Lens experts, where is the QC with Canon

jonmatd said:

My biggest complaint is that the Nikon lenses and D70 are not
having these problems. Canon is a larger more powerful company
than Nikon, it's QC should be better.

HW

Click to expand...

You say that Nikon isn't having this problem. Have you read the Nikon D70 review? It clearly seems to have a similar problem.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond70/page19.asp

BTW... I have 3 L lenses and have had zero problems with any of them with my 10D. (All bought in the last year.)

Of the 7 Canon lenses I've purchased I only have had one bad lens. The first 135f/2.8 Soft Focus was dead on arrival from B&H. The aperture blades would stick closed 2 out of 3 clicks and reported error 99. I sent it back and got a replacement that works fine. The others:
24-70f/2.8L
70-200f/2.8L
28-135IS
400f/5.6L
75-300IS

and 50/1.8 have all worked fine. I've had no focus problems and all have been sharp as you would expect for the lens. But I will say one DOA in 8 lenses does seem a bit high for a failure rate.

--
Bill



http://www.pbase.com/slowpokebill
'The fact that no one understands you doesn't mean you're an artist.' Unknown
'Every man dies; but, not every man lives' Braveheart
'Sometime the magic works. Sometimes it doesn't' Little Big Man

mike bustad said:

--24-70 L but I sure don't want to go through focus issues like you
all. Maybe I should sell all my Canon stuff and get the Nikon 70
like the poster is so fond of lol. But this does concern me I don't
want to spend $700 to $1100 and have to return or fight Canon to
get the lens working correctly.

Tanglefoot47
Tulalip Wa.
Canon 10D 100-400 IS, Sigma 18-125, Sony 828, S-500

Click to expand...

A friend of mine purchased a Nikon D70 and his first copy was DOA. It would not recognize any brand of card. We looked carefully and no bent pins. It was promptly replaced by the local dealer.
--
Bill



http://www.pbase.com/slowpokebill
'The fact that no one understands you doesn't mean you're an artist.' Unknown
'Every man dies; but, not every man lives' Braveheart
'Sometime the magic works. Sometimes it doesn't' Little Big Man

All three of my lenses (all 'L's) backfocussed. The only prime (400 5.6) was the worst.

You call Canon, you send the lenses in, you get them back fixed. (Maybe the second time... \:-~ )

In the old film days, you'd never notice a bit of backfocus. Now, at 400% in PS, you do . If you notice it while normally viewing your images, get the darn things fixed!

And for those who say "for 99,000, they ought to be perfect"... well, welcome to the real world. Canon is cranking out a LOT more lenses than Nikon, with more features (IMO) and at reasonable prices. These aren't laboratory lenses, they are consumer lenses..... If you want perfection, check out the prices for Leica...!

PhotoTom said:

Could it be the camera is out of calibration?

PhotoTom said:

My biggest complaint is that the Nikon lenses and D70 are not
having these problems. Canon is a larger more powerful company
than Nikon, it's QC should be better.

HW

Click to expand...

Its QC should be better, but I'm not so sure that Nikons aren't
dealing with the same issues. Consider that there are many, many
more digital Canon SLR's out there than there are Nikons, you can
expect that there'd be many, many more posts about them.

--
Tom

Click to expand...

I didn't take it the wrong way Tom, it was a thought provoking post. The whole reselling, poor shipping, bad usage problem has t be added into the mess. My dealer gave me a Tamron 180 Macro to take home and play with last week. Right out of the box it was dead nuts sharp without a single problem. Does it focus like a 70-200, no, it can hunt like crazy if at times. What it does is make beautiful images that I can print out and enjoy that are very sharp and contrasty with good shadow detail. I don't mind using manual focus on a lens that is relatively inexpensive but deliveres where it is supposed to, on the paper.

The 1D went in with the 100-400 so in about two weeks I'll know if they did the job right and I can enjoy this great combo. If I stay under 300 it is sharp, it is only at 300 to 400 that it gets really soft.

The Nikon thing is only a side note to the problem. I have much more Canon gear than Nikon but all the Nikon pieces worked out of the box. A fine point but necessary to mention when we discuss so much money being spent.

