effect their
sales. It's the public facade of their not being a problem that's
effecting their reputation.

Jaz

--
http://www.jackzucker.com
Click to expand...
From reading Pekka's experience, it doesn't sound like they've nailed down what the problem is yet. The tech is thinking it might be body thickness and, if so, that could be a reason to issue a recall if it's determined to have occurred during a certain batch. As for the "facade of there not being a problem", clearly the tech sees a problem but just doesn't know yet what to attribute it to. And even if he does find that it's a body thickness issue, the data has to go through all the channels too. They're not going to go through a recall unless they feel it's absolutely necessary.
 
I can't imagine this is a design flaw. Surely they would've caught something like THIS when they built the first few units, etc.

Of all the ones sent back in for repair, this is the first I've heard of a "body thickness" issue.
mark currier said:
This "body thickness" thing is exactly the kind of thing I'm
talking about. Both the 10D's that I have had have acted as if the
sensor was in the wrong place, even though everything appeared to
be ok through the viewfinder. I'm wondering if the 10D's are not
being manufactured in mutiple factories and that one of them is
mis-assembling them or has a serious QC problem. If my shots had
been coming out correctly from day 1, I would not let some people
posting problems on a forum sway me in any way and would not

•assume• that the problem was inherent in •all• 10D's and go
running to check mine. This happened with the D60 and I got a
great one. I'm sure some people got some problem ones, but I
didn't bother checking mine any further because it worked. However
I didn't think that those who had a problem were imagining it. Now
I have a camera with a problem and you can be damn sure that I want
it resloved.

Mark
PearlRider said:
and this post is a testament to that.
Click to expand...
--
Mark Currier
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
 
Keith Dodson said:
Adam-T said:
They acquitted themselves VERY badly on the issue of the soft
camshafts and bad geartrain design in the VF750 in the early 80s ,
they denied that it was a problem and blamed the owners, later they
backpedalled a bit and offered a special lube to add to the oil and
finally new cams etc .. luckily by then they redesigned the engine
as the VFR750 with gear driven cams and all was well again..

The VF750 and it's "Chocolate" camshafts will NEVER be forgotten
though - I doubt the "fall apart at the swivel" Nikon 900 will be
either, my old one is STILL held together with duct tape

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855

Click to expand...
--
Keith
http://www.pbase.com/dod1011/galleries
(More images to come...)
(See my profile for gear)
' Be respectful to your superiors, if you have any.'
Samuel L. Clemens
Click to expand...
--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855

 
mark currier said:
but there's going to a lot of people with some major egg on their
faces when it comes out that there was truly a serious problem.
Click to expand...
People trying to prove others wrong. I know for certain that I won't have egg on MY face because I've never doubted that there are SOME defective cameras out there and many that aren't. I also know that user error COULD be the fault in SOME of these "bad camera" cases. This is a brand new camera. It's going to have "quirks" that people haven't stumbled upon yet. We did stumble on the focus mode shift quirk though and I think that can be attributed to, at least, SOME of the reported problems with focus. The main thing about Pekka's post which I see though is that Canon will definitely back their products.
 
Pekka,

FWIW, I exchanged my front focusing 10D serial # 2105xxx for a new camera yesterday.
The serial # is 4302xxxxxxxx.
This seems like an entirely different camera in a few ways.

For one, when I shoot in standard parameter settings, my images are rich and very "deep" whereas, before, I always had to "boost" everything.

The AF is dead on" the subject. I tried your test, and the usual cereal box, or ruler tests. All tests gave me very accurate focus results.

Also, this new camera came with 2 sets of manuals. One in English and one in Spanish. This may seem irrelivent, but to me it indicates some kind of quality control and attentiveness in the package.

Good luck
Pekka Saarinen said:
Today the repairman took my 10D on the table and tried to calibrate
its autofocus system with their EF 200mm f/2.8 L USM II (which he
said was good reference they used for calibrating).

He was not able to tweak my 10D to even near the correct point. The
chart they used showed still back focus of +2.5 even when all
calibration room was totally used.

He contacted Canon Europe and asked them to send a new unit for
comparison, because the reason for inability to calibrate seemed to
be "wrong body thickness": lenght from lens back to sensor was not
correct, according to specs. Testing the new unit's calibration
range should tell if my unit is simply a flawed one. If the new
unit is off as well the next step would be try to get info from
Canon how to proceed.

If the new unit's calibration room is ok, then it is most likely
that I will get that new body and the old one will remain at Canon
for investigation.

He tested all my Canon lenses and they seemed all back focus some.
So when body is ok my lenses should be quite ok, too. He added that
I can of course bring those lenses in for final calibration when we
have got the body in order so that all will be secured.

On monday he will contact his contact persons at Canon Europe for
more details on my 10D's body thickness issue and if there is any
knowledge about that.

It is great to see that this person is dedicated in finding a
reason from problems and also in getting me a well calibrated
camera.

I got a D60 from them so I'll have a camera while 10D is in repair.
Excellent service.

--
Pekka
http://photography-on-the.net
Click to expand...
 
even though I'm the first to admit that Canon does have a problem in this area. He probably doesn't have the service manual and adjustment software for the camera. The AF shift adjustment should take care of any body thickness tolerances and if it doesn't then the first thing to do is a complete readjustment of all AF parameters... Not enquire about body thickness as though it was a film body.
DavidP said:
Of all the ones sent back in for repair, this is the first I've
heard of a "body thickness" issue.
mark currier said:
This "body thickness" thing is exactly the kind of thing I'm
talking about. Both the 10D's that I have had have acted as if the
sensor was in the wrong place, even though everything appeared to
be ok through the viewfinder. I'm wondering if the 10D's are not
being manufactured in mutiple factories and that one of them is
mis-assembling them or has a serious QC problem. If my shots had
been coming out correctly from day 1, I would not let some people
posting problems on a forum sway me in any way and would not
•assume• that the problem was inherent in •all• 10D's and go
running to check mine. This happened with the D60 and I got a
great one. I'm sure some people got some problem ones, but I
didn't bother checking mine any further because it worked. However
I didn't think that those who had a problem were imagining it. Now
I have a camera with a problem and you can be damn sure that I want
it resloved.

Mark
PearlRider said:
and this post is a testament to that.
Click to expand...
--
Mark Currier
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
Click to expand...
 
Derek Hawkins said:
even though I'm the first to admit that Canon does have a problem
in this area. He probably doesn't have the service manual and
adjustment software for the camera. The AF shift adjustment should
take care of any body thickness tolerances and if it doesn't then
the first thing to do is a complete readjustment of all AF
parameters... Not enquire about body thickness as though it was a
film body.
Click to expand...
What diff does it make whether it's a film or digital body?
--
http://www.jackzucker.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top