Sending equipment to Canon repair

divamum

The 24-70L is sick and needs to go to the hospital :cry I don't know if it got bumped or what, but the other day it stopped autofocusing - I cleaned the contacts and it started again, but now it is extremely erratic as far as focus. This is not "missed focus" but "completely batso crazy 'HUH?' focus" (eg at f4 and even 5.6, put focus point on eyes and it gave me a shoulder in focus but nothing else) and, more frustratingly, only sometimes.

Anyway, I think it needs to go to the Canon l'Hopitale. I'm about equidistant between NJ and Newport News - is there any advantage to using one or the other?

Thanks in advance.....

PS I am really, really, REALLY glad I kept the Tamron 17-50 instead of selling it, as I have frequently considered doing since I got the 24-70. I have shoots today and next week and, while I would be using the 50 and 85 primes much of the time anyway, I DO need something to go wider. Thanks, Dgrinners, for all the good advice to have BACKUPS!!

aj986s

I have sent a lens (18-200) and body (50D) to Canon for service work. I was generally very happy with the service. When I sent the lens, it turned out to be a recall issue, and they fixed it for free. However......when they sent it back, they had inadvertenly rotated the barrel during reassembly, so that my petal style lens hood wasn't lining up properly. But they took care of, including covering shipping costs both ways. Took about 2 weeks or so for each repair, except for the lens booboo, which they expedited.

ziggy53

divamum wrote: »

... I'm about equidistant between NJ and Newport News - is there any advantage to using one or the other? ...

I don't think there's any practical, measurable difference between those two. The Jamesburg service center may get more traffic, because of their proximity to New York and because they accept walk-in service, but that can work both for and against you. Either should be capable and competent.

Matthew Saville

Yep, it's always great to keep those "upgrade path" lenses around, I always say!

Unfortunately, if you're thinking of shooting with your 17-50 while the 24-70 is in for service, bad news: Chances are, your main body needs to go in WITH the 24-70. That's the best (the ONLY) way to make sure they are truly calibrated... :-(

=Matt=

divamum

Thanks guys.

Honestly, I think this is more than "calibration" - it's so far off when it's off that I think it may need actual repair rather than merely adjusting. Le sigh.

We'll see, I guess - I'll get it sent off asap and see what they say..................

Moving Pictures

divamum wrote: »

Thanks guys.

Honestly, I think this is more than "calibration" - it's so far off when it's off that I think it may need actual repair rather than merely adjusting. Le sigh.

We'll see, I guess - I'll get it sent off asap and see what they say..................

I feel for you. My beloved Sigma 70-200 had some serious issues. The good news is that it came back entirely rebuilt, at a price that was less than I had budgeted, with more work done on it than I'd asked for (the Sigma folks replaced the entire collar assembly: the threads had long since stripped out and I had the threads rebuilt with a helicoil ...)

Ed911

Before you send anything thing off, try this.

I assume the you tried the lens on another body...and the problem persisted. Or, you at least tried another lens on the body, and that combination worked fine. If this is the case, then you indeed do have a lens issue.

? Did you clean the contacts on the camera body?

I also would not send both camera and lens to repair unless you believe that both are contributing to the issue...which is highly unlikely.

Canon will repair, clean, and calibrate your lens before returning it to you. It will be as if factory fresh and should perform on your body as it did out of the box. So, if the body is working with other lenses...keep the body and use it. All cameras and lenses are manufactured and calibrated seperately...and produce excellent results when mated.

I had a similar problem with one of my lenses...I believe that Nikon replaced the motor and encoder. It worked, and still does, just like new...didn't need to send the body in.

Hope this helps...good luck.

divamum

Thanks Ed. I haven't actually tried it on another body yet (I could put it on my xsi), but my other lenses are all just fine on the 7d so I don't think it's the camera.

How do I clean contacts above and beyond a quick rub with a pencil eraser, and/or do you do something different with the camera's contacts (vs the lens's)? I used a pencil eraser when it stopped AF altogether, and it sprang back to life. I need to run through all my own diagnostics methodically in the next day or so, and will then (assuming it's needed, which I'm pretty sure it is) send it off to Canon.

Thanks in advance!

Ed911

Sorry about taking so long to get back...been out of town and taking care of some pressing business.

If your other lenses are working on your camera body, I wouldn't suspect that the body contacts are dirty...so there should be no reason to clean them.

Try using method TWO in the video below to clean the contacts on your lens. Isopropyl alcohol will remove any oils that may have deposited there, and it also great for loosening and removing other contaminants.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41hAgFbbk-E

If you decide to clean the contacts in your camrea body, use method two in the video from youtube....DO NOT USE METHOD ONE...I HAVE NO IDEA WHY THEY EVEN SUGGEST THAT AS A VIABLE WAY FOR CLEANING CONTACTS inside of a camera body. Brush bristles can gather dust, also flick, and therefore propel dust particles where you wouldn't want them, and the rocket blower would do the same thing. Not a good method here. Besides, a speck of dust is not going to block electrical contact. When you twist your lens in place, the dust will be moved aside by the contacts sliding into place.

Method 2, using a q-tip wrapped in a microfiber cleaning cloth is the best method. I also would use the purest form of Isopropyl alcohol that you can find...usually 90% from Wal-mart. The reason for 90% alcohol is that the other diluting component is water...and you don't want any water if possible in your cleaning solution, if possible. In electronics, we use 100% isopropyl alcohol...but, that usually isn't readily available to consumers.

The idea is to rub the contacts gently, removing any oils, or other contamination that may have been deposited.

Be sure to keep you camera body facing down, or at a good angle, where dust will not naturally fall into the lens opening.

Hope this helps. Just be careful, and you'll be fine.

divamum

BRILLIANT. Thanks Ed! It was the eraser particles which made me hesitate, so you've answered exactly what I needed to know

Darn thing is still doing its "sometimes perfect, sometimes whacked out" thing. I'm using it, but chimping like crazy and relying on other lenses in the meantime. Wouldn't you know this would happen right when I'm suddenly really busy?!

Dan7312

I've often wondered about the advice to use an eraser to "clean" contacts on cameras. Not so much because of the particles that might fly off of it but because it not unusual for a contact for an electical signal to have a very thin layer of gold plating to lower its resistance and thereby lower the amount of force needed to make a good contact. I know from my days of designing computers that this layer is incredibly thin and that "erasing" the contacts on a printed circuit board was not recommended because of this... though I'd seen it used on printed circuit contacts there too.

Maybe the contacts for cameras are made really rugged so they can be erased or use a different technique to lower their resistance... I just don't know. But I wouldn't use an eraser on a electrical signal contact.

divamum wrote: »

BRILLIANT. Thanks Ed! It was the eraser particles which made me hesitate, so you've answered exactly what I needed to know

Darn thing is still doing its "sometimes perfect, sometimes whacked out" thing. I'm using it, but chimping like crazy and relying on other lenses in the meantime. Wouldn't you know this would happen right when I'm suddenly really busy?!

Ed911

divamum wrote: »

BRILLIANT. Thanks Ed! It was the eraser particles which made me hesitate, so you've answered exactly what I needed to know

Darn thing is still doing its "sometimes perfect, sometimes whacked out" thing. I'm using it, but chimping like crazy and relying on other lenses in the meantime. Wouldn't you know this would happen right when I'm suddenly really busy?!

You are welcome. If you have cleaned your lens contacts...and the problem still exists, in light of the body working with other lenses, then I think it's time to send the baby to the doctor.

Intermittent problems will drive you crazy. And, leave you stranded at the most inopportune time.

Good luck and let us know what the doctor says.

divamum

Well, clearly it was not my imagination: $283 repair estimate just came through. Not entirely sure exactly what will be repaired, although the repair slip confirms "erratic AF".

To be honest, that's about what I was expecting and budgeting so I was prepared for it even though it's a big bite; that said, given the cost of the Mk II, I feel like it's well worth sinking the repair $ into this one!!

DeVerm

divamum wrote: »

Well, clearly it was not my imagination: $283 repair estimate just came through. Not entirely sure exactly what will be repaired, although the repair slip confirms "erratic AF".

To be honest, that's about what I was expecting and budgeting so I was prepared for it even though it's a big bite; that said, given the cost of the Mk II, I feel like it's well worth sinking the repair $ into this one!!

Indeed... and they probably rebuild it to a like-new condition. I have done electronics repairs and you always fix other things that catch your eye while doing the primary repair.

divamum

Hopefully that will be the case.... Should have it back in about 10 days I guess, so we'll see!

moose135

Good luck with the lens, Divamum. I missed this thread when you originally posted, so I'm a little late to the party. A year or so back, my old Canon 28-200 started doing some funky stuff when trying to focus. Since I was driving through NJ on a semi-regular basis, I dropped it off at their facility. Three days, and $100 later, I had a new AF motor, and it works like a charm. Hope things work out as well for you.

divamum

And.... arrived back with me today, 7 days after they received it (8 after I sent it). So busy won't even have a chance to test it until the weekend, but very pleased to have it back! Wasn't expecting it until next week, so big thumbs up for speed (it went to NJ, fwiw).

Repair slip says, "It was found the contact of the part was faulty, causing inaccurate fous. The part was replaced. Adjusted center/tilt/front/back focus and cleaned factory specs". Parts replaced were 1. Focus Assembly 2 USM/Ring 3 focusing/Collar.

So... does this mean that essentially the entire AF system was replaced? Just trying to understand exactly what was wrong with it (and what they did)

Thanks in advance!

jmphotocraft

Cool, I hate dirty specs.

divamum

adbsgicom

Good luck. Often a repair site will chose to replace the broken thing and anything it touches just in case so they don't have to deal with anything else going wrong that might cause you to call and complain that they didn't really fix it. It is just smart customer service. Their price on the stuff they replaced is probably less than one-way shipping charges if one of the related parts was iffy.

JimKarczewski

divamum wrote: »

And.... arrived back with me today, 7 days after they received it (8 after I sent it). So busy won't even have a chance to test it until the weekend, but very pleased to have it back! Wasn't expecting it until next week, so big thumbs up for speed (it went to NJ, fwiw).

Repair slip says, "It was found the contact of the part was faulty, causing inaccurate fous. The part was replaced. Adjusted center/tilt/front/back focus and cleaned factory specs". Parts replaced were 1. Focus Assembly 2 USM/Ring 3 focusing/Collar.

So... does this mean that essentially the entire AF system was replaced? Just trying to understand exactly what was wrong with it (and what they did)

Thanks in advance!

Good luck on deciphering what parts they replaced. I just got my 70-200 back and the list was, uh, interesting to say the least.

CPS is a good thing to have though, took you 7 days to get yours back? I sent mine in arrived Monday and had it back in my hands today (max 3 days in house @ Canon) and free overnight shipping back to me. One of the good benefits (besides the 30% discount on repairs and parts) to having CPS if you have enough equipment to qualify.

divamum

Btw, have finally had a chance to use it a bit and the improvement is FABULOUS - even better than when I bought it (when it was pretty darn good). Even at 2.8 it's more than acceptable; not as sharp as my primes of course, but comparing very well. Extremely pleased!

ziggy53

Fantastic.