HW

I agree with Larry. One proactive measure is to bring/send the lens(es) in to Canon to have them calibrated. Canon CPS conceded that quality control at the manufacturing plant leaves a lot to be desired, but you have to realize that they are cranking them out as fast as they can. Yours may or may not have been one to be spot checked by QC. On the other hand, Canon Service--either the Jamesburg or Irvine facility--has the time to devote to YOUR lens, on an individual basis. Basically, Canon factory service is your quality control. Having said that, most of the time they get it calibrated correctly the first time around. Sometimes, as Larry points out, you need a second time. It's a pain in the behind, but well worth the effort. I've had three L zooms "tightened up", much to my great satisfaction.

Larry Lueck said:

All three of my lenses (all 'L's) backfocussed. The only prime
(400 5.6) was the worst.

You call Canon, you send the lenses in, you get them back fixed.
(Maybe the second time... \:-~ )

In the old film days, you'd never notice a bit of backfocus. Now,
at 400% in PS, you do . If you notice it while normally viewing
your images, get the darn things fixed!

And for those who say "for 99,000, they ought to be perfect"...
well, welcome to the real world. Canon is cranking out a LOT more
lenses than Nikon, with more features (IMO) and at reasonable
prices. These aren't laboratory lenses, they are consumer
lenses..... If you want perfection, check out the prices for
Leica...!

Click to expand...

--
James

I am afraid that I disagree. In case of cheap "consumer" lenses, no one should complain about the faults. The "L" type or even higher grade lenses should be checked thoroughly even if it would mean a higher price. My time is measured in $$$ and I cannot effort testing lenses that I buy.

It appears though that "L" zooms are suffering the most from the lack of quality control. I think that the problem is a lack of well trained and dedicated people on any production lines (including my own company)!

Michael

Ps. Please see this:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=6958397
as well

Larry Lueck said:

All three of my lenses (all 'L's) backfocussed. The only prime
(400 5.6) was the worst.

You call Canon, you send the lenses in, you get them back fixed.
(Maybe the second time... \:-~ )

In the old film days, you'd never notice a bit of backfocus. Now,
at 400% in PS, you do . If you notice it while normally viewing
your images, get the darn things fixed!

And for those who say "for 99,000, they ought to be perfect"...
well, welcome to the real world. Canon is cranking out a LOT more
lenses than Nikon, with more features (IMO) and at reasonable
prices. These aren't laboratory lenses, they are consumer
lenses..... If you want perfection, check out the prices for
Leica...!

Click to expand...

--
Michael

mfurman said:

It appears though that "L" zooms are suffering the most from the
lack of quality control. I think that the problem is a lack of well
trained and dedicated people on any production lines (including my
own company)!

Michael

Ps. Please see this:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=6958397
as well

Larry Lueck said:

All three of my lenses (all 'L's) backfocussed. The only prime
(400 5.6) was the worst.

You call Canon, you send the lenses in, you get them back fixed.
(Maybe the second time... \:-~ )

In the old film days, you'd never notice a bit of backfocus. Now,
at 400% in PS, you do . If you notice it while normally viewing
your images, get the darn things fixed!

And for those who say "for 99,000, they ought to be perfect"...
well, welcome to the real world. Canon is cranking out a LOT more
lenses than Nikon, with more features (IMO) and at reasonable
prices. These aren't laboratory lenses, they are consumer
lenses..... If you want perfection, check out the prices for
Leica...!

Click to expand...

--
Michael

Click to expand...

--of the line lenses for Canon and they should make every effort in making them perfect before shipping. Time is money plus it cost to send these lenses in one two or three times plus the pain of going through the hassle.

Tanglefoot47
Tulalip Wa.
Canon 10D 100-400 IS, Sigma 18-125, Sony 828, S-500

Last year I was able to purchase one of the earlier 10D cameras. I already had a bunch of Canon lenses so I started taking photos. I did have a focusing issue so I took the camera and all of the lenses to Irvine. Two weeks later everything had been calibrated and they all work fine. Since then I have purchased a 16-35 and a 28-135 IS and they also work. With the latter I did take my laptop to the camera store and checked out the precise lens I was buying due to some complaints I had read about. It worked fine so I bought it. I am careful to buy "new" lenses and not recycled problems. (Or at least the packaging looks that way.)

--
John S
http://www.jsullivanlawyer.com/Galleries.htm

mike bustad said:

--24-70 L but I sure don't want to go through focus issues like you
all. Maybe I should sell all my Canon stuff and get the Nikon 70

Click to expand...

