No attempt? Have you seen the study that the Pocket Wizard folks did about a year or more ago regarding the failures 580exII PW Flex users reported? I don\'t have the link handy but as I recall it is on the PW site.
I\'m recalling this from memory so it might not be 100% correct but the gist of it was PW discovered was that as part of the re-design of the 580ex > 580exII to make it waterproof the design of the shield around the flash was causing arcing, darkening and pre-mature failure of the flash tube. The weather sealing affected the dissipation or heat vs the unsealed 580ex. Those factors, combined with using the PW in HSS mode with an external battery pack creates a perfect storm leading to pre-mature failure. The problem with arcing also varied from one 580exII to another depending on how the unit was assembled, with some having more space between the flash tube and shield not arcing to the same extent or at all. The the arcing problems didn\'t occur on the 430exII because it had a different flash head design.
It was PW\'s way of saying: \"This is Canon\'s problem, not ours\". Canon\'s position while not publicly stated would be that the PW HSS method over-drives the 580exII beyond it\'s design specs, but it has probably taken steps to address the problems PW brought to light.
There has been evidence of unannounced design modifications to the 580exII in recently sold batches. Canon addressed the mode switching to TTL which caused random full power bursts by changing the shape of the contact pins from rounded to cone shaped. It has probably also addressed the problems brought to light by the PW testing in later batches but keeps that under the radar to prevent demands for a recall.
A survey not taking into account purchase date is of limited value to a potential 580exII owner who would be most interested in how many purchased in the last 6 months have failed and why.
