. Each is shot on tripod, mirror lockup, center AF point, one shot, iso 100, wide open aperture. [/IMG]
Just some additional food for though....
When you sent the camera in did you ask CPS to check focus issues?
Are you sure the One shot AF Release Priority was set to Focus and not Release? You could get erratic focus if it was on Release.
Also AI servo has what? a dozen settings that affect how it obtains and holds focus. Also AI servo might not be spot on the first image, I think. Also coming up with a standardized test for AI servo seems like quite a task.
I'm not saying you shouldn't send it back, but make sure you've crossed all the i's and t's.
When Beach replaces your camera I don't think they are under any obligation to replace it with a brand new one, I don't think there is a lemon law for camera's. In theory they could ship you a refurb or repack.
I don't know what Beach does with returns like this, I doubt they drop it into the vaporizer machine:D, but my guess is they might do a check and refurb if need be, then sell it as used or as a replacement.
If Beach will give you a refund that would be best, if you can get it. I wouldn't wait to the end of the RMA window to do it, I think you've a much better chance of getting a refund the earlier you ask for it.
Dan-
When the camera went in the first time, it had the focus adjusted as it was worse than my old 50D in AI servo mode. That was presumably rechecked on the second visit.
One shot was set to focus
AI servo testing was done on my own later. The first image was usually fine. It was the middle of the burst that would inexplicably be out by at least 6 inches.
As for a return, that gets a bit complicated. I bought the camera as a kit with flash and SD card. I have the card but discarded the packaging it came in. The flash is currently owned by my boss (who needed a flash and thus prompted me to get this as a kit). I can get the flash back but am concerned that Beach will mark down dinky things like a missing package for the SD and charge a 10% restocking fee. I also don't want to return the camera (which works well for landscape and okay but not as it should for portraits) and be without for 2-3 more weeks. I've got some shoots coming up for which the 5D would be preferred over my 50D.
I'm waiting to hear back from the manager at Canon-NJ. After two trips and as a CPS Gold member, I think they would want to do the 'right' thing and replace this camera with a new one.
I'm really not someone who nitpicks at new toys if that is how it appears. This started with dust spots I could not remove on a 12 hour old camera and quickly worsened from there. I was okay with dialing in -18 for the 85/1.8 (while my friend's 5D mk II was spot on with it). It was only when the AF consistency test showed such a wide spread of focus that it confirmed what I was seeing in 'real life' shots.
As I said above, I'm not convinced you could build an argument on FoCal, but I believe you have enough evidence of AF anomalies in the wild to open the case again with Canon. They would have no grounds to refuse, and they are the only ones who can do the definitive testing. Canon has the prerogative when it comes to how the case is handled, but you have a warranty and your CPS Gold, and by now a documented history of far less than satisfactory responses to issues with the camera and the lens, to date. The various costs to you of the camera being originally not fit for purpose, of time and of loss of use, over a protracted period, and of damage to your lens, could be leveraged with Canon to get them to decide to put you, the customer, first by immediately replacing your camera with a new one.
As I also said, you could, and at the same time, be negotiating with the store you bought the camera from for the best that they can give you. There is a high chance they would replace with new. You would certainly get a full warranty. And although you might be out of pocket some, it might be worth it to be able to put the whole thing behind you.
Dan-
When the camera went in the first time, it had the focus adjusted as it was worse than my old 50D in AI servo mode. That was presumably rechecked on the second visit.
One shot was set to focus
AI servo testing was done on my own later. The first image was usually fine. It was the middle of the burst that would inexplicably be out by at least 6 inches.
As for a return, that gets a bit complicated. I bought the camera as a kit with flash and SD card. I have the card but discarded the packaging it came in. The flash is currently owned by my boss (who needed a flash and thus prompted me to get this as a kit). I can get the flash back but am concerned that Beach will mark down dinky things like a missing package for the SD and charge a 10% restocking fee. I also don't want to return the camera (which works well for landscape and okay but not as it should for portraits) and be without for 2-3 more weeks. I've got some shoots coming up for which the 5D would be preferred over my 50D.
I'm waiting to hear back from the manager at Canon-NJ. After two trips and as a CPS Gold member, I think they would want to do the 'right' thing and replace this camera with a new one.
I'm really not someone who nitpicks at new toys if that is how it appears. This started with dust spots I could not remove on a 12 hour old camera and quickly worsened from there. I was okay with dialing in -18 for the 85/1.8 (while my friend's 5D mk II was spot on with it). It was only when the AF consistency test showed such a wide spread of focus that it confirmed what I was seeing in 'real life' shots.
Good points Neil
I agree FoCal is not the definitive test. It just pointed me to the possibility of persistent AF problems. I explained that to the service center manager when we spoke.
As of know I'm expecting a loaner 5d mk iii tomorrow and will send out mine the next day. That should rule out user error and I plan to put the new camera through its paces. Canon will get my camera and cd with focal data as well as a series of photos with clear cut focus issues.
Beach is out of stock at the moment but I was assured the clock did not start on my RMA deadline until I received the camera may 15 so that adds a week cushion.
Great! Looking more positive overall, Eyal! You are more in control now, it's just a matter of keeping the pressure on and seeing it through, with Canon or the store. I'm rooting for you, as you US guys would say!:D
Good points Neil
I agree FoCal is not the definitive test. It just pointed me to the possibility of persistent AF problems. I explained that to the service center manager when we spoke.