A mate has just returned a Nikon 28-70 F2.8 AFS because it's useless wide open , there are 80-400VRs failing and the mirror fell out of a collegues D1X so you're not safe ANYWHERE.. the problem with these forums is that you read more about the issues than the good stuff

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

Canon charges much more for its premier L lens and the customer has every right to expect they these lenses will operate properly out of the box. Not after 2 and 3 repair attempts. It's ridiculous. Give me a break.

mfurman said:

It appears though that "L" zooms are suffering the most from the
lack of quality control. I think that the problem is a lack of well
trained and dedicated people on any production lines (including my
own company)!

Michael

Ps. Please see this:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=6958397
as well

Larry Lueck said:

All three of my lenses (all 'L's) backfocussed. The only prime
(400 5.6) was the worst.

You call Canon, you send the lenses in, you get them back fixed.
(Maybe the second time... \:-~ )

In the old film days, you'd never notice a bit of backfocus. Now,
at 400% in PS, you do . If you notice it while normally viewing
your images, get the darn things fixed!

And for those who say "for 99,000, they ought to be perfect"...
well, welcome to the real world. Canon is cranking out a LOT more
lenses than Nikon, with more features (IMO) and at reasonable
prices. These aren't laboratory lenses, they are consumer
lenses..... If you want perfection, check out the prices for
Leica...!

Click to expand...

--
Michael

Click to expand...

My point is that the focus s/be where the problems originate. In the playback of old LPs, it wasn't the turntable at fault, it was the vinyl, with the inherent cracks and pops. I'm dating myself here, but I would take back 1-2 LPs to get a decent one. I don't believe the lenses are in the same category, just based on my own personal experience: I have returned only one lens (the 70-300 DO) not because of the image quality, but the zoom action.

jonmatd said:

DaveClarkOne said:

Amen. If I didn't know any better, you are either patronizing a
dealer specializing in "seconds" or perhaps there's something w/the
camera, or you're finding fault to find fault. The analogy with
turntables is a stretch I think, because there were FAR more faults
to be found with the VINYL than the spinning speed of the turntable
--never heard of people taking issue with that. I am VERY
particular with quality, and I'm having trouble believing you are
this unlucky. I'm in favor of Canon taking whatever steps are
needed to improve QC, but from personal experience, I'm not
convinced there's a problem.

Click to expand...

The turntable analogy is accurate, the vinyl is the subject, just
as the child or bird is the subject. They are never perfect but
they should be reproduced perfectly, warts and all.

HW

Click to expand...

--
A picture is worth 1,000 reviews.

My point is that on a film camera, for the typical hobbyist photographer, these focus issues wouldn't even be seen.

IOW, QC is good enough for the typical film exposure.

On top of that, even though L lenses are much more expensive than non-L, they are not expensive compared to genuine top-of-the-line lenses from Leica, et al.

I do NOT want to pay Leica prices for Canon lenses.

Compare L lenses with top-of-the-line Sigma lenses. Not much price difference considering you don't get IS, and that's assuming Sigma figured out the correct focus commands....

Again! If you have focus issues, send the lenses in for repair! You do it with your car, appliances, etc...

Just one - seemingly not so much connected - note from my side for those who are not so familiar with acceptable quality levels in various industries.

I work in the automitive industry, there the usual customer demand is 20ppm, wich means 20 pieces of products are alllowed to be defective in any way out of 1 million pieces delivered. However, competition can be so much intensive in that industry that I have already heard of one major company loosing business to a competitor because they had 2 defective units out of 1million delivered. And I'm not talking about a simple bolt or a nut, I'm talking extremely high tech devices with 1/1000 minimeter precision and complex moving parts.

I'm pretty sure that lens manufacturing business can not be so much different, at least as far as precision and QC standards are concerned.

Should Canon be running with 2-20ppm quality levels I'm sure these forums would be almost silent of any quality complaints.
Therefore, from this angle, I find the Canon QC activities alarmingly bad.

If so many luxurious cars needed repairs just after delivery we would have been reading about this in every newspaper.

I would have almost certainly had more lenses if I had not dreaded a though of testing at a store and later at home. It is a complete waste of time.

Michael

Larry Lueck said:

My point is that on a film camera, for the typical hobbyist
photographer, these focus issues wouldn't even be seen.

IOW, QC is good enough for the typical film exposure.

On top of that, even though L lenses are much more expensive than
non-L, they are not expensive compared to genuine top-of-the-line
lenses from Leica, et al.

I do NOT want to pay Leica prices for Canon lenses.

Compare L lenses with top-of-the-line Sigma lenses. Not much price
difference considering you don't get IS, and that's assuming Sigma
figured out the correct focus commands....

Again! If you have focus issues, send the lenses in for repair!
You do it with your car, appliances, etc...

Click to expand...

--
Michael

My thought exactly!

Michael

Attila-h said:

Just one - seemingly not so much connected - note from my side for
those who are not so familiar with acceptable quality levels in
various industries.

I work in the automitive industry, there the usual customer demand
is 20ppm, wich means 20 pieces of products are alllowed to be
defective in any way out of 1 million pieces delivered. However,
competition can be so much intensive in that industry that I have
already heard of one major company loosing business to a competitor
because they had 2 defective units out of 1million delivered. And
I'm not talking about a simple bolt or a nut, I'm talking extremely
high tech devices with 1/1000 minimeter precision and complex
moving parts.

I'm pretty sure that lens manufacturing business can not be so much
different, at least as far as precision and QC standards are
concerned.
Should Canon be running with 2-20ppm quality levels I'm sure these
forums would be almost silent of any quality complaints.
Therefore, from this angle, I find the Canon QC activities
alarmingly bad.

Click to expand...

--
Michael

Attila-h said:

I'm pretty sure that lens manufacturing business can not be so much
different, at least as far as precision and QC standards are
concerned.
Should Canon be running with 2-20ppm quality levels I'm sure these
forums would be almost silent of any quality complaints.
Therefore, from this angle, I find the Canon QC activities
alarmingly bad.

Click to expand...

Thank you, a $4500.00 retail camera and a $2500.00 retail lens should focus properly especially when it's the third lens from two stores. This is not asking for a miracle. When you by something that retails for $7000.00 you deserve more than a "send it back and we will fix it". I've had five Ford Explorers in the last decade and not one of them have had a failure of any part. When a sensor went on the 2000 it was fixed the same day and they drove me to work and back. Canon doesn't have to pick me up or drive me anywhere, they have to produce a device that focuses 95% of the time. I will gladly tolerate 5% missed shots, not 20% and certaily not soft focus.

This is not a rant, it is an honest appraisal of what they are selling us. Believe me, the pro from The Asbury Park Press who came to shoot my company earlier this year was not full of it. He has the same problems and he needs it a lot more than I do. At the Monmouth County Fair there was a pro shooting with an old D1X for the papers and he said he wont switch. He has nine lenses and everyone worked out of the box. When they break he send them back, he doesn't send them back to make them work the way they were supposed to work.

I was at the Cranberry Canon service center this week and dropped off my 1d + 100-400L. I asked them if when they set this up is the 1D going to work well with all my other lenses. His reply was "We'll see". That's BS. The cameras are all made the same way with a certain Red Book distance between the mounting and the sensor plane. They know this measurement. I find it hard to believe they can't take 10 minutes, charge $50.00 extra and get the "L" lenses right from the get go.

HW

I think that manufarcturing quality gets overlooked due to a number of reasons:

1. Canon has a leading position on the digital SLR market, majority of PJ's carry Canon SLR's. Let's admit, Canon concentrates a lot on the camera design and development, actually quite successfully. I think they look at camera development as the main business growth contributor.

2. Newcomers are usually influenced by camera price/features not by that of the lenses.

3. Existing customers with expensive lens portfolio are very unlikely to sell everything they have and change over to a new brand

I think due to the above, Canon decidedly overlooks manufacturing quality.

BTW, a car is a thousand times more complex device than a lens. That means, if cars were manufactured with the same standards Canon is manufacturing lenses you would need to have at least 3 cars of the same type, only to have 2 permanently sitting at the repair station at any given time, their quality would be that bad.

Attila-h said:

Should Canon be running with 2-20ppm quality levels I'm sure these
forums would be almost silent of any quality complaints.
Therefore, from this angle, I find the Canon QC activities
alarmingly bad.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry... how can you possibly come to any conclusion regarding ppm quality levels looking at complaints in forums? I do business with probably the largest camera store in northern California. I know one or two of these folks very well. They all tell me that it's rare to ever get a return on a Canon "L" lense. Given the volume of lenses they sell, I take that as a much more representative sample of quality than listening to people ***** in forums. (Not that they don't have a problem... but most people who buy an L lense are probably out taking photos and not spending alot of time in forums.)