I sent my 1d3 serial #522xxx in for AF issues again about a month ago. This is the 4th I've done so and I did have the sub-mirror fix. I had some discussions with some big wigs at Canon USA and thought I was to have my camera replaced but instead they again tried to fix it. This is what my repair form stated exactly..
Replaced plate, parallax adjusting,/Lever Assy, Mirror charge/LeverAss'y, SH Charge/Mirror Box Assy/Washer/Washer, Plain, Checked all, Adjusted focus and Exposure, Cleaned to Factory specs. Cleaned CMOS
Not sure what all that means but it was a far more extensive explanation of the performed work than I've recieved in the past. Camera seems to working quite well but I haven't had the chance to shoot some real tough action images that would challenge the camera..
I wonder if this repair is similar to what Canon will be doing on the current recall.
What a nightmare..Canon did you unjustice. Are they trying to prove something ?
drobertfranz wrote:
I sent my 1d3 serial #522xxx in for AF issues again about a month ago. This is the 4th I've done so and I did have the sub-mirror fix. I had some discussions with some big wigs at Canon USA and thought I was to have my camera replaced but instead they again tried to fix it. This is what my repair form stated exactly..
Replaced plate, parallax adjusting,/Lever Assy, Mirror charge/LeverAss'y, SH Charge/Mirror Box Assy/Washer/Washer, Plain, Checked all, Adjusted focus and Exposure, Cleaned to Factory specs. Cleaned CMOS
Not sure what all that means but it was a far more extensive explanation of the performed work than I've recieved in the past. Camera seems to working quite well but I haven't had the chance to shoot some real tough action images that would challenge the camera..
I wonder if this repair is similar to what Canon will be doing on the current recall....Show more →
Quoted text from the above post on DPReview: "According to CPS representatives in my regions, there are 3 different revisions of the Mk III. These are labelled within the battery compartment. There is a code inside of it. Relevant are the last 2 digits:
01-04 are the first one with defective AF mirror
05-08 are the second one (blue dot)
09-13 are the latest. These are fine and should include the latest AF module.
So probably if your cam belongs to the 09-13 range, the new fix is not necessary."
Just spoke with Canon Tech Support and asked if it were possible to isolate the
to effected serial numbers and he said NOPE, would you like to send it in to have it
checked out? I told him I'd like to wait a bit since I'm shooting some town
league basketball playoffs.
My 1DMK3 was purchased 1 month ago. After getting aquented with the camera
and playing with the settings, I have not had any problems really. I use center
point only. When using the assist points, it was a little soft, but I have since
gone to center only, no assist. Still don't have enough shots under belt to really
judge.
I did load the new firmware, I'll continue to use center point and make a decision
in a couple weeks.
maverick666 wrote:
What a nightmare..Canon did you unjustice. Are they trying to prove something ?
I would think it an injustice only if they wouldn't replace his camera after saying so but had nothing new to offer in the way of a fix. I am guessing they didn't replace his camera because they had a new fix that they thought would resolve his issues. If they don't I'll wager they will replace it.
It seems there are already quite a few reports about CPS representatives or Canon service techs saying conflicting things about serial numbers, manufacturing dates and what have you. Sounds very much like the Internet rumour machine in high rev to me.
lidesun wrote:
Both IRVINE and JAMESBURG can do the fix, no HW replacement involved, only electronic adjustment. And this info was verified by Jamesburg CPS and Newport VA.
My camera was in for other AF service in NJ this Tuesday, and got it back yesterday, they did the AF Adjustment service there which was double confirmed with CPS.
And all I can say, yes, I can feel the difference after the AF Adjustment and new FW update, the camera acts more like the old Mark II, N, but still has the its own advantages-- quicker and more sensitive in low light situation compared with the older 1D bodies. and yes the outer AF points perform much better.
BTW--the AF system has 6 months warranty for th erepair
Chuck Coyne wrote:
My 1D3 however which was one of the earlier models requiring the sub assembly fix will need to be sent in for a checkup to see if it needs the recall repairs. Apparently any of the 1D3's that were sent in for the sub assembly repair will need to be sent in for this repair. I'm not positive but it sounded to me that the rep believed the issue is somewhat related to the repair for the sub assembly that was performed. In other words it looks like when they repaired the sub assembly they caused this other issue some how and it wasn't discovered until sometime after.
This doesn't surprise me in the least bit. Mine worked pretty well prior to the submirror "fix". After I sent it to VA for the sub-mirror, it came back terrible (Irvine somewhat fixed it after the fact). Thus, my reluctance to send it back to VA. Oh well....I'll send it on Monday.. Don't really want it sitting on a truck over the weekend anyway.