As of know I'm expecting a loaner 5d mk iii tomorrow and will send out mine the next day. That should rule out user error and I plan to put the new camera through its paces. Canon will get my camera and cd with focal data as well as a series of photos with clear cut focus issues.
Beach is out of stock at the moment but I was assured the clock did not start on my RMA deadline until I received the camera may 15 so that adds a week cushion.
Eyal, thank you for the info!
It looks like I'll be getting FoCal once they come out with 5D3 fixup. Not that I desperately need it (both bodies seem to be in focus), but it's always nice to have an automated tool for fine tuning...
So the loaner 5D mk III arrived today. Got home, put on the 85/1.8 and...awesome! I literally can't get it to miss focus (well, except when the boy stepped within the camera's minimal focusing distance). Still need to put the camera through its paces which will come Saturday for flag football playoffs but so far so good...
YES!!!! Validation....Finally!
So I got a loaner 5D mk III and it has been just awesome. Just completed the FoCal microAf and consistency testing. Setup was identical:
started with my 5D mk III (graph at top). Zeroed out af settings and ran through microAF - needed -1 adjustment. Then ran AF consistency with 25 successive shots.
Took loaner 5D and moved my L bracket, lens (70-200/2.8 IS II on loan as well), battery and card and placed in tripod at same spot. Ran through same sequence as above (this one needed -2 microAF correction). And...
This is not just validation but mind boggling to me. My 5D manages not just to be inconsistent at focus but drops the resolution of the lens be a huge factor. Now to add this info to my very, very long letter to Canon CPS.
YES!!!! Validation....Finally!
So I got a loaner 5D mk III and it has been just awesome. Just completed the FoCal microAf and consistency testing. Setup was identical:
started with my 5D mk III (graph at top). Zeroed out af settings and ran through microAF - needed -1 adjustment. Then ran AF consistency with 25 successive shots.
Took loaner 5D and moved my L bracket, lens (70-200/2.8 IS II on loan as well), battery and card and placed in tripod at same spot. Ran through same sequence as above (this one needed -2 microAF correction). And...
...
This is not just validation but mind boggling to me. My 5D manages not just to be inconsistent at focus but drops the resolution of the lens be a huge factor. Now to add this info to my very, very long letter to Canon CPS.
That appears to be a smoking gun type of validation.
Yah...just makes me really glad (as well as mad) - if it wasn't for FoCal, I would never have been able to prove the camera had problems despite the two trips to service. Frankly, I think Canon should be ashamed of themselves at this point.
Yah...just makes me really glad (as well as mad) - if it wasn't for FoCal, I would never have been able to prove the camera had problems despite the two trips to service. Frankly, I think Canon should be ashamed of themselves at this point.
I'm in love with my Canon gear, so I wouldn't call "shame" in that respect. But where I think there is shame is that at your service centre they didn't take the initiative and jump to it to thoroughly investigate your gear and even to preempt you and replace the 5D3 before you had to ask! What they did to your lens is beyond the pale, of course, even though it could have been a rare accident.
Wow, that is profound! I'm quite pleased with my 5DIII's AF, but this makes me want to get FoCal just out of sheer curiosity!! Good luck... I'd say if you don't get satisfaction, you have evidence for a case in small claims court!
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Canon would have been money ahead if they had simply swapped out your 5D3 body with an individually tested and calibrated one. This story is going to cost them a few sales.
I'm really trying to hold off taking this to canon rumors or some other site that might run it and speed up what has been a frustrating exercise and glaring example or poor quality control both on the production line and at the service center.
I'm really trying to hold off taking this to canon rumors or some other site that might run it and speed up what has been a frustrating exercise and glaring example or poor quality control both on the production line and at the service center.
I've been following this thread very closely Eyal, and thank you for staying with it. I was/am about to send in my MkII for service/maintenance, but Now instead of CPS, I'm thinking KEH. I just want a decent service performed. And for the life of me I cannot wrap my head around a service center with a new-return not digging into the issue properly the first time. Telling to me was a Manager you got on the line that told you how great the tech is.
I'm really trying to hold off taking this to canon rumors or some other site that might run it and speed up what has been a frustrating exercise and glaring example or poor quality control both on the production line and at the service center.
This is just me being a contrarian and maybe a devils advocate.
I'm sure that this is going to be resolved with you ending up with a 5D3 that focuses properly. But I just don't see it as "a glaring example or poor quality control both on the production line and at the service center". I see it as a run of bad luck. My suggestion is that you don't go to Las Vegas for at least a year or two.
QC on a production line is by it nature is statistical, bad stuff will get though, the only question is how much. If lot's of 5d3's were getting though with AF issues that would be a glaring example of poor QC, because AF is one of the principal features of this camera. But I've seen very few public comments of poor AF about this camera.
Service is usually a pretty rote rather than an analytical process. To make it both quick and not too expensive it is based on "for symptom X do correction Y". In fact for less expensive sorts of things "correction Y" is replace. When the symptom is something that rarely happens, and for the 5D3 it looks like that is the case for your bad AF, service just isn't going to understand what the symptom means. The tech with 25yr service is, my guess, really good but has never designed or analyzed mechanics, or optics, or electronics. But I'll bet he can tell you the exact cause of every weird symptom he has seen in the last five years. That's been my experience with technology technicians.
My take on these things is that most companies and service departments really do want to get them fixed, but for things that are way out of the norm of what they typically see it is very hard for them to do that without help from me. And in the case of CPS, even though there are some horror stories about them, most of time the comments about them are quite good.
