biodan wrote:
Just to be contrarian, since my Mark III didn't have any problems & i had faith in Canon fixing the problem, i was hoping that the prices of Mark III's would have dropped further so i could pick up a 2nd unit (recent prices dipped into the 4100 range)
The fact that Canon waited so long to make a formal announcement is evidence of how hard this has been for them to pin down. As has already been said, assuming they actually do this fix, I would guess they are pretty sure it will do the job. The more loudly they make the announcement, the more sure they are.
72chevelle454 wrote:
Jim do you find the 40d capable of focusing as well as the MIII, we tried one along side our MIII's and it did not seem to do much better, I understand that it is a much lower end camera. I was just curious as to your experience with it. Mainly in AI-Servo only.
Thanks
I find the AF in Servo on the 40D to be considerably better than the previous xxD cameras but it still isn't a 1 series camera. Although it doesn't have the AF performance of a 1 series camera I haven't found it limiting in any way.
FWIW I believe the Nikon D2x had focusing problems when it was released and it was related to the mirror box as well.
In late September, I sent my 1dIII into Canon Service at Irvine, with the following issues:
1. Err 99 (not resolving)
2. AI Servo and occasional 1 shot focus issues
3. Loose CF door leatherett
I received my repaired 1dIII on October 4th with the following comments regarding repair:
REPLACED SHUTTER UNIT, SH, MIRROR CHARGE UNIT.
CLEANED CMOS. ADUJUSTED FOCUS TO STANDARD.
REPLACED REARD CF DOOR LEATHERETT. CL/CK ALL
FUNCTIONS.
I am not sure what "SH" means, but it appears that they replaced both the shutter and parts of the miror charge unit...might this have been the fix we are all hoping for?
I can tell you that my camera (SN 533xxx) focuses much better in AI servo upon return. It's not perfect, but neither am I, and I suspect that most of the errors are my own. Interestingly, when I had the camera returned, my Custom Functions had been changed around, and file type had been set to JPEG. The only change I made was setting filetype to RAW again.
You're being rather high & mighty, huh? For every transaction, there is (a) a buyer who may have buyer's remorse and a seller who felt he got a good deal or conversely or (b) a buyer who felt he got a good deal and a seller who was willing to sacrifice some profit to expedite a rapid sale. Point is, there are always multiple ways of interpreting transactions. You can cast aspersions on a person's motivations, but they speak more clearly to your one-sided view of human nature.
Just to be clear, in this instance, a seller may have lost faith in Canon & wanted to exit. That seller may or may not disclose an AF problem. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with a buyer knowingly paying for merchandise that he can fix or has faith in the manufacturer to fix. For example, damaged new cars have been sold to an owner of a body shop with full disclosure and BMW dealers have been known to sell 'refurbed' 7-series with known electronic gremlins.
Wickedfn4u wrote:
So you would like to pray off the misery and frustrations of others? NICE
ashwinrao1 wrote:
In late September, I sent my 1dIII into Canon Service at Irvine, with the following issues:
1. Err 99 (not resolving)
2. AI Servo and occasional 1 shot focus issues
3. Loose CF door leatherett
I received my repaired 1dIII on October 4th with the following comments regarding repair:
REPLACED SHUTTER UNIT, SH, MIRROR CHARGE UNIT.
CLEANED CMOS. ADUJUSTED FOCUS TO STANDARD.
REPLACED REARD CF DOOR LEATHERETT. CL/CK ALL
FUNCTIONS.
I am not sure what "SH" means, but it appears that they replaced both the shutter and parts of the miror charge unit...might this have been the fix we are all hoping for?
I can tell you that my camera (SN 533xxx) focuses much better in AI servo upon return. It's not perfect, but neither am I, and I suspect that most of the errors are my own. Interestingly, when I had the camera returned, my Custom Functions had been changed around, and file type had been set to JPEG. The only change I made was setting filetype to RAW again.
Edited by ashwinrao1 on Oct 17, 2007 at 08:57 PM GMT...Show more →
It sounds like you may have the fix already, and the time frame is certainly right.
I sent mine in for service late August. When I mentioned to the Canon service this evening that mine had been sent in for the AF issue and asked re: the possibility that they had implemented this hardware fix then, the rep asked when had I sent it in.
When I told him August, he said "no"
But you were mere weeks ago, they must have been doing some for a while to get to the point that they are confident it is "the fix"
Anyway, simple answer is to ask Canon, have your service number handy when you give them a call.
I sent mine into Canon UK on 8th October, got it back on 12th October and only AF was adjusted, no parts replaced. So I guess Canon either didn't know about this fix at this point and it is going to have to go in again. Great.
I don't think I am going to be particularly enthusiastic until I have heard from people how the AF performs post this replacement sub mirror assembly. So keep jumping for joy guys and girls, but I will hold off running to the bar and buying a large single malt until this becomes a known fix.
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.
I hope this solves the problems for everyone! I was following this story closely and in the end opted for a 5D (last week) rather than wait for a fix so I think I helped everyone out a bit (although not with the 5D2 announcement I called for last Saturday...sorry there!).
I wonder if any of the posters who were claiming it was all user error and there was nothing wrong with the camera will come forth and eat a bit of crow with this announcement? Some were quite adamant and prolific posters to that effect and now clearly seem to be in the wrong.
It's really silly to be too sure about something like this, there were a lot of cocky people on both sides of the fence, as usual. My stance was always to keep an open mind and wait for the official announcement, glad it's finally here.
I hope the crow tastes fine. I keep a barrel of salt handy when surfing the 'net, you can have some of that if you need to spice it up a bit.
Tentacle wrote:
It leaves me puzzled why Canon never said "We are aware of the problem and working hard to solve it."
Might be to fend off legal action or something but I agree: the way they handled it totally goes against basic marketing A-B-C. Shows that Canon still very much is a product / technical oriented company.
Tentacle wrote:
It leaves me puzzled why Canon never said "We are aware of the problem and working hard to solve it."
This is typical Japanese/Asian behaviour.
It's loss of face (or something like that) to admit you've failed.
They come out with it when they have a solution.
Your approach is Western
By the way where can I read that official announcement
So I can refer to this when a make an appointment with the Canon Repair Centre
By the way where can I read that official announcement
So I can refer to this when a make an appointment with the Canon Repair Centre
There is no official appointment yet, but if you direct them to Rob Galbraith's website and point out that multiple reports strongly suggest there is a fix out, then maybe you'll get somewhere.
On the other hand, it's possible that Canon lets Canon USA roll out the fix first, before Canon Europe is to do so.
(recent prices dipped into the 4100 range)