Joe Tompkins wrote:
Just spoke with Canon Tech Support and asked if it were possible to isolate the
to effected serial numbers and he said NOPE, would you like to send it in to have it
checked out? I told him I'd like to wait a bit since I'm shooting some town
league basketball playoffs.
My 1DMK3 was purchased 1 month ago. After getting aquented with the camera
and playing with the settings, I have not had any problems really. I use center
point only. When using the assist points, it was a little soft, but I have since
gone to center only, no assist. Still don't have enough shots under belt to really
judge.
I did load the new firmware, I'll continue to use center point and make a decision
in a couple weeks. ...Show more →
When you call to arrange to have your camera sent in, the first thing they will do is enter your serial number into what the rep called their "tool". The tool tells them if your camera needs the fix and if it does not, they will tell you right then.
FretNoMore wrote:
It seems there are already quite a few reports about CPS representatives or Canon service techs saying conflicting things about serial numbers, manufacturing dates and what have you. Sounds very much like the Internet rumour machine in high rev to me.
Sounds more like Canon can't get their story straight to me.
Hrow wrote:
Well so far I am VERY impressed... with UPS.
Dropped off my camera north of Philadelphia yesterday at 5:15 PM and it is now listed as out for delivery. It left the depot north of Philly at 10:03 PM - made it Laurel Md. by 12:22 AM (2:32 minutes and 137 miles according to Mapquest) - where it departed to Newport News at 1:33 AM and arrived at 2:00 AM (202 miles - obviously not covered by ground, but at that distance that plane really must have been "flying".
Any bets on Canon being able to provide similarly efficient service?
Arrived at 9:58 AM. 16 hours 45 minutes for UPS to ship it ground through 4 handling locations and 4 states for 310 miles. Got to give Brown some points on this one. I am betting that it will take Canon longer to log it in as received.
Got a call from Canon UK today, dropped my 1Ds3 in to them, even though I haven't had any particular AF problems they advised a free check anyway, I expect it back early next week. No dramas, just good prompt service (so far)
I got an invitation from CPS to offer my 1Ds3 for an AF check-up.
Appearantly the accuracy of the outer AF points of some mkIII bodies is in question.
I did experience some AF issues on the outer AF points of my previous 1Ds3 bodies (both late 2007 bodies). The replacement body doesn't have these issues (I think it is from may 2008).
Canon Service calibrated my lenses to my latest 1Ds3 a few months back (and did a good job at it).
So why should I sent it in? Has there been a change in the AF calibration procedure of some sort
Hmmmm... I am not sure if I would have peace of mind when I hand my cam over to them... With the bad luck I am having these days I wouldn't be surprised if they mess up my cam badly. I think I will pass on this one since I experience no AF issues to begin with...
Daan B wrote:
Hmmmm... I am not sure if I would have peace of mind when I hand my cam over to them... With the bad luck I am having these days I wouldn't be surprised if they mess up my cam badly. I think I will pass on this one since I experience no AF issues to begin with...
Well, if you're happy with the way your camera is operating then I can't blame you for not sending it in BUT six in one half a dozen in the other...while there is a possibility of the camera coming back to you performing worse than when it left the body, in its current state, may indeed be under performing and a service trip may improve it. Like you I felt my MKIII was performing well though I did notice images were slightly soft when I performed a test after this whole thing started back up, so it left this morning and its fate rests in the hands of Canon service...I can only hope they actually improve it.
Daan B wrote:
I got an invitation from CPS to offer my 1Ds3 for an AF check-up.
Appearantly the accuracy of the outer AF points of some mkIII bodies is in question.
I did experience some AF issues on the outer AF points of my previous 1Ds3 bodies (both late 2007 bodies). The replacement body doesn't have these issues (I think it is from may 2008).
Canon Service calibrated my lenses to my latest 1Ds3 a few months back (and did a good job at it).
So why should I sent it in? Has there been a change in the AF calibration procedure of some sort ...Show more →
According to one rep I talked to (and we know how inconsistent they have been), the AF fix/adjustment they are doing is brand new.
maverick666 wrote:
What a nightmare..Canon did you unjustice. Are they trying to prove something ?
[quote
I think they probably we're coming up with the current fix and used me as a quinea pig. I was a bit dissapointed that I didn't get a new camera but I just want it to work properly....
GeneO wrote:
I would think it an injustice only if they wouldn't replace his camera after saying so but had nothing new to offer in the way of a fix. I am guessing they didn't replace his camera because they had a new fix that they thought would resolve his issues. If they don't I'll wager they will replace it.
):