Canon Quality Control SUCKS
It looks like everywhere you look on the Internet, you come across messages from various users complaining about their Canon photography gear. The forums at DPreview for example are filled with posts about camera bodies giving the ERR 99 error message, dying very soon after purchase, can’t focus correctly out of the box and have to be sent in for calibration etc. Similarly for their lenses, there are so many instances of lenses front or back focusing, producing soft images, misalignment, too much chromatic aberration and flare. And these are the more expensive bodies and professional L lenses! They cost a fortune. At prices between $4000 and $8000 for a professional 1D body, and prices between $1400 and $2500 for a professional L lens, you would expect the hardware to perform really well. But apparently not if it’s made by Canon.
I can’t imagine spending $8000 on a 1Ds Mark III body and notice that it doesn’t work well within a few days of getting it. And yet, this is a situation many people have found themselves in. Just search on the Internet. It’s simply incredible. And Canon seems to get away with it too.
Take the autofocus fiasco with the 1D Mark III camera for example. That is just an excellent example of the bad quality control, or the complete lack of something resembling quality control at Canon. It took them months to fix it and a complete recall of all 1D Mark III bodies sold. And then, you find out that it is still not fixed. What a mess.
With such bad quality control, it doesn’t matter what products you deliver and specs that make you look better than the competition don’t matter either. What’s the use of being the only one with a 21 megapixel camera, when it looks like more than half of them don’t function correctly out of the box? When you buy a body or lens from Canon, these days you have to pray that you get a good (enough) copy.
The 40D body doesn’t even have the micro adjust feature so you can adjust the autofocus of lenses that front or back focus slightly. So the only option you have is send the body and lenses back to Canon for calibration. In my opinion, even the consumer level DSLR has to have micro adjust capability for lenses, especially if you can’t seem to make your lenses autofocus correctly out of the box, like is the case with Canon.
And now they are rumored to be working on the 5D mark II body. If that body doesn’t have as much focus points as the Nikon D3/300 (or very close), if it doesn’t have micro adjust for lenses and if it doesn’t have weather sealing comparable to the 1D bodies, they don’t have to release it at all in my opinion. Because Nikon is going to be a much better alternative, as it already is right now. Weather sealing on the Canon EOS 40D is laughable. It’s incredible that Canon even claims that the 40D body is weather sealed. That is simply a big lie.
Canon needs to get their act together ASAP in order not to further damage their reputation, or what remains of it at this point.
Update: Also, do NOT buy the Canon UV Haze Filters. Save your money. They claim that it prevents haziness, but forget to tell you that it also causes some really beautiful internal reflections in high contrast situations and bright light. In certain situations it also causes loss of contrast in images. Totally unacceptable. And this even when used with L lenses. Most people claim to buy them to protect their lenses, but protecting your lenses can’t happen at the expense of image quality. To this day I wonder why Canon even sells them.
Update 2: Just in case you think I have something against Canon, you should know that I currently own close to $20,000 worth of Canon photography gear. I do however think that they should deliver more quality than they currently do.
Update 3: I also forgot to mention the many instances of camera bodies arriving with dirt, dust and even oil on the sensor or in the mirror box. I actually had one 40D myself that arrived with a big black piece of dirt on the sensor. Way to go Canon!
Update 4 (April, 21 2008): Photographer Lloyd Chambers posted a comment below that is certainly worth reading. The link he provides is further evidence that you cannot seem to trust lenses from Canon and even Nikon these days (Also check this related thread on DPReview.) I like his conclusion:
Don’t assume that your brand-new lens (or one you’ve banged around) is optically good. Test it and see for yourself. Today’s modern lens designs are outstanding, but real lenses must be manufactured and transported, offering many possibilities for theoretical performance to drop considerably.
If you find that your new lens is optically out of whack, you might be able to exchange it for another copy—one good reason to work with a reputable vendor. Or you can send it in for service, which nearly always resolves the problem (in the author’s experience). Both approaches require retesting the lens; there is no guarantee with either approach. The risk in sending it in for service is exceeding the return period of the vendor. Be sure to be as specific as possible about the problem, including photographs that show it clearly. This will help ensure that the problem is fixed.