In the case of the scratch on your lens and Nikolai's camera body, that's a bit harder to understand. It's a bit harder to understand that the service area didn't see those marks, even if they didn't notice making them. At the least it seems like they would have proactively mentioned it to you.
An lastly the strategy for resolution... When this sort of happens to me I am resigned to having it cost me at least time and probably money. I don't like it but I try to focus on resolution rather than unhappiness.
Your approach has been more hard-edged than mine typically is... when you take that approach to any repair service like CPS, you are also criticizing the people there and they probably will see that criticism. I'm not saying the hard edged criticism wasn't warranted, but I've been on the inside of electronic repair services and I'm pretty sure it won't help resolve things faster and might even slow things down.
In fact one of the things I think you have done (and this is really just IMHO) is your comments to CPS mixed together the problem with your criticism. That makes it even harder for them to understand what is is they have to do to satisfy you because there is just too much info in your comments.
My approach is more like "Oh, not that's not really what I meant, and it still isn't working, take a look at this please".
But this is just me thinking out loud. I've a friend in the utility industry who has had to deal with lots and lots of repair departments and his technique for dealing with them is infinitely more hard edged than yours and he has been very successful in getting the resolution he wanted. So maybe you should amp it up a bit:D.
Dan
I appreciate your thoughts on this. I agree any line can produce a lemon. However, that being said, the service center should have gone above and beyond with such a new camera and such an important issue the first time. Can you imagine the PR disaster Canon would have had if this camera had gone to DPreview or Rob Galbraith and not me?
I will say that in my verbal interaction with CPS (mostly the manager there), I have been very much on the soft-edged side. I think my letter here was fair and the follow up letter I had intended to send was, all things considered, incredibly soft. That all changed when I got the results from the two 5D3's. When I had mentioned the FoCal software to the manager (before having a chance to use it with another 5D3) he said that he heard about the program but they had their own in house program for testing the same things. I can't believe that this public software can find a glaring AF problem in 10 minutes that their in house one missed.
It is just incredibly frustrating to know the camera is bad, to send it to Canon twice and have to then prove its bad with the amount of time and testing I mentioned above.
I think I write 'harder' than I speak and, that being said, the newly drafted letter is very, very hard edged. Before I send the body back though, I really need to find a 70-200/4 IS somewhere local as I'm convinced there is still a major module 'loose' inside. I think that part is paranoia but, after all this, it may not be inappropriate to be suspicious of a repaired lens.
Here is my letter to Canon in its entirety (the graph above is appended to the end of the letter). Appreciate your thoughts on whether this letter appropriately explains the current situation.
To whom it may concern,
I am writing to you to review my issues with the recent purchase of a Canon 5D mk III.
I purchased the camera as a kit from Beach Camera on May 7th and received it on May 15th (it had been on backorder at the time). Within hours of my first outing, I noticed two problems. The first was 8 dust spots clearly visible at f/11. The other was very unreliable focus in AI servo mode. I tried to correct the dust spots with an auto then manual cleaning (using a rocket blower) but the dust spots would not dislodge. I contacted CPS and was given a prepaid slip for service. I decided to send in my Canon 70-200/4 IS lens as well as that seemed to be one lens with particular problems achieving focus with the new camera (it had been a perfect match on the 50D previously).
The camera and lens went out on Monday May 21st and returned on Wednesday May 23rd. I was thrilled with the fast turnaround time. The focus seemed improved compared to initial use but I was dismayed to find the dust spots were still there. I then noticed that my previously perfect 70-200 lens had a huge scratch in the barrel, was very loose when zooming and felt as though something was loose inside. I quickly contacted Canon and was given an overnight shipping label.
The camera and lens went out again on Tuesday May 29th (Monday was a holiday). I called for an update on Thursday May 31st and was advised the camera was fixed but the lens was waiting for a new barrel to be delivered. I asked that the camera be sent ahead of the lens and finally received it on Monday June 4th. I was pleased to see the dust spots were gone.
I had recently purchased the FoCal system for microAF adjustment as I had been displeased by the manual attempts I had previously used. I used version 1.4 which includes support for the 5D mk III. I went through the 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 17-40/4, 24-105 lenses and found varying degrees of AF adjustment needed. The primes were the ‘worst’ at -18 and -16 respectively. I also had promised to calibrate a friend’s 5D mk II and found great results with her 24-70 and 70-200/2.8 IS. As a last step, I ran the AF Consistency module on her camera. This was set up as one shot, center AF, mirror lockup with the camera being refocused from infinity each time. Her results were perfect and consistent across 10 consecutive shots. I then placed my camera on the tripod with her 70-200 lens. Confirmed microAF was at zero and that that was the correct value for optimal sharpness and ran the consistency test. My results were highly variable.
I then took my camera out with the 85/1.8 on and shot some sequences of my children. This was in good light with fast shutter speeds and I noticed that, in the midst of a sequence, the camera would miss focus by 6-12 inches and then reacquire. So it appears that the FoCal system was correct in that the AF module does ‘miss’ focus in a sequence under real-life conditions.
I received a loaner 5D mk III in the mail on Thursday June 7th and immediately placed the 85/1.8 lens on it - the results were nothing short of amazing. Perfect and reliable focus each and every time even in poor light. I just completed testing the two 5D mk III’s side by side and the result was astonishing: I setup a tripod with conditions exactly the same except for the Canon body. Started with my 5D mk III with L bracket and loaner 70-200/2.8 IS II lens. Performed the microAF correction routine followed by AF consistency testing. Switched the lens, bracket, battery and CF to the loaner 5D mk III and ran through the same sequence of testing - first microAF correction (-1 for mine; -2 for loaner at 200mm) then AF consistency with 25 images in a row using center focus, mirror lockup, one shot. The Loaner 5D was perfect and had almost 50% higher resolution! (result graph below)
I am astonished, bewildered and incredibly frustrated that I had to go through the above to prove the defects in this camera. At this point, we are at three weeks of wasted time, effort and missed photo opportunities. I cannot believe that Canon Service could not find the problems I did with a $70 piece of software and some careful attention.
I respectfully ask that you review the enclosed CD with photos and files documenting the lengths I have gone to in order to get this camera to work ‘as advertised’. I will not accept this camera body to be returned to me at this point. After two visits to CPS, you’ve had your ‘chance’ to correct flaws. I ask that you replace the camera at this point with a new one. I purchased this camera new at full retail price and, at this point, have a refurbished one (and a poorly functioning one at that).
I have tried to see if I could obtain a replacement from the place of purchase but they currently report that new cameras will not arrive for 2-3 weeks thus placing me out of the window for an RMA by the time the camera is in-stock.
When a replacement is approved, please ensure that the new camera is from a recent production (so that there is no need to correct any so-called light leaks with another trip to Canon service) and please confirm that it is working to ideal specifications especially in regards to auto-focus. Also, please ensure that no dust particles are present on the sensor. At this point, I expect nothing less than a perfect Canon 5D mk III.
Given the incredible amount of time and effort spent at this thus far, I would hope that Canon would offer appropriate compensation as well in the form of complimentary extensions of my Gold membership or some other gesture of good will.
Please don’t hesitate to contact me with any questions.
Sincerely,
The 5dIII issues are bad; the scratch on the lens and the rather perfunctory "customer care" are worse.
I'm really sorry you got a lemon. A first-year model will have unexpected issues, and it's just unfortunate you're the one who got one (I had a first-year car once (one of the early production models, in fact) and learned this very much the hard way! However, I got fabulous care for it and because of that actually bought another of the same model 5 years later and, if they still made them (it's a Saturn Vue) would be having another one as this one starts to reach it's EOL).
To add to that, however, damaging your personal property is NOT ok. Neither is the fact that you've had to chase it like crazy and work this hard.
Good luck with it all. MAJOR drag having to mess with this after having agonized over the purchase in the first place!
I don't think this is too "hard-edged" at all and really focuses on resolution. The only issue I see is that you have to read the entire letter to figure what is wrong and what you want done to resolve the complaint. Maybe starting with something like:
"I am writing to you about an unresolved issue with the recent purchase of a Canon 5D mk III body. Its the auto focus often inaccurate.
I would like this issue to be resolved by Canon replacing it with a new Canon 5D mk III and an complimentary extension to my Gold CPS subscription for my efforts and time.
Here is the history associated with this issue and what I have done to help resolve it."
would make it more likely that Canon, i.e. the person who reads the letter, understands the issue and the what you want done to resolve it.
However there is a slight inconsistency in your resolution request. You are criticizing CPS by saying that their service is incapable of fixing your camera, but you are asking for an extension to your CPS subscription.
If it were me I would drop the request for the CPS extension and focus on the thing you really want, the replacement body. CPS gold is what. $100?
Here is my letter to Canon in its entirety (the graph above is appended to the end of the letter). Appreciate your thoughts on whether this letter appropriately explains the current situation.
To whom it may concern,
I am writing to you to review my issues with the recent purchase of a Canon 5D mk III.
I purchased the camera as a kit from Beach Camera on May 7th and received it on May 15th (it had been on backorder at the time). Within hours of my first outing, I noticed two problems. The first was 8 dust spots clearly visible at f/11. The other was very unreliable focus in AI servo mode. I tried to correct the dust spots with an auto then manual cleaning (using a rocket blower) but the dust spots would not dislodge. I contacted CPS and was given a prepaid slip for service. I decided to send in my Canon 70-200/4 IS lens as well as that seemed to be one lens with particular problems achieving focus with the new camera (it had been a perfect match on the 50D previously).
The camera and lens went out on Monday May 21st and returned on Wednesday May 23rd. I was thrilled with the fast turnaround time. The focus seemed improved compared to initial use but I was dismayed to find the dust spots were still there. I then noticed that my previously perfect 70-200 lens had a huge scratch in the barrel, was very loose when zooming and felt as though something was loose inside. I quickly contacted Canon and was given an overnight shipping label.
The camera and lens went out again on Tuesday May 29th (Monday was a holiday). I called for an update on Thursday May 31st and was advised the camera was fixed but the lens was waiting for a new barrel to be delivered. I asked that the camera be sent ahead of the lens and finally received it on Monday June 4th. I was pleased to see the dust spots were gone.
