Jeff Offline Dedicated FM Upload & Sell: On
|
Tentacle wrote:
Doesn't make much of a difference, does it? Either it was a design flaw or it was a manufacturing flaw. Bottom line is that the camera has to undergo some physical modification in order to rectify the problem, it has to return to Canon for a fix, it can not be a DIY solution in the form of a firmware update and/or changing settings.
Actually, it does indeed make a difference for those of us that have wrestled with this problem since Day One, and may have been the reason that such a long period of time was required to implement the fix. If it had been bad parts, a re-design would not have been necessary. A poor design would take much longer to remedy, as the replacement part would have to be both re-designed, and then manufactured in volume. In hindsight it makes little difference, but the fact reamins that here we are, 4+ months down the road, only now hearing about a hardware fix.
Like I suggested, I'd guess it was a design flaw that wasn't discovered during initial testing. Of course I could be wrong, but if it were simply bad parts that didn't extend throughout the entire line of production (until some recent time, presumably), I'd guess that the fix would have come months ago. I'd further guess that some months from now Canon will suggest that all MkIII's take a trip to a service center, once the initial influx has been dealt with.
Then again, who cares what I'd guess, anyway...
|