Lloyd also sent along some more interesting links:
And here’s his take on the Canon 16-35mm f2.8L II:
In my view, images from the 16-35 II which have not been corrected for color fringing are unacceptable at 16mm, at least with some subjects, such as the white birches in the test image. I am sorely disappointed at Canon’s assertion that chromatic aberration has been “virtually eliminated”. The claim is so much at odds with the rendered images that one can only marvel at Canon’s brazenness. While we can’t expect too much from an ultra-wide zoom lens, we can expect realistic assessments of imaging performance from the manufacturer.
Owning a copy of that lens myself, I can only confirm this, and I was equally surprised when I saw the first results when using the lens. Finally, I want to add that this part of Lloyd’s comment below:
I would estimate based on my own experience that somewhere between 30-50% of brand new pro-grade lenses have at least mild optical issues, and some, like the 70-200/4 have moderate to severe ones-. Fortunately, in most cases these are correctable with a trip to the service center.
roughly matches with what I’ve seen so far online. Lloyd gives some good tips in this article for when you purchase a new lens.
This entry was posted
on Saturday, April 19th, 2008 at 8:39 am by Karel Donk
and is filed under 
April 19th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
You are a sad case! no facts lot of utter crap you write.
April 19th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Unfortunatly there is no substantive fact in this post. I can understand being upset after a hardware failure, but turning that into inherent brand flaws is silly.
April 19th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
I have provided some links. Check them out. Use Google. Test your own equipment just to be sure.
April 19th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Links are not facts. You give no hard numbers of any kind, and assume the provided links are reliable. I know how to use google, and my equipment is fine. Its obvious you have some kind of predisposition to your view, what you need are some kind of facts to back it up.
April 19th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Galbraight’s link is not a fact? Dude, don’t make yourself look stupid.
April 19th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
You missed my point, obviously in that particular case there was a substantiated problem. How many of the others can you verify as well? I did not say “non of your links contain anything factual” I said “links are not facts”. I still don’t see any verifiable numbers I.E. facts to back up your stated quality assurance problem after 2 updates, which would imply you have none. If you are going to malign someone or something, at least have the wherewithal to do it correctly. Now how happy would you be if say, canon were to sue you for slander?
April 19th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
So first, “links are not facts” but then “obviously in that particular case there was a substantiated problem” ?
I don’t have numbers. What IS clear is that a good number of users are having issues from those links and many more around the Internet. And the info on those links is enough to back up my claims.
April 19th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
*sigh* can you not see the difference between linking to everything in your article and providing facts in the article? Let me be more concise so you understand what I mean, You have provided no facts in your article, you have at best linked to other pages which may or may not be factual, which is not the same thing.
I know you don’t have numbers. “a good number’ means nothing. “having issues” means nothing. Without verifiable *facts* you have no argument, just links to other peoples web pages. I understand that you are entitled to your opinion, but I am also entitled to tell you it is woefully circumstantial.
You also make no mention of other manufacturers QC, who are you comparing canon to to say they suck? Or are you just basing the level of suckage on your own expectations?
April 19th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
As far as the info on the links not being factual, I doubt people are going to lie about the issues they are having with their equipment. I am also not comparing Canon to anyone else with regards to their quality control. Even if, for example, Nikon was as bad or worse, it doesn’t justify Canon releasing products that don’t work well out of the box.
When I buy a product, I don’t want to have to send it back to a Canon service center within days of having it. It is nice that they offer that service and warranty, but looking at so many people having issues, it begins to look like they have no choice but to have those service centers because they know they have to somehow fix the crap they sell to people.
April 19th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
I’ve used Canon 35mm film gear for many years and I’m about to plunk down some money to replace my Canon T90 with DSLR. I really want to buy a Canon, probably a 40D. But I’m finding the sheer number of users reporting defective gear very concerning. The forums on sites like dpreview.com are loaded with posts from people with cameras and lenses that were DOA, failed shortly after purchase, or had to be sent to the factory for repairs or calibration before they could be used.
Oddly, most of the forums also have plenty of posts from people like Badtz Maru above, who flame anyone who mentions a problem and who claim all reports of problems are non-factual or not statistically valid in some way or other. One argument runs that satisfied customers never post to online forums but dissatisfied customers do, so for every 100 posts about defective cameras there may be 1000 satisfied customers who didn’t post anything — maybe, but I’m not sure I totally buy that argument.
Anyway, I’ll probably end up buying a Canon despite their QC problems, simply based on my many years of good experiences with Canon cameras. But if my new equipment turns out to be defective, that may be enough to make me switch to another brand.
April 19th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
This is true:
I noticed the exact same thing over a period of 9 months so far, and I have experienced it first hand as well. The best thing you can do is go to a shop where they sell the equipment and ask to test everything right there. Bring focus charts with you and test every focal length/aperture setting, should be razor sharp. In the first few days also give it some extensive use just to be sure. If it doesn’t work well, return it immediately.
And as for the argument “satisfied customers never post to online forums but dissatisfied customers do, so for every 100 posts about defective cameras there may be 1000 satisfied customers who didn’t post anything”:
This can also be used differently. How many people are having issues but do NOT post about it at all because they don’t know they are having issues? Remember, the lens focus issues and calibration issues and stuff like that are not going to be noticed by everyone. Most people will think it’s their fault, or will be satisfied with soft pictures, not knowing better.
April 19th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
What is your point? Quality control? Why are you complaining about the feature of the 5D mark II? The camera is not even announced yet. Bullshit!!! Don’t ever waste my time like this again.
April 19th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
He’s right when it comes to Canon and lack of QC.
Bought a S1, broke 18 months after purchase. Flash does not fire. SInce I bought the underwater housing I bought a refurb model of the S1. Now the flash sticks. Also I noticed that the first S1 I purchased and still currently use ( no flash photography) I find on some occasions on startup I see a black rolling screen I need to turn off the unit and it goes away. Now my S3 I bought. On some rare occasion I find that the flash will not fire. It’s only happened twice. It’s over a year now. I also have a Rebel XT. It does front/back focus at times. So if you want proof of poor quality control. I am living proof of Canon’s lack of quality control. But yet I foolishly buy. I am no fan of product names, I just think there all the same and I can’t figure out which company has the worst QC.
April 19th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
I agree with you, but not entirely. I bought a brand new EF 17-40L lens and it was defective. On a cropped sensor body, the left 20% of the frame at 17mm was ‘blurred’ in every shot I took with the lens. As this was a replacement for the 18-55EF-S lens which was the most horrible lens I ever used (still can’t get over its focussing errors), I lost all faith in Canon SLR equipment and sold it. Am switching to Nikon.
I am, however, a HUGE fan of Canon compacts.
April 19th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
I would be surprised if you owned one of the cameras you are bashing,you pathetic fool.
Every piece of Canon equipment I’ved has performed perfectly,without flaw,100% reliable and never let me down.
From a 20D,40D,Eos3 and now my 1Ds mark2,including lenses and flash system.All of them worked perfectly,I must be lucky,or you might just be a complete idiot
You say the 40D sealing is a joke? Why,did it fail your bathtub photography test? Get a life man,seriously.
$20,000 in Canon equipment? I doubt you even have a rebel,or a camera to begin with.
*snort* Loser.
April 19th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
I am glad someone finally speaks up for these canon problem, their exposure and white balance also suck, ultra blowout highlight and hot yellow wb when shot indoor
April 19th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Get a life ! Go out and learn how to make some pictures. Why buy 20.000 $ of equipment, and ONLY then realize that it is all crap?? Did you buy 20.000 $ for ONE camera only.. no surely not, so you have kept on buying it, knowing it is all crap.. stupid if you ask me .. but anyway.. enjoy life . if you still can
April 20th, 2008 at 12:08 am
I see the camera company buttkissers are out in force. Probably sent their little army of liars over here from dpreview. Who pays you people to spout propaganda like this in service of a corporation? Surely no one would be so monstrously stupid as to do this of their own accord.
April 20th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
dude i’ve been reading DPREVIEW forums for years (including the Canon SLR Lens, Rebel/XT/XTi…, and 10/20/30/40D forums) and i have no idea what you are talking about when you say they are “loaded” with posts of people complaining about faulty camera gear.
i also think it’s a little funny that you ramble on about a “good number of people” and provide links to other people complaining about having faulty camera equipment but you don’t make any mention of the quality of your own camera gear. have YOU personally ever had a problem with canon gear? it sounds like you are just reading random, completely unsubstantiated claims by people on the internet and getting outraged at…. nothing?
April 20th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Thanks for being brave enough to write about Canon’s flaws. I’ve owned Canon equipment for close to 20 years but I’ve had enough. There are other options out there.
April 21st, 2008 at 2:30 am
not much people know one of Canon’s focus secret, in the film old day when they created the eos 1, they used CCD based auto focus system, that sit under the mirror, they use this system for many years, but they started using cmos based auto focus system after eos 3, after that their auto focus system is all up side down, all their auto focus is sometime good and sometime bad, but most people don’t see it since everyone need is 4X6″ small photos, after the Canon created their first DSLR D30, lot of people complained bad focus, the reason is Canon carried this cmos based system from eos 3, although they keep improve this cmos based focus system, they are still far behind their old eos 1 and nothing come close to nikon, since nikon still use CCD base auto focused system
April 21st, 2008 at 2:37 am
You have made very broad based claims against a manufacturer with no statistical information to support these. Rarely does one see “I’m happy” posts for any product in forums, whether it is photography related or not. Reading forums hardly qualifies as sufficient research to make a blog entry as you did. What percentage of users have what problems?
The Google search query you set up as a link in this blog can easily be changed to search for “Nikon problems”, or for those of any other manufacturer. The Nikon variation returns many, many pages of hits. There is no sense in quantifying these either as statistically they not relevant. This only points out that you have a biased view, and are attempting to prove it based on inaccurate data.
Your statement that the forums at DPR are “filled” with various complaints is incorrect. There are complaints, but no more than those in the Nikon forums. Your leading problem, ERR 99, can be caused by numerous problems, some the responsibility of Canon and others by 3rd party accessories that do not work or work well with camera body, e.g. flashes, lenses, etc. Some of causes require routine user maintenance, e.g. cleaning the contacts on a lens.
You clearly do not have the education, training or experience in math, statistics or quality control.
Based on the information you published about yourself on your website, you admit that you have only 3 years experience in photography, in spite of the $20K in equipment you claim to own. It appears you have spent a lot of time collecting equipment, and not enough time learning photography, the equipment, or how to use it.
I have no issue calling any manufacturer to task when they under deliver. This blog, and your attempts to defend your position, however, does more of a disservice and removes your credibility. Yesterday one of your threads related to this on DPR was removed.
I suggest you delete this blog entry, let the whole thing pass into internet oblivion, and rethink your approach to influencing a meaningful and effective improvement where you think it is required. Throwing mud at a wall, and hoping some sticks, is just not effective.
April 21st, 2008 at 2:39 am
*** to Leon ***
hello, the reason why it is perfect to someone and bad to others, it is depend on how picky you are, for some people slighty blur is acceptable, but some people want pre-press quality.
I have a friend he use the famous out of focus 1dm3, he told me he has no focus problem so far, so I asked him to send me a few full res pic for my enjoyment, he did, guess what all his shoot were slighty out of focus even on bright sunny day, I later found out that he never view his shoot 100% he only view them fit on screen, so he never see the problem.
April 21st, 2008 at 4:04 am
ill:
Just follow the search link in my post and see the results. Here’s just an example, notice how many people are replying to say they had issues and sent the camera and lenses back:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1019&thread=27602928
I mentioned experiencing issues first hand, and so I am also basing this on my own experience. I’ve had a 40D body die within 2 days of minimal use with ERR 06, 40D body arriving with black dirt on the sensor, focus issues with at least 2 L lenses, and have yet to check others.
Doug:
Obviously I can’t provide hard numbers, because I simply do not have access to all that data. I have experienced issues myself, and have noticed many others having the same issues and posting about it online. Many have the issues but don’t even realize it, as osxholunman writes above, and I have said! Look at my response below.
As I have stated, my goal is not to see who is better here. It doesn’t matter if Nikon is just as bad or worse, because in my opinion, Canon is pretty bad already and needs to fix stuff. You can’t say “oh Nikon is just as bad so it’s normal”.
LOL. Look for them, it’s easy to find.
osxholunman:
This is a great example, and is also in line with my own experiences. This is why I said that apart from the people posting about issues, I suspect there are many more out there who have issues but don’t post about it, but even more that have issues and don’t know they have them! The issues I had myself with front/back focus, were such that if you didn’t look at the image at pixel level, you would think you have a sharp image. Looking at pixel level shows how soft is and that the focus is off. And for a pro, this is unacceptable. Even as a normal user I would not find this acceptable because I know it can and should be much better and there are good alternatives out there. Hell, you don’t have to look at alternatives because Canon should just put more effort into testing the lenses before they ship them. When their products work, they are excellent, it’s just that it seems that you have to be lucky these days to get a working one out of the box.
Here’s an example: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1019&thread=27599522
April 21st, 2008 at 10:56 am
I’ve had extensive experience with Nikon and Canon, having used 80 or so AF lenses in total from both vendors, including most of the “L” line from Canon and AF-S line from Nikon. My most recent issue was with the Canon EF 70-200 f/4L IS which I’ve written up here at http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/free/BrandNewBlur/index.html .
Unfortunately, that experience is not unusual for either Nikon or Canon, and my blog contains other experiences over the years (but not all). I’ve had similar experiences with the Nikon 12-24DX, 17-55DX, 17-35 AF-S and others, the Canon 24-70/2.8L (two samples), 16-35/2.8L (two samples) and others. I would estimate based on my own experience that somewhere between 30-50% of brand new pro-grade lenses have at least mild optical issues, and some, like the 70-200/4 have moderate to severe ones-. Fortunately, in most cases these are correctable with a trip to the service center.
Quality control costs money. Companies price their products based on a number of factors, but QC is a major cost–this is a major reason why a Leica lens costs 3-5X a Canon or Nikon one–you can expect the lens will perform according to specs, with a very very low failure rate.
The other dirty little secret is that the exotic lenses we see today like the Nikon 12-24DX require extremely high precision for their optical designs to be realized (a tiny error on a 100mm lens is very very different than the same error on a 12mm lens). That is the bottom line: Nikon and Canon have superb optical designs, but realizing them requires exacting precision during assembly, and both vendors have clearly opted for low success rates to keep the selling price low.
Solutions: (1) buy 2-3 samples and keep only the best one (in my experience in virtually every case, testing will show differences among multiple samples!), (2) buy used from a trusted party who vouches for the lens, (3) resign yourself to the 4-5 hours it takes to really check a lens out, and to the 3-4 week delay in having the Canon or Nikon service center fix the problem (one trip might not suffice).
April 21st, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Karel,
I commented:
“Your statement that the forums at DPR are “filled” with various complaints is incorrect.”
To which you replied:
“LOL. Look for them, it’s easy to find.”
I don’t consider your reply meaningful. Out of curiosity I checked the 40D/+ forum, as of a few minutes ago and there was 1 complaint on the first page. There is a long thread in which the OP asked if users have problems, the replies indicate positive experiences. I also checked the Canon SLR lens forum, there was 1 complaint about a 3rd party lens.
I suggest you look up the word “filled” in the dictionary of your choice, your usage is incorrect.
Lloyd Chambers’ experiences with the 2 major manufacturers correctly reflect the costs associated with higher assurances of quality IMO, and this is not limited to photography equipment. What still remains, however, is a user’s expectations and satisfaction threshold. This will vary from user to user, and a lens that does not meet a manufacturer’s theoretical MTF data does not necessarily mean it is bad or there is a QC problem.
Manufacturers target groups of customers, establish both performance criteria and the maximum permissible levels of failures. If a camera or lens does not exceed its maximum allowable failure rate, it is considered acceptable.
In a non-photography industry, we manufactured scientific instruments that were used by both businesses and periodically by NASA. Instruments that were to fly on the space shuttle as part of specific missions required the highest level of reliability, and cost significantly more to manufacture to guarantee reliability. Few businesses would agree to pay the higher costs required to ensure very low initial failure and very high mean time between failure rates.
This blog entry, and the DPR thread, are quickly becoming defused from a one manufacturer sucks perspective.
April 21st, 2008 at 5:17 pm
I agree, here’s my horror story.
Early Jan I purchased a new 70-200 2.8 IS from B&H, lens date code Dec/07. After experimenting with it I found it to be soft (I have a 28-135 kit lens which is sharper) so it was sent in to Canon for re-calibration.
Two weeks later it returned with the following work done to it;
“Replaced EMD/IS lens ass’y, zoom unit, 2nd/3rd group lens ass’y, barrel, & other. Checked all, adjusted center/tilt/focus & cleaned factory specs”. It’s been gutted and everything replaced!
After experimenting with it (focusing chart) I noticed that it now back focuses. Needless to say it was returned (overnight shipping ). A week had pasted and I had not heard anything so I called. I was told they need my body as well, I explained the back focusing issue is the same on two different bodies I have, they told me to send in BOTH bodies.
I sent in my 40D to have the lens calibrated to it. Lens was received back with the following repair; “Replaced lens mount, mount rubber & Collars”
The first thing I noticed upon receiving the lens and body back was that the zoom collar on the lens was extremely loose, so loose that if the lens was pointed up or down the weight of the lens elements would cause the ring to rotate by itself.
This time I was told to return the lens to the California service center where it was again serviced and returned with the following repair;
“It was found that the mechanical chassis was loose causing the zoom ring to catch. The mechanical chassis was replaced.”
Upon receipt, the lens was again tested and found to be back focusing. At this point I demanded a new replacement lens. The troubled lens was returned and a replacement set to me. It is performing fine to date.
Unbelievably poor service which took a over THREE months and countless calls to resolve.
Buyer BEWARE!
April 21st, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Doug,
My google search link brings up enough threads, not just one that you claim to have seen on only the first page of the forum.
Also you say:
As if your goal is to just make sure it’s not just Canon that appears to have bad QC. As I have said from the beginning in my comments, I don’t care if Nikon or anyone else has the same bad QC. It doesn’t make Canon or them better. In that case they all need to work on improving quality because as it is now, in my opinion, it is not acceptable. If you cannot manufacture a working lens at a retail price of $2000 without issues, then why do it and fool everyone into buying it? I never read anything form Canon telling me that they scaled down their QC and have a ~50% failure rate so they could make me afford the lens. Instead they boast about their products. Just read a Canon press release.
And so when I put down my $2000, I expect to get a good working product! Like the guy in this thread http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1019&thread=27599522
April 22nd, 2008 at 11:36 pm
I haven’t seen any data that reflects a 50% failure rate by any manufacturer for any product, and neither have you. I am not an advocate of Canon, although I shoot with their gear. These are nothing more tools. Your comments are nothing more than silly, hyped rhetoric.
You may have noticed all of your threads and posts on DPR for the last 3 weeks have been deleted. And before you begin, I doubt this is a conspiracy either against you or in support of canon by DPR.
You need gain a sense of reality and perspective.
April 23rd, 2008 at 5:24 am
Doug,
You haven’t seen any data because apparently you want to ignore it. Look at Lloyd Chamber’s comments, that is exactly what I have seen with others according to their comments. Canon QC is in a sad state, and as some here have said, nobody seems to have the guts to speak up about it.
I indeed noticed my threads have been deleted on DPR. It should be clear to others why that was done.
Meanwhile, posts keep popping up, here’s the latest:
ERR 99 thing is scaring me off
40D front focus
40D Focusing issues
Focus accuracy improved
Read comments in those threads from others mentioning also having (had) issues. And these are just on the first page of the forum at the time of writing this. Dig deeper and see how many more you find!
April 23rd, 2008 at 6:57 pm
It is clear that the definitions of “filled”, and 50% are lost on you. One does not have to “dig deep” to ascertain if a forum is “filled” with threads pertaining to particular subject matter. One does not need Google for this, simply scan the forums, I challenge you to do this. Further, the figure of 50% for the failure rate you simply invented and can not back this with data.
I don’t really care who the manufacturer is, you are simply wrong with your exaggerated claims. You site Lloyd Chamber’s comments to support your position relative to Canon. However, you choose to ignore the sections of his statement in which he indicates several manufacturers are the same with respect to the noted product issues, or the implication of you get what you pay for using Leica as a benchmark.
Adding a few more posts hardly supports your 50% claim. Further, I suggest you read the threads that you reference, these hardly work in your favor.
We all have the simple option of purchasing from the manufacturer of our choice. Leica might be a better choice for you and others that are dissatisfied with either C or N.
April 24th, 2008 at 5:35 am
Sorry Doug, but you can’t deny there are noumerous posts with issues. The Google search clearly shows this.
Please read my previous comment again.
April 25th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Another day, more posts with issues:
40D + 24-105L soft images
Canon 40D good and bad
40 D and error messages and Canon Repair Center Irvine CA
Do you need more help Doug? Will you open your eyes now and notice the problems? How about the repair center horror stories? Even Lloyd Chambers said one trip might not be enough, and indeed, the forums