I had recently purchased the FoCal system for microAF adjustment as I had been displeased by the manual attempts I had previously used. I used version 1.4 which includes support for the 5D mk III. I went through the 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 17-40/4, 24-105 lenses and found varying degrees of AF adjustment needed. The primes were the ‘worst’ at -18 and -16 respectively. I also had promised to calibrate a friend’s 5D mk II and found great results with her 24-70 and 70-200/2.8 IS. As a last step, I ran the AF Consistency module on her camera. This was set up as one shot, center AF, mirror lockup with the camera being refocused from infinity each time. Her results were perfect and consistent across 10 consecutive shots. I then placed my camera on the tripod with her 70-200 lens. Confirmed microAF was at zero and that that was the correct value for optimal sharpness and ran the consistency test. My results were highly variable.
I then took my camera out with the 85/1.8 on and shot some sequences of my children. This was in good light with fast shutter speeds and I noticed that, in the midst of a sequence, the camera would miss focus by 6-12 inches and then reacquire. So it appears that the FoCal system was correct in that the AF module does ‘miss’ focus in a sequence under real-life conditions.
I received a loaner 5D mk III in the mail on Thursday June 7th and immediately placed the 85/1.8 lens on it - the results were nothing short of amazing. Perfect and reliable focus each and every time even in poor light. I just completed testing the two 5D mk III’s side by side and the result was astonishing: I setup a tripod with conditions exactly the same except for the Canon body. Started with my 5D mk III with L bracket and loaner 70-200/2.8 IS II lens. Performed the microAF correction routine followed by AF consistency testing. Switched the lens, bracket, battery and CF to the loaner 5D mk III and ran through the same sequence of testing - first microAF correction (-1 for mine; -2 for loaner at 200mm) then AF consistency with 25 images in a row using center focus, mirror lockup, one shot. The Loaner 5D was perfect and had almost 50% higher resolution! (result graph below)
I am astonished, bewildered and incredibly frustrated that I had to go through the above to prove the defects in this camera. At this point, we are at three weeks of wasted time, effort and missed photo opportunities. I cannot believe that Canon Service could not find the problems I did with a $70 piece of software and some careful attention.
I respectfully ask that you review the enclosed CD with photos and files documenting the lengths I have gone to in order to get this camera to work ‘as advertised’. I will not accept this camera body to be returned to me at this point. After two visits to CPS, you’ve had your ‘chance’ to correct flaws. I ask that you replace the camera at this point with a new one. I purchased this camera new at full retail price and, at this point, have a refurbished one (and a poorly functioning one at that).
I have tried to see if I could obtain a replacement from the place of purchase but they currently report that new cameras will not arrive for 2-3 weeks thus placing me out of the window for an RMA by the time the camera is in-stock.
When a replacement is approved, please ensure that the new camera is from a recent production (so that there is no need to correct any so-called light leaks with another trip to Canon service) and please confirm that it is working to ideal specifications especially in regards to auto-focus. Also, please ensure that no dust particles are present on the sensor. At this point, I expect nothing less than a perfect Canon 5D mk III.
Given the incredible amount of time and effort spent at this thus far, I would hope that Canon would offer appropriate compensation as well in the form of complimentary extensions of my Gold membership or some other gesture of good will.
Please don’t hesitate to contact me with any questions.
Sincerely,
Dan
I appreciate your thoughts on this. I agree any line can produce a lemon. However, that being said, the service center should have gone above and beyond with such a new camera and such an important issue the first time. Can you imagine the PR disaster Canon would have had if this camera had gone to DPreview or Rob Galbraith and not me?
I will say that in my verbal interaction with CPS (mostly the manager there), I have been very much on the soft-edged side. I think my letter here was fair and the follow up letter I had intended to send was, all things considered, incredibly soft. That all changed when I got the results from the two 5D3's. When I had mentioned the FoCal software to the manager (before having a chance to use it with another 5D3) he said that he heard about the program but they had their own in house program for testing the same things. I can't believe that this public software can find a glaring AF problem in 10 minutes that their in house one missed.
It is just incredibly frustrating to know the camera is bad, to send it to Canon twice and have to then prove its bad with the amount of time and testing I mentioned above.
I think I write 'harder' than I speak and, that being said, the newly drafted letter is very, very hard edged. Before I send the body back though, I really need to find a 70-200/4 IS somewhere local as I'm convinced there is still a major module 'loose' inside. I think that part is paranoia but, after all this, it may not be inappropriate to be suspicious of a repaired lens.
My overall take in this is That Canon Failed to understand that once a Camera is sent in, someone is asking you to take on their [Cameras'] problem. Doesn't matter if it is new or an older model. That is what repair facilities do all over the World each day. Someone asks me to take their problem on, and It then becomes my job to do so if I accept the job. THE END!
After my repair, it is my job to then prove to myself that the item in question works as designed. If by chance I let the item slip out and it comes back to me, the first thing I have to do is look at what I did as the potential culprit of the return-repair-request.
Taking responsibility is a key factor. It is a reason I do Business here at SM. If I have a problem with an item, they own the problem and fix it. It's also the same way I have done business all my business life.
Canon Goofed. If it's an anomaly, great. But really, A new Camera, New on the Market, new new new! Not good.
I would flash your CPS Gold badge right up front, and then try to make the letter half as long while containing the same facts. These people surely have tons of mail come across their desk on any given day. They're going to see a book and either set it aside for later, or they will just skim it. In general, people don't read.
Secondly, I would send a pre-letter asking exactly to whom you should send this - someone who is supposed to handle such matters and is authorized to do something about it. Someone in a supervisor role. Then send this to them, not just to whom it may concern.
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Thanks Michael
I had found that link as well but thought there was no way it would still work having been posted in 2006. Just tried to send a brief note and will keep fingers crossed.
Comments
Of counting the years!
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Just some additional food for though....
When you sent the camera in did you ask CPS to check focus issues?
Are you sure the One shot AF Release Priority was set to Focus and not Release? You could get erratic focus if it was on Release.
Also AI servo has what? a dozen settings that affect how it obtains and holds focus. Also AI servo might not be spot on the first image, I think. Also coming up with a standardized test for AI servo seems like quite a task.
I'm not saying you shouldn't send it back, but make sure you've crossed all the i's and t's.
When Beach replaces your camera I don't think they are under any obligation to replace it with a brand new one, I don't think there is a lemon law for camera's. In theory they could ship you a refurb or repack.
I don't know what Beach does with returns like this, I doubt they drop it into the vaporizer machine:D, but my guess is they might do a check and refurb if need be, then sell it as used or as a replacement.
If Beach will give you a refund that would be best, if you can get it. I wouldn't wait to the end of the RMA window to do it, I think you've a much better chance of getting a refund the earlier you ask for it.
http://www.danalphotos.com
http://www.pluralsight.com
http://twitter.com/d114
When the camera went in the first time, it had the focus adjusted as it was worse than my old 50D in AI servo mode. That was presumably rechecked on the second visit.
One shot was set to focus
AI servo testing was done on my own later. The first image was usually fine. It was the middle of the burst that would inexplicably be out by at least 6 inches.
As for a return, that gets a bit complicated. I bought the camera as a kit with flash and SD card. I have the card but discarded the packaging it came in. The flash is currently owned by my boss (who needed a flash and thus prompted me to get this as a kit). I can get the flash back but am concerned that Beach will mark down dinky things like a missing package for the SD and charge a 10% restocking fee. I also don't want to return the camera (which works well for landscape and okay but not as it should for portraits) and be without for 2-3 more weeks. I've got some shoots coming up for which the 5D would be preferred over my 50D.
I'm waiting to hear back from the manager at Canon-NJ. After two trips and as a CPS Gold member, I think they would want to do the 'right' thing and replace this camera with a new one.
I'm really not someone who nitpicks at new toys if that is how it appears. This started with dust spots I could not remove on a 12 hour old camera and quickly worsened from there. I was okay with dialing in -18 for the 85/1.8 (while my friend's 5D mk II was spot on with it). It was only when the AF consistency test showed such a wide spread of focus that it confirmed what I was seeing in 'real life' shots.
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
http://www.danalphotos.com
http://www.pluralsight.com
http://twitter.com/d114
... of working on EOS system gear, introduced in '87?
pp
Flickr
As I also said, you could, and at the same time, be negotiating with the store you bought the camera from for the best that they can give you. There is a high chance they would replace with new. You would certainly get a full warranty. And although you might be out of pocket some, it might be worth it to be able to put the whole thing behind you.
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
I agree FoCal is not the definitive test. It just pointed me to the possibility of persistent AF problems. I explained that to the service center manager when we spoke.
As of know I'm expecting a loaner 5d mk iii tomorrow and will send out mine the next day. That should rule out user error and I plan to put the new camera through its paces. Canon will get my camera and cd with focal data as well as a series of photos with clear cut focus issues.
Beach is out of stock at the moment but I was assured the clock did not start on my RMA deadline until I received the camera may 15 so that adds a week cushion.
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
It looks like I'll be getting FoCal once they come out with 5D3 fixup. Not that I desperately need it (both bodies seem to be in focus), but it's always nice to have an automated tool for fine tuning...
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
So I got a loaner 5D mk III and it has been just awesome. Just completed the FoCal microAf and consistency testing. Setup was identical:
started with my 5D mk III (graph at top). Zeroed out af settings and ran through microAF - needed -1 adjustment. Then ran AF consistency with 25 successive shots.
Took loaner 5D and moved my L bracket, lens (70-200/2.8 IS II on loan as well), battery and card and placed in tripod at same spot. Ran through same sequence as above (this one needed -2 microAF correction). And...
This is not just validation but mind boggling to me. My 5D manages not just to be inconsistent at focus but drops the resolution of the lens be a huge factor. Now to add this info to my very, very long letter to Canon CPS.
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
That appears to be a smoking gun type of validation.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
I'm in love with my Canon gear, so I wouldn't call "shame" in that respect. But where I think there is shame is that at your service centre they didn't take the initiative and jump to it to thoroughly investigate your gear and even to preempt you and replace the 5D3 before you had to ask! What they did to your lens is beyond the pale, of course, even though it could have been a rare accident.
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
http://michaelnel.smugmug.com
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
I've been following this thread very closely Eyal, and thank you for staying with it. I was/am about to send in my MkII for service/maintenance, but Now instead of CPS, I'm thinking KEH. I just want a decent service performed. And for the life of me I cannot wrap my head around a service center with a new-return not digging into the issue properly the first time. Telling to me was a Manager you got on the line that told you how great the tech is.
This is just me being a contrarian and maybe a devils advocate.
I'm sure that this is going to be resolved with you ending up with a 5D3 that focuses properly. But I just don't see it as "a glaring example or poor quality control both on the production line and at the service center". I see it as a run of bad luck. My suggestion is that you don't go to Las Vegas for at least a year or two
QC on a production line is by it nature is statistical, bad stuff will get though, the only question is how much. If lot's of 5d3's were getting though with AF issues that would be a glaring example of poor QC, because AF is one of the principal features of this camera. But I've seen very few public comments of poor AF about this camera.
Service is usually a pretty rote rather than an analytical process. To make it both quick and not too expensive it is based on "for symptom X do correction Y". In fact for less expensive sorts of things "correction Y" is replace. When the symptom is something that rarely happens, and for the 5D3 it looks like that is the case for your bad AF, service just isn't going to understand what the symptom means. The tech with 25yr service is, my guess, really good but has never designed or analyzed mechanics, or optics, or electronics. But I'll bet he can tell you the exact cause of every weird symptom he has seen in the last five years. That's been my experience with technology technicians.
My take on these things is that most companies and service departments really do want to get them fixed, but for things that are way out of the norm of what they typically see it is very hard for them to do that without help from me. And in the case of CPS, even though there are some horror stories about them, most of time the comments about them are quite good.
In the case of the scratch on your lens and Nikolai's camera body, that's a bit harder to understand. It's a bit harder to understand that the service area didn't see those marks, even if they didn't notice making them. At the least it seems like they would have proactively mentioned it to you.
An lastly the strategy for resolution... When this sort of happens to me I am resigned to having it cost me at least time and probably money. I don't like it but I try to focus on resolution rather than unhappiness.
Your approach has been more hard-edged than mine typically is... when you take that approach to any repair service like CPS, you are also criticizing the people there and they probably will see that criticism. I'm not saying the hard edged criticism wasn't warranted, but I've been on the inside of electronic repair services and I'm pretty sure it won't help resolve things faster and might even slow things down.
In fact one of the things I think you have done (and this is really just IMHO) is your comments to CPS mixed together the problem with your criticism. That makes it even harder for them to understand what is is they have to do to satisfy you because there is just too much info in your comments.
My approach is more like "Oh, not that's not really what I meant, and it still isn't working, take a look at this please".
But this is just me thinking out loud. I've a friend in the utility industry who has had to deal with lots and lots of repair departments and his technique for dealing with them is infinitely more hard edged than yours and he has been very successful in getting the resolution he wanted. So maybe you should amp it up a bit:D.
http://www.danalphotos.com
http://www.pluralsight.com
http://twitter.com/d114
I appreciate your thoughts on this. I agree any line can produce a lemon. However, that being said, the service center should have gone above and beyond with such a new camera and such an important issue the first time. Can you imagine the PR disaster Canon would have had if this camera had gone to DPreview or Rob Galbraith and not me?
I will say that in my verbal interaction with CPS (mostly the manager there), I have been very much on the soft-edged side. I think my letter here was fair and the follow up letter I had intended to send was, all things considered, incredibly soft. That all changed when I got the results from the two 5D3's. When I had mentioned the FoCal software to the manager (before having a chance to use it with another 5D3) he said that he heard about the program but they had their own in house program for testing the same things. I can't believe that this public software can find a glaring AF problem in 10 minutes that their in house one missed.
It is just incredibly frustrating to know the camera is bad, to send it to Canon twice and have to then prove its bad with the amount of time and testing I mentioned above.
I think I write 'harder' than I speak and, that being said, the newly drafted letter is very, very hard edged. Before I send the body back though, I really need to find a 70-200/4 IS somewhere local as I'm convinced there is still a major module 'loose' inside. I think that part is paranoia but, after all this, it may not be inappropriate to be suspicious of a repaired lens.
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
To whom it may concern,
I am writing to you to review my issues with the recent purchase of a Canon 5D mk III.
I purchased the camera as a kit from Beach Camera on May 7th and received it on May 15th (it had been on backorder at the time). Within hours of my first outing, I noticed two problems. The first was 8 dust spots clearly visible at f/11. The other was very unreliable focus in AI servo mode. I tried to correct the dust spots with an auto then manual cleaning (using a rocket blower) but the dust spots would not dislodge. I contacted CPS and was given a prepaid slip for service. I decided to send in my Canon 70-200/4 IS lens as well as that seemed to be one lens with particular problems achieving focus with the new camera (it had been a perfect match on the 50D previously).
The camera and lens went out on Monday May 21st and returned on Wednesday May 23rd. I was thrilled with the fast turnaround time. The focus seemed improved compared to initial use but I was dismayed to find the dust spots were still there. I then noticed that my previously perfect 70-200 lens had a huge scratch in the barrel, was very loose when zooming and felt as though something was loose inside. I quickly contacted Canon and was given an overnight shipping label.
The camera and lens went out again on Tuesday May 29th (Monday was a holiday). I called for an update on Thursday May 31st and was advised the camera was fixed but the lens was waiting for a new barrel to be delivered. I asked that the camera be sent ahead of the lens and finally received it on Monday June 4th. I was pleased to see the dust spots were gone.
I had recently purchased the FoCal system for microAF adjustment as I had been displeased by the manual attempts I had previously used. I used version 1.4 which includes support for the 5D mk III. I went through the 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 17-40/4, 24-105 lenses and found varying degrees of AF adjustment needed. The primes were the ‘worst’ at -18 and -16 respectively. I also had promised to calibrate a friend’s 5D mk II and found great results with her 24-70 and 70-200/2.8 IS. As a last step, I ran the AF Consistency module on her camera. This was set up as one shot, center AF, mirror lockup with the camera being refocused from infinity each time. Her results were perfect and consistent across 10 consecutive shots. I then placed my camera on the tripod with her 70-200 lens. Confirmed microAF was at zero and that that was the correct value for optimal sharpness and ran the consistency test. My results were highly variable.
I then took my camera out with the 85/1.8 on and shot some sequences of my children. This was in good light with fast shutter speeds and I noticed that, in the midst of a sequence, the camera would miss focus by 6-12 inches and then reacquire. So it appears that the FoCal system was correct in that the AF module does ‘miss’ focus in a sequence under real-life conditions.
I received a loaner 5D mk III in the mail on Thursday June 7th and immediately placed the 85/1.8 lens on it - the results were nothing short of amazing. Perfect and reliable focus each and every time even in poor light. I just completed testing the two 5D mk III’s side by side and the result was astonishing: I setup a tripod with conditions exactly the same except for the Canon body. Started with my 5D mk III with L bracket and loaner 70-200/2.8 IS II lens. Performed the microAF correction routine followed by AF consistency testing. Switched the lens, bracket, battery and CF to the loaner 5D mk III and ran through the same sequence of testing - first microAF correction (-1 for mine; -2 for loaner at 200mm) then AF consistency with 25 images in a row using center focus, mirror lockup, one shot. The Loaner 5D was perfect and had almost 50% higher resolution! (result graph below)
I am astonished, bewildered and incredibly frustrated that I had to go through the above to prove the defects in this camera. At this point, we are at three weeks of wasted time, effort and missed photo opportunities. I cannot believe that Canon Service could not find the problems I did with a $70 piece of software and some careful attention.
I respectfully ask that you review the enclosed CD with photos and files documenting the lengths I have gone to in order to get this camera to work ‘as advertised’. I will not accept this camera body to be returned to me at this point. After two visits to CPS, you’ve had your ‘chance’ to correct flaws. I ask that you replace the camera at this point with a new one. I purchased this camera new at full retail price and, at this point, have a refurbished one (and a poorly functioning one at that).
I have tried to see if I could obtain a replacement from the place of purchase but they currently report that new cameras will not arrive for 2-3 weeks thus placing me out of the window for an RMA by the time the camera is in-stock.
When a replacement is approved, please ensure that the new camera is from a recent production (so that there is no need to correct any so-called light leaks with another trip to Canon service) and please confirm that it is working to ideal specifications especially in regards to auto-focus. Also, please ensure that no dust particles are present on the sensor. At this point, I expect nothing less than a perfect Canon 5D mk III.
Given the incredible amount of time and effort spent at this thus far, I would hope that Canon would offer appropriate compensation as well in the form of complimentary extensions of my Gold membership or some other gesture of good will.
Please don’t hesitate to contact me with any questions.
Sincerely,
Eyal Oren
CPS Gold
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
I'm really sorry you got a lemon. A first-year model will have unexpected issues, and it's just unfortunate you're the one who got one (I had a first-year car once (one of the early production models, in fact) and learned this very much the hard way! However, I got fabulous care for it and because of that actually bought another of the same model 5 years later and, if they still made them (it's a Saturn Vue) would be having another one as this one starts to reach it's EOL).
To add to that, however, damaging your personal property is NOT ok. Neither is the fact that you've had to chase it like crazy and work this hard.
Good luck with it all. MAJOR drag having to mess with this after having agonized over the purchase in the first place!
"I am writing to you about an unresolved issue with the recent purchase of a Canon 5D mk III body. Its the auto focus often inaccurate.
I would like this issue to be resolved by Canon replacing it with a new Canon 5D mk III and an complimentary extension to my Gold CPS subscription for my efforts and time.
Here is the history associated with this issue and what I have done to help resolve it."
would make it more likely that Canon, i.e. the person who reads the letter, understands the issue and the what you want done to resolve it.
However there is a slight inconsistency in your resolution request. You are criticizing CPS by saying that their service is incapable of fixing your camera, but you are asking for an extension to your CPS subscription.
If it were me I would drop the request for the CPS extension and focus on the thing you really want, the replacement body. CPS gold is what. $100?
http://www.danalphotos.com
http://www.pluralsight.com
http://twitter.com/d114
My overall take in this is That Canon Failed to understand that once a Camera is sent in, someone is asking you to take on their [Cameras'] problem. Doesn't matter if it is new or an older model. That is what repair facilities do all over the World each day. Someone asks me to take their problem on, and It then becomes my job to do so if I accept the job. THE END!
After my repair, it is my job to then prove to myself that the item in question works as designed. If by chance I let the item slip out and it comes back to me, the first thing I have to do is look at what I did as the potential culprit of the return-repair-request.
Taking responsibility is a key factor. It is a reason I do Business here at SM. If I have a problem with an item, they own the problem and fix it. It's also the same way I have done business all my business life.
Canon Goofed. If it's an anomaly, great. But really, A new Camera, New on the Market, new new new! Not good.
Very complete and detailed letter not only defining the technical issues but the level of frustration you as a Canon customer are experiencing.
I hope your correspondence gets to the right person.
Keep us posted.
Sam
Secondly, I would send a pre-letter asking exactly to whom you should send this - someone who is supposed to handle such matters and is authorized to do something about it. Someone in a supervisor role. Then send this to them, not just to whom it may concern.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
There is an "email Chuck Westfall" link on this page:
http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0604/westfall.html
http://michaelnel.smugmug.com
I had found that link as well but thought there was no way it would still work having been posted in 2006. Just tried to send a brief note and will keep fingers crossed.
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos