BobnJake wrote:
I just got off the phone with the Jamesburg Service Center. You should take the time to call & get your name on the "List". Apparently, a notice will be up on the Canon website the end of the month about the fix, BUT call & get on the "List" so that you receive an early e-mail notification about what to do for sending the camera in.
So I guess the Canon quality inspection will have marked the bodies that have the updated internals, so one can easily identify if a fix is required or not.
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 can not be a DIY solution in the form of a firmware update and/or changing settings.
As someone clarified for me earlier, if it was a manufacturing flaw it makes it more reasonable to expect that a smaller amount of cameras would be effected than if it was a design flaw, which would indicate that all cameras are effected.
It is good information to know for those of us who haven't experienced the problem first hand with our own cameras. Again, I don't want to waste Canon's time or delay someone else's repair if I don't have to.
Previously, I had posted that I received a repaired canon 1dIII back on October 4th, which I had sent in for a nonresolving Err99 in addition to the AI Servo and 1 shot focus inaccurancy issues
Canon's repair slip included the following comment:
REPLACED SHUTTER UNIT, SH, MIRROR CHARGE UNIT.
CLEANED CMOS. ADUJUSTED FOCUS TO STANDARD.
REPLACED REARD CF DOOR LEATHERETT. CL/CK ALL
FUNCTIONS.
Today I called Canon at Irvine, CA to inquire if the above repair suggested that I had the new submirror assemby. The representative reported that yes, they did in fact replace the defective submirror component in my camera and checked it against a "standard", which apparently they will be sending to us to test our own cameras. It appears thus that the submirror assembly has been replaced in defective cameras since early October.
I have had a substantial improvement in my AI Servo focus accuracy, and have posted pics of events with this modified camera (see the football images)....Yay, things seem to be in order finally.
ashwinrao1 wrote:
Previously, I had posted that I received a repaired canon 1dIII back on October 4th, which I had sent in for a nonresolving Err99 in addition to the AI Servo and 1 shot focus inaccurancy issues
Canon's repair slip included the following comment:
REPLACED SHUTTER UNIT, SH, MIRROR CHARGE UNIT.
CLEANED CMOS. ADUJUSTED FOCUS TO STANDARD.
REPLACED REARD CF DOOR LEATHERETT. CL/CK ALL
FUNCTIONS.
Today I called Canon at Irvine, CA to inquire if the above repair suggested that I had the new submirror assemby. The representative reported that yes, they did in fact replace the defective submirror component in my camera and checked it against a "standard", which apparently they will be sending to us to test our own cameras. It appears thus that the submirror assembly has been replaced in defective cameras since early October.
I have had a substantial improvement in my AI Servo focus accuracy, and have posted pics of events with this modified camera (see the football images)....Yay, things seem to be in order finally.
Obviously Canon US service is far better than UK. I dropped my 1D3, 1D2N, 9 lenses, asked for specific lens body calibration and a thorough test of the AF AI-Servo given the problems I was having. What did they do? 'Check and adjust AF, no problem found'. Blo00dy great! And they charged me £330 for the calibration.
Just got off the phone with Canon Service USA. They put me on the waiting list and said that it would be approx 3 weeks before they contacted 1DmkIII owners with more definitive information and mailing labels.
The rep asked me for the sales date and the serial number of my mkIII...so if you call, have that info ready. They also will ask for your mailing address and e-mail address.
I was advised that once I receive the labels, it will take approx 7-10 days total (including shipping both ways) for Canon to effect the repair and have the camera back in my hands.
Be prepared to wait on the phone approx 5-10 minutes to get through to a rep as they are currently swamped with callers seeking the fix. The rep told me that most of the calls they are receiving at the service center (in the last 48 hours) are regarding this issue.
The numer I called was the one posted on page one of this thread.
Cheers
Scott
PS: I think that when they return the cameras they should include a coupon
for a pint or two. Hint, hint - good for public relations. Sake would be acceptable too :-)
Alistair Watson wrote:
Obviously Canon US service is far better than UK. I dropped my 1D3, 1D2N, 9 lenses, asked for specific lens body calibration and a thorough test of the AF AI-Servo given the problems I was having. What did they do? 'Check and adjust AF, no problem found'. Blo00dy great! And they charged me £330 for the calibration.
I'd DEFINITELY try to get that money back... I've had the opposite experience (not with a 1D3 as I don't own one - yet). Dropped a camera with the 580 II mounted and it fell right on the flash which broke off at the mount. Dropped it at CPS and they repaired it in 4 days without it costing me a dime. That's service! Paying the equivalent of 500 euro for a calibration of lenses with a faulty body without results looks like plain highway robbery to me.
Emile Gregoire wrote:
I'd DEFINITELY try to get that money back... I've had the opposite experience (not with a 1D3 as I don't own one - yet). Dropped a camera with the 580 II mounted and it fell right on the flash which broke off at the mount. Dropped it at CPS and they repaired it in 4 days without it costing me a dime. That's service! Paying the equivalent of 500 euro for a calibration of lenses with a faulty body without results looks like plain highway robbery to me.
Why would he get his money back? He sent in 2 bodies and 9 lenses, which they calibrated. If they didn't see the issue with his Mark III, how could they fix it? Alistair jumped the gun - that's not Canon's fault, it's his.
I just got off the phone with canon repair center and they mentioned the recall to the hardware fix for the 1d mark 3. The service man mentioned that they would fix all 1d mark3 with this problem and no mention of one serial number over the other. He mentioned anyone having AI Servo problems to get on the waiting list as soon as possible. Also mentioned that the part will not be available until late October but no later than the 25th. Canon will send two E-mails. The first will be from Canon validating the problem and providing a claim number and when the part will be available for installation. The second E-mail will be a pre-paid Shipping and Insurance form from UPS. Hope this helps.
Edited by Chefdaniel on Oct 19, 2007 at 02:55 AM GMT
Sam Bennett wrote:
Why would he get his money back? He sent in 2 bodies and 9 lenses, which they calibrated. If they didn't see the issue with his Mark III, how could they fix it? Alistair jumped the gun - that's not Canon's fault, it's his.
You're right: he sent two bodies in. So they should return half the money. I hate that is has become normal to charge customers for not solving their issue. It's always the customer's problem - never the manufacturer's or the distributor's. Call me crazy, but I don't think that's correct.
Doesn't really matter that at that time they didn't see his issue - it is quite clear there is one and it looks as they're finally admitting there is one. Seems only logical they should take responsibility in hindsight. What would you have a guarantee for otherwise? The thing was supposed to work with his 9 lenses, wasn't it?
Edited by Emile Gregoire on Oct 18, 2007 at 09:05 PM GMT
Emile Gregoire wrote:
You're right: he sent two bodies in. So they should return half the money. I hate that is has become normal to charge customers for not solving their issue. It's always the customer's problem - never the manufacturer's or the distributor's. Call me crazy, but I don't think that's correct.
Horseshit. If Canon couldn't reproduce the problem, then they can't fix it, period. The Canon "announcement" so far has indicated its dependent on temperature, so it sounds like in the lab scenario the techs simply can't see the issue. That's precisely why Canon's been taking so longer to figure this out, and it's precisely why it would have been wiser for most people to take a "wait and see" approach to this instead of wasting their time and money (as well as Canon's) shipping around tens of thousands of dollars worth of gear for this futile effort.
If Alistair had approached this as a warranty issue, that would be one thing - but that was not the approach he took.
Edited by Sam Bennett on Oct 18, 2007 at 03:07 PM GMT
Sam Bennett wrote:
Horseshit. If Canon couldn't reproduce the problem, then they can't fix it, period. The Canon "announcement" so far has indicated its dependent on temperature, so it sounds like in the lab scenario the techs simply can't see the issue. That's precisely why Canon's been taking so longer to figure this out, and it's precisely why it would have been wiser for most people to take a "wait and see" approach to this instead of wasting their time and money (as well as Canon's) shipping around tens of thousands of dollars worth of gear for this futile effort.
What stink more than your horseshit is that Canon delivered a body with a problem and they're not willing to take responsibility. If at that time they didn't see the problem it was correct to charge that amount. Now that they've found out there was a problem after all, they should take responsibility and offer a refund of the money someone spent because they delivered a malfunctioning body.
Emile Gregoire wrote:
What stink more than your horseshit is that Canon delivered a body with a problem and they're not willing to take responsibility. If at that time they didn't see the problem it was correct to charge that amount. Now that they've found out there was a problem after all, they should take responsibility and offer a refund of the money someone spent because they delivered a malfunctioning body.
Again, if Alistair sent in his Mark III and that's it, you might have a point. But Alistair sent in 2 bodies and NINE LENSES, which they ensured were working properly to the best of their ability at the time. Canon spent a lot of time doing all this, and they charged him for it. If Alistair wanted the focusing issue with his Mark III fixed he should have dealt with it as a warranty issue, and then he wouldn't have been charged a dime. Seems pretty friggin' basic to me.
