Ridiculous!!!

Started Jul 2, 2008 | Discussions
Markuson Senior Member • Posts: 1,607
Ridiculous!!!

I'm right now in the process of boxing up my brand new 35 1.4L lens and sending it back for replacement. The stupid thing couldn't focus within 12 FEET of an out-door target (and I'm not kidding!!). Not even CLOSE.

And that's AFTER a +20 micro-adjust on the $4500 body they claim is "fixed"!!

I've just about HAD IT with Canon's BS.

So ya... The word is indeed...
RIDICULOUS!!!!!
--
-----------------
A few Markuson Images...
Look-see at:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson

Pete Woronowski New Member • Posts: 17
Re: Ridiculous!!!

Are you sure its the lens? All my lenses work perfect on my 5D,1DSMK11 and 1DMK11 but my 1DMK111 which has been in twice for the submirror fix and replaced stopper won't focus right yet I'm told its within spec by Canon.

Mine is very noisy but again its within spec, I can't understand how all my other camera's work perfect and my 'in spec ' camera is useless.
Can you try another body?
Take Care, Pete

Chilloutbuddy Regular Member • Posts: 139
Re: Ridiculous!!!

Ouch, not good.
It is a little bit ridiculous for such an expensive lens, but hey, it happens.

Thats why its important to buy from a seller with a good return policy which I'm sure is what you did. But don't think it would never happen with a Nikon, Pentax or whatever. Just jump on the forum and have a look. AFAIC only Zeiss (and Leica?) hand test every single lens that leaves the factory (this extra service is included in the price of course), and still I've heard ppl complaining every now and then...

Best of luck with your second copy.

-- hide signature --
OP Markuson Senior Member • Posts: 1,607
Re: Ridiculous!!!

Chilloutbuddy wrote:

Ouch, not good.
It is a little bit ridiculous for such an expensive lens, but hey, it
happens.

Well...with Canon of late...it happens A LOT!!!

Their quality control is absolutely in the toilette...and anyone who denies that is sleeping. How many people are on their third or fourth copy of a 100-400? How many people had the same with a 24-70?

How many times have you had to listen to one more post asking the LEGITIMATE question, "Did you get a GOOD COPY of L lens?" Or, "I hope you get a good copy."

Ridiculous.

-- hide signature --

A few Markuson Images...
Look-see at:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson

DavidPisback Senior Member • Posts: 1,218
nobody believes you

Nobody believed me back when I had the 1D's (or with the multiple lens copies of my own and friends that I've witnessed first hand).

Why should you be any different?

Of course, who knows if Nikon is really any better?

Markuson wrote:

Their quality control is absolutely in the toilette...and anyone who
denies that is sleeping. How many people are on their third or
fourth copy of a 100-400? How many people had the same with a 24-70?

How many times have you had to listen to one more post asking the
LEGITIMATE question, "Did you get a GOOD COPY of L lens?" Or, "I
hope you get a good copy."

Ridiculous.

lovingtheview Contributing Member • Posts: 807
Remember the Challenger, Markuson, et. al.

Markuson:

For every single person who makes such a post about the failure of any model of any product, I say, "Remember the Challenger disaster." If the most extraordinary embodiment of man's highest technology in 1986 could fail, then ANY, that's ANY, that's ANY product made by man can fail. If a multi-billion dollar spaceship fails after undergoing the highest scrutiny ever applied to a man-made product, then the failure of my dslr and yours, is understandable at the most basic level of reasoning. Not one purchaser of a dslr or lens on this earth has any assurance that his/her experience will not be identical to yours and mine. We are lucky that the purchase is not of a Mercedes, BMW, Lexus, or Infinity auto. A very high percentage of those new cars has to go back for service early in its life. If the $60,000. product is failure PRONE, why would a lens or dslr be failure PROOF?

Markuson, I understand your utter frustration. I've had the same bad luck once with a Canon camera. Now, you've had bad luck with a camera and a lens. I know you are not loving Canon at the moment. However, your experience has no more to do with Canon than any other camera maker. The same thing is happening this very hour with every model of every dslr maker and lens maker.

You are not alone. You are just subject to the same statistics of product failure as every other person who makes a purchase.

In this light, using the word "ridiculous" conveys frustration well, but is otherwise a meaningless adjective as applied to the matter of product reliability.

Good luck with the problems,

Lovingtheview

Markuson wrote:

I'm right now in the process of boxing up my brand new 35 1.4L lens
and sending it back for replacement. The stupid thing couldn't focus
within 12 FEET of an out-door target (and I'm not kidding!!). Not
even CLOSE.

And that's AFTER a +20 micro-adjust on the $4500 body they claim is
"fixed"!!

I've just about HAD IT with Canon's BS.

So ya... The word is indeed...
RIDICULOUS!!!!!
--
-----------------
A few Markuson Images...
Look-see at:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson

jerryk Veteran Member • Posts: 6,625
Re: Ridiculous!!!

Agree, try the lens with another body.

-- hide signature --

jerryk.smugmug.com

OP Markuson Senior Member • Posts: 1,607
Re: Remember the Challenger, Markuson, et. al.

lovingtheview wrote:

Markuson:

However, your experience has no more to do with Canon than any other
camera maker. The same thing is happening this very hour with every
model of every dslr maker and lens maker.

You are not alone. You are just subject to the same statistics of
product failure as every other person who makes a purchase.

In this light, using the word "ridiculous" conveys frustration well,
but is otherwise a meaningless adjective as applied to the matter of
product reliability.

If I was writing merely from my own experience...I'd agree with your premise.

However, for the last 18 months, Canon has displayed an arrogant, careless disregard for honesty and straight-forward practices. They have refused to replace cameras that are clearly defective (as demonstrated for them beyond doubt in my case, and in MANY other cases), and are churning out "L" lenses that ROUTINELY are WAY out of whack due to an apparent COMPLETE lack of testing.

Pros from every corner of the globe have to routinely send their BRAND NEW LENSES in ...just so they will work up to specifications.

This is totally unacceptable, and is FAR WORSE than in the past.

I own 11 L lenses. The most recent 3 have ALL needed major adjustment, and the trend is more and more and more problems.

How many times have you read a post saying, "I hope you get a good copy" or "I'm on my third/fourth copy and FINALLY got one that is sharp!"

This is common now, and the word that fits this pattern is indeed...RIDICULOUS.

M

Markuson wrote:

I'm right now in the process of boxing up my brand new 35 1.4L lens
and sending it back for replacement. The stupid thing couldn't focus
within 12 FEET of an out-door target (and I'm not kidding!!). Not
even CLOSE.

And that's AFTER a +20 micro-adjust on the $4500 body they claim is
"fixed"!!

I've just about HAD IT with Canon's BS.

So ya... The word is indeed...
RIDICULOUS!!!!!
--
-----------------
A few Markuson Images...
Look-see at:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson

-- hide signature --

A few Markuson Images...
Look-see at:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson

stoddard Regular Member • Posts: 140
Re: Ridiculous!!!

I returned one with the same problem. Waited a month, but still wanted it. Second copy did the same thing. Returned it. I sort of don't blame anyone. The lens just did not work for me

domphoto Regular Member • Posts: 329
Re: Ridiculous!!!

i just returned 3 - bacfocussing 5d's....my lenses are perfect on the 1ds mark2

i have no patience for canon's lens mating process....or for sub standard products

-- hide signature --
aclo Regular Member • Posts: 480
Re: Remember the Challenger, Markuson, et. al.

lovingtheview wrote:

Markuson:

For every single person who makes such a post about the failure of
any model of any product, I say, "Remember the Challenger disaster."
If the most extraordinary embodiment of man's highest technology in
1986 could fail, then ANY, that's ANY, that's ANY product made by man
can fail. If a multi-billion dollar spaceship fails after undergoing
the highest scrutiny ever applied to a man-made product,

[SNIP]

Take a look at this:

http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/missions/51-l/docs/rogers-commission/Appendix-F.txt
or if you want more of the report, here

http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/missions/51-l/docs/rogers-commission/table-of-contents.html

If you're lazy :), go to the first link, scroll down to the end, and read the last sentence (if you don't know the author, google him before dismissing him). The challenger mess hardly underwent the highest scrutiny ever applied to a man-made product...

Anyway I do see your point, I just thought this was an interesting ASIDE (ie, I am not trying to claim anything here, just making a random comment).

bronxbombers Forum Pro • Posts: 18,226
Re: Remember the Challenger, Markuson, et. al.

lovingtheview wrote:

Markuson:

For every single person who makes such a post about the failure of
any model of any product, I say, "Remember the Challenger disaster."
If the most extraordinary embodiment of man's highest technology in
1986 could fail, then ANY, that's ANY, that's ANY product made by man
can fail. If a multi-billion dollar spaceship fails after undergoing
the highest scrutiny ever applied to a man-made product, then the
failure of my dslr and yours, is understandable at the most basic
level of reasoning.

you need to read up more on the challenger....
and shuttle program in general....

boudro_ Senior Member • Posts: 1,190
Re: Remember the Challenger, Markuson, et. al.

bronxbombers wrote:

lovingtheview wrote:

Markuson:

For every single person who makes such a post about the failure of
any model of any product, I say, "Remember the Challenger disaster."
If the most extraordinary embodiment of man's highest technology in
1986 could fail, then ANY, that's ANY, that's ANY product made by man
can fail. If a multi-billion dollar spaceship fails after undergoing
the highest scrutiny ever applied to a man-made product, then the
failure of my dslr and yours, is understandable at the most basic
level of reasoning.

you need to read up more on the challenger....
and shuttle program in general....

I think his point might be realavent, not exactly in the way he meant.

I would like to note that testing might not catch everything at the functional end. all the parts might work, but the whole doesn't. Take the original Celeron processor. P2 chips and Level 2 cache would both work flawlessly, but fail when mounted together, so sell it as a p2 without level 2 cache, aka Celeron.

 boudro_'s gear list:boudro_'s gear list
Canon EOS 5D Samsung NX210 Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM +6 more
maxz
maxz Veteran Member • Posts: 3,479
You got my copy

just kidding... but my first copy of 24L does similar thing, the opposite to yours, mine won‘t focus beyond one meter, everything beyond that is a beautiful bokeh. And no mine has nothing to do with body AF problem

Max

Markuson wrote:

I'm right now in the process of boxing up my brand new 35 1.4L lens
and sending it back for replacement. The stupid thing couldn't focus
within 12 FEET of an out-door target (and I'm not kidding!!). Not
even CLOSE.

And that's AFTER a +20 micro-adjust on the $4500 body they claim is
"fixed"!!

I've just about HAD IT with Canon's BS.

So ya... The word is indeed...
RIDICULOUS!!!!!
--
-----------------
A few Markuson Images...
Look-see at:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson

 maxz's gear list:maxz's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P900 Sony RX10 III Olympus TG-5 Nikon D90 Nikon D800 +66 more
John Crichton Regular Member • Posts: 124
Re: Ridiculous!!!

They alway claim it fixed.
Mine sent in for AF calibration.
It returned with back focus problem.

I sent it in again.
Now they said it has a problem but it is now fixed.
They fixed my fixed lens.

The world "fixed" in their Dictionary is...

"Looked and Worked on customer equipment without retest or any sort of QC because it wasted their time. If customer don't sent it back it is definitely FIXED but if they do it is FIXED but NOT FIXED ENOUGH."

Canon is a company with lots of F words.

Bartek Senior Member • Posts: 1,408
Re: Remember the Challenger, Markuson, et. al.

lovingtheview wrote:

We are lucky that the purchase is not of a
Mercedes, BMW, Lexus, or Infinity auto. A very high percentage of
those new cars has to go back for service early in its life. If the
$60,000. product is failure PRONE, why would a lens or dslr be
failure PROOF?

and here comes the important difference in my opinion between cars in service and DSLR's in service. It's much easier for a car owner to permanently fix something in the car by replacing a part or two under the large hood than successfully calibrate today's DSLR at the service center.

Once I had a chat with the technician in my local Canon authorized service (the only one person trained there for DSLRs for a few brands) and he said that all the help he has from Canon is an access to the Canon extranet website over internet where he can look for similar problems and solutions provided by other technicians of the forum or download tech docs and everything else is on his own skills and he agreed that many times it's like "let's see what happens if I try this". I had a small problem with my 5D (too dark VF led display) and he told me that it's better for me if he doesn't attempt to fix it and disassemble my camera what has convinced me and I had to stay with this not that important problem for ever.

He was trained by Canon but it was few years ago at the time of licensing the facility (probably the 10D times). This facility is being outsourced by Canon and they have their own business goals.

Yet he didn't tell me the following things but it's not hard to guess that in most cases they don't have a business in spending many hours on time consuming but cheap calibration procedures. For them it's better when the customer comes back once again and they can have once again some money from Canon for another warranty repair of this very bad camera that brakes all the time no one will check how it was done at first time or was it the camera problem once again especially when the whole world if bashing this bad 1DIII that brakes all the time. Sad but true.

So I think Canon would better invest the same money for much better quality control and replacements of bad units during warranty period (as other electronics vendors do) than over investing in useless service facilities that only frustrate the users and in some cases even brake more than fix. OK some very general maintenance or fixes and good obvious verifying procedures that give clear answers are necessary and should be maintained by Canon themselves rather than outsourced to third party companies.

-- hide signature --

Bartek

 Bartek's gear list:Bartek's gear list
Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark III
lovingtheview Contributing Member • Posts: 807
Further Thoughts on Remember the Challenger?

Thanks to all who replied to this sub thread. I would be hard pressed to refute any of your observations, in particular those of Markuson, aclo, bronxbombers, boudro, and bartek.

I’m not that stubborn, and still have the capacity to take in info which is in disagreement with what I have said. Thanks to each of you.

Here, then, respectfully, are a few more of my thoughts:

Markuson: You did not tell us earlier that you had eleven L’s, and a recent three of those were problematic. That takes on more statistical relevance. As for Canon’s handling of the MK1DIII’s sadly protracted focus issue miasma, many of my posts on the subject will show that although I am a Canon-only owner, I hold Canon squarely guilty of creating here an industry precedent-setting boondoggle. Canon could have taken any one of 20 courses of action which would have left them with an honorable record on the whole affair. As it stands, their choices and actions were abysmally inadequate, and not in any way characteristic of a first-rate company. In light of where we are at this moment, “Ridiculous” becomes a stronger descriptor.

Aclo and Bronxbombers: Good point on the known QC shortfalls which the Challenger engineers are guilty of. Of course, my original post referred not only to QC, but equally, to design and manufacturing. Beyond that, the essential point of my reply to Markuson holds in that all products are subject to failure, even if the Challenger failure is not an ideal analogy. I often use that one, flawed as it is technically and semantically, because its shocks people into re-examining the question of why their new (Lexus, Canon, Nikon, Porsche, etc.) comes from the dealer with defects already in place.

Boudro: Thanks for the better focus on the issue generally.

Bartek: Indeed, the analogy between cars and dslrs is not a tight comparison. As for factory guidance available to repair centers, a thorough study of this subject would frighten all consumers. This could be a good dissertation in itself. Just yesterday, I heard of a nightmare from a dealer who was trying to get his extremely high-end professional photo printer fixed early in the warranty period. The story is disturbing, so I choose not to air it here.

Thanks to all,

Lovingtheview

Scott Larson Veteran Member • Posts: 6,316
Re: Remember the Challenger, Markuson, et. al.

Markuson wrote:

However, for the last 18 months, Canon has displayed an arrogant,
careless disregard for honesty and straight-forward practices. They
have refused to replace cameras that are clearly defective (as
demonstrated for them beyond doubt in my case, and in MANY other
cases), and are churning out "L" lenses that ROUTINELY are WAY out of
whack due to an apparent COMPLETE lack of testing.

My advice for everyone is to buy Canon stuff from a reputable dealer, preferably local. When I bought a Mark IIn three years ago whcih had a cluster of stuck red pixels in the middle of the frame at ISO 800 and above, I concluded that Canon doesn't really have any Q.C. system other than ship everything and let the customers sort the bad ones out. My experience with my first Mark III showed me that Canon will not only ship anything but their support is only there to convince you that nothing is wrong with your defective Canon product.

In both cases i was able to exchange the cameras at my dealer for replacements which still had flaws but are less serious.

 Scott Larson's gear list:Scott Larson's gear list
Canon EOS-1D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS-1D X +13 more
lovingtheview Contributing Member • Posts: 807
Not Canon Alone, Scott

Scott,

As painful as it is, I agree with the spirit of what you say. Yet, your description is on the harsh side, particularly as it refers to Canon. I don't think we, even as the most informed dslr consumers, have any information to illustrate that Canon is one bit worse than Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Pentax, Fuji, etc. Owners of all of these dslr brands have their ample literature of horror stories.

The sad reality may be then, that the CFO's and comptrollers of these companies have choked their customer service, warranty, and repair departments, to the point where employees have 20-minute in-house lunch breaks, don't have the power to really support their consumers, are very often not technically prepared for complex issues, and certainly don't have the budget to take decisive actions.

These corporations are playing out a nasty, unethical strategy. Let them sleep in their foul smelling quarters. Some might even wake up from the stench. For those of us who actually BUY their dslrs, the near-term outlook is not promising.

Best,

Lovingtheview

Scott Larson wrote:

Markuson wrote:

However, for the last 18 months, Canon has displayed an arrogant,
careless disregard for honesty and straight-forward practices. They
have refused to replace cameras that are clearly defective (as
demonstrated for them beyond doubt in my case, and in MANY other
cases), and are churning out "L" lenses that ROUTINELY are WAY out of
whack due to an apparent COMPLETE lack of testing.

My advice for everyone is to buy Canon stuff from a reputable dealer,
preferably local. When I bought a Mark IIn three years ago whcih had
a cluster of stuck red pixels in the middle of the frame at ISO 800
and above, I concluded that Canon doesn't really have any Q.C. system
other than ship everything and let the customers sort the bad ones
out. My experience with my first Mark III showed me that Canon will
not only ship anything but their support is only there to convince
you that nothing is wrong with your defective Canon product.

In both cases i was able to exchange the cameras at my dealer for
replacements which still had flaws but are less serious.

natureman Veteran Member • Posts: 3,979
Re: Remember the Challenger, Markuson, et. al.

Markuson wrote:

lovingtheview wrote:

Markuson:

However, your experience has no more to do with Canon than any other
camera maker. The same thing is happening this very hour with every
model of every dslr maker and lens maker.

You are not alone. You are just subject to the same statistics of
product failure as every other person who makes a purchase.

In this light, using the word "ridiculous" conveys frustration well,
but is otherwise a meaningless adjective as applied to the matter of
product reliability.

If I was writing merely from my own experience...I'd agree with your
premise.

However, for the last 18 months, Canon has displayed an arrogant,
careless disregard for honesty and straight-forward practices. They
have refused to replace cameras that are clearly defective (as
demonstrated for them beyond doubt in my case, and in MANY other
cases), and are churning out "L" lenses that ROUTINELY are WAY out of
whack due to an apparent COMPLETE lack of testing.

Pros from every corner of the globe have to routinely send their
BRAND NEW LENSES in ...just so they will work up to specifications.

This is totally unacceptable, and is FAR WORSE than in the past.
I own 11 L lenses. The most recent 3 have ALL needed major
adjustment, and the trend is more and more and more problems.

How many times have you read a post saying, "I hope you get a good
copy" or "I'm on my third/fourth copy and FINALLY got one that is
sharp!"

I've noticed that MANY times on these forums. I have no doubt that there are far more complaints about bad copies of bodies and/or lenses from Canon users than all the other brands put together. Sure, there are cases of user error, but that would be true of all brands.

Canon's QC is obviously the worst in the business. There's absolutely no excuse for their top tier leneses (or anything else really) to be screwed up right out of the box. Having to send brand new lenses and/or bodies back to them several times just to get them working correctly (maybe) is "ridiculous".

My Canon cameras (5D and XT) have the worst focusing I've ever encountered, with any camera. I cannot trust them to focus correctly and they are OFTEN way off. I like Canon sensors, but their focusing problems are maddening.

This is common now, and the word that fits this pattern is
indeed...RIDICULOUS.

M

Markuson wrote:

I'm right now in the process of boxing up my brand new 35 1.4L lens
and sending it back for replacement. The stupid thing couldn't focus
within 12 FEET of an out-door target (and I'm not kidding!!). Not
even CLOSE.

And that's AFTER a +20 micro-adjust on the $4500 body they claim is
"fixed"!!

I've just about HAD IT with Canon's BS.

So ya... The word is indeed...
RIDICULOUS!!!!!
--
-----------------
A few Markuson Images...
Look-see at:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson

-- hide signature --

A few Markuson Images...
Look-see at:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads