Firstly(imagemaster)your Af module is not a motor car engine it wont "seize" up.
It does not rely upon oil for cooling to prevent seizing and damage.
Pretty poor analogy at best.
If YOU had read the notice properly you "may" notice it clearly states the problem manifests itself in inaccurate AF behavior..not blowing up or seizing.
So again has anyone anywhere seen this behavior manifest itself in any way.
If this was a major problem do you not think the boards would not been full of posts from people complaining about poor AF performance, blurry viewfinders on what is clearly the best AF camera ever released.
Yet not one post ive seen that describes what the service notice is about.
Preventative maintenance is one thing but if it was a major issue requiring a recall why havnt we seen people many like me with high shutter counts.
Pete ill be getting mine done but i wont be hurrying in as clearly is not a major issue or we would of heard about it well and truly with complaints about degrading AF performance indicating poor lubricant levels.
Sounds to me like a few random problems rather than a systematic issue with all bodies being under done.
dehowie wrote:
Firstly(imagemaster)your Af module is not a motor car engine it wont "seize" up.
It does not rely upon oil for cooling to prevent seizing and damage.
Pretty poor analogy at best.
If YOU had read the notice properly you "may" notice it clearly states the problem manifests itself in inaccurate AF behavior..not blowing up or seizing.
So again has anyone anywhere seen this behavior manifest itself in any way.
If this was a major problem do you not think the boards would not been full of posts from people complaining about poor AF performance, blurry viewfinders on what is clearly the best AF camera ever released.
Yet not one post ive seen that describes what the service notice is about.
Preventative maintenance is one thing but if it was a major issue requiring a recall why havnt we seen people many like me with high shutter counts.
Pete ill be getting mine done but i wont be hurrying in as clearly is not a major issue or we would of heard about it well and truly with complaints about degrading AF performance indicating poor lubricant levels.
Sounds to me like a few random problems rather than a systematic issue with all bodies being under done. ...Show more →
There are reports out there of the blurry viewfinder. Not sure if they were on this forum or other forums. I agree that it is odd that we haven't heard more about these issues. However, I would think that Canon must think it is a fairly major issue or they wouldn't have issued this notice. Why risk the bad publicity if it will only ever affect a few random people? From the little information we have on this problem, it sounds like it may take a while to manifest itself. Perhaps Canon has had a significant number of reports from the professional sports guys who have likely already fired off a lot more shots on their bodies than the average FM forum poster has. Most of these professionals don't seem to frequent these camera forums.
I've heard less complaints about 1D X than any other Canon camera I can recall (AF point illumination aside) and there are plenty of people here that have taken tens of thousands of shots. Its been out a year now hasn't it?
dehowie wrote:
Firstly(imagemaster)your Af module is not a motor car engine it wont "seize" up.
It does not rely upon oil for cooling to prevent seizing and damage.
Pretty poor analogy at best.
If YOU had read the notice properly you "may" notice it clearly states the problem manifests itself in inaccurate AF behavior..not blowing up or seizing.
"In some units of the models listed below, there is a possibility that the following phenomena may occur due to wear caused by insufficient lubrication within the camera’s driving mechanism.
1. AF searches but does not lock in on the subject.
(Caused by minute particles produced by wear mentioned above.)
2. The image shown in the viewfinder is “blurry” or “not steady”.
(Occurs if wear progresses.)"
Poor analogy, eh? What part of insufficient lubrication within the camera's driving mechanism don't you understand Maybe you should be a Canon engineer.
If you are looking for a camera that actually had problems, mine was definitely showing symptoms. Consecutive frames would be in focus, out of focus, then back in focus. When I was lucky I was getting two or three in focus before it drifted again. This was occurring with multiple lenses, different settings and drive modes.
I also had issues seeing through the viewfinder, to the point that I would check to see if my diopter setting had changed. Spots had just begun appearing on the sensor.
I have had the 1dx for a year and according to Canon, when serviced it had almost 102,000 clicks on it. I'm a working pro who shoots mostly sports.
Thanks Deb yours is the first ive seen of anyone saying they have had the problem.
My 1Dx's have 85k and 95k shots with no sign of any misbehavior.
Good luck so far i guess or maybe Canon is scared of another Mk3 PR disaster.
Imagemaster so i guess your saying that the AF searching but not locking or a blurry image in the viewfinder are not AF issues?
Oh thats right they are engine issues indicative of an internal combustion engine about to seize because of lacking lubrication.
Jeez i should of known..maybe some more SAE 30 for your 1Dx...
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I've heard less complaints about 1D X than any other Canon camera I can recall (AF point illumination aside) and there are plenty of people here that have taken tens of thousands of shots. Its been out a year now hasn't it?
I have 230K on one 1D-X and 60K on the other. No problems with either.
dehowie wrote:
Thanks Deb yours is the first ive seen of anyone saying they have had the problem.
My 1Dx's have 85k and 95k shots with no sign of any misbehavior.
Good luck so far i guess or maybe Canon is scared of another Mk3 PR disaster.
Imagemaster so i guess your saying that the AF searching but not locking or a blurry image in the viewfinder are not AF issues?
Oh thats right they are engine issues indicative of an internal combustion engine about to seize because of lacking lubrication.
Jeez i should of known..maybe some more SAE 30 for your 1Dx...
There may not have been many complaints because it requires a certain volume of shooting for symptoms to show up. Or perhaps, like me, the camera has been rock solid so they thought it was a lens problem. It took the issue appearing on multiple lenses, and the volume of oof shots to increase, for me to suspect the camera. (My 400 2.8 II had issues with the FW update, so it looked like an extension of that.) In the couple of weeks before the advisory, I was just becoming suspicious of the camera. The viewfinder problem I had initially chalked up to aging eyesight.
This thread also contains comments from another shooter who blamed the lens but had begun to wonder if it was the lens.
Preventative maintenance is the best kind: quick and cheap. Not sure why anyone wouldn't do it and risk missing the moment if their camera's AF starts to slip. Plus, it is essentially a free clean and check. Mine needed mechanical and electrical adjustments, too. No charge from Canon. Will they do the same if someone opts out of the fix now and their camera later requires repair? Maybe. Maybe not.
When the Mark III had issues, there were screams of conspiracy and coverup. This time, there are suspicions that Canon is spending a huge amount of money in shipping and expensive tech time to get people to send in cameras that don't need to be looked at. WTF?!?
Deborah Kolt wrote:
When the Mark III had issues, there were screams of conspiracy and coverup. This time, there are suspicions that Canon is spending a huge amount of money in shipping and expensive tech time to get people to send in cameras that don't need to be looked at. WTF?!?
Deborah, you are one funny woman. Just that I can not figure out what a Wireless Transmitter of Flash (WTF) has to do with the topic
I was out of town for a week and had sent it in last Friday. I just got back and I swear the camera sounds faster in 12 FPS mode to me now. Is anyone else thinking it seems faster?
No real paperwork stating what they did but the black mark is there.
Deborah Kolt wrote:
Preventative maintenance is the best kind: quick and cheap. Not sure why anyone wouldn't do it and risk missing the moment if their camera's AF starts to slip. Plus, it is essentially a free clean and check. Mine needed mechanical and electrical adjustments, too. No charge from Canon. Will they do the same if someone opts out of the fix now and their camera later requires repair? Maybe. Maybe not.
I guess some people just want to wait until something fails, then they can whine on FM about Canon.
I just used a 1DX for 10 days from CPS Loans. I used it at Yellowstone. Most of the time I had a 600mm f4 IS II lens on it and many times with a 2X III teleconverter.
In general I felt the 1DX was quite a fast machine. However at times I thought it under performed in terms of autofocus compared to my 5D3 (which I have quite a bit of experience with couple with the 600mm f4 IS II). At the time I had not heard about the advisory notice.
I did experience times where the focus would just not lock. Most of the time this was where the subject was very small in the view finder. I felt that the 5D3 would have probably be able to achieve focus. I also noticed some images were not in focus in a series of rapid fire. Again it seemed to be less consistent than my 5D3.
I don't have any quantifiable tests but it certainly seemed like it wasn't performing like I would have expected.
I hope it was affected because I would like to believe the camera performs better. Of course there is always the chance it was my issue or I wasn't able to make an objective comparison.
SeattleBirdMan wrote:
I just used a 1DX for 10 days from CPS Loans. I used it at Yellowstone. Most of the time I had a 600mm f4 IS II lens on it and many times with a 2X III teleconverter.
In general I felt the 1DX was quite a fast machine. However at times I thought it under performed in terms of autofocus compared to my 5D3 (which I have quite a bit of experience with couple with the 600mm f4 IS II). At the time I had not heard about the advisory notice.
I did experience times where the focus would just not lock. Most of the time this was where the subject was very small in the view finder. I felt that the 5D3 would have probably be able to achieve focus. I also noticed some images were not in focus in a series of rapid fire. Again it seemed to be less consistent than my 5D3.
I don't have any quantifiable tests but it certainly seemed like it wasn't performing like I would have expected.
I hope it was affected because I would like to believe the camera performs better. Of course there is always the chance it was my issue or I wasn't able to make an objective comparison.
That is not the way mine performed out of the box, nor does it correspond to initial reviews. I have both cameras and the 1Dx was always incredibly consistent and rock solid - even more reliable in AF than the 5D3 for the stuff I shoot. Given that the advisory is recent, the amount of wear and tear on those loaners, and the performance you describe, I suspect it was affected or had some other issue.
It would make sense to me (with absolutely no proof, of course), that burst shooting would create more friction, and more particles, than single shot. Especially at the speed the 1Dx clicks away.
Imagemaster wrote:
I guess some people just want to wait until something fails, then they can whine on FM about Canon.
So true! I'm actually starting to feel sorry for them. (Canon, that is - not the conspiracy theorists.) Weren't they just being hammered here for high prices, and trying to make exorbitant profits? Now they stand accused of spending their money on useless service.
Luckily, I live just a 45 minute drive from Canon Canada. I drove to Canon this morning and got there about 12:30pm. The CPS persom took my camera and invited me to have a seat while she went in the back and gave my IDx to a tech for the service. It took all of 15-20 miniutes(if that). I was on my way home with a lubed 1Dx in hand at 1:05pm.
I empathize with everybody who had to ship their 1Dx in and wait for the repaired camera to be shipped back.
mogud wrote:
Luckily, I live just a 45 minute drive from Canon Canada. I drove to Canon this morning and got there about 12:30pm. The CPS persom took my camera and invited me to have a seat while she went in the back and gave my IDx to a tech for the service. It took all of 15-20miniutes(if that). I was on my way home with lubed 1Dx in hand at 1:05pm.
I empathize with everybody who had to ship their 1Dx in and wait for the reapired camera to be shipped back.
Yes, you are lucky you did not have to ship it, because Canon Canada will only pay for one-way shipping, unlike Canon USA that pays for shipping both ways.
Did they give you any paperwork? As someone said, when you resell, that will be the first question asked by potential buyers.
Maybe you should be a Canon engineer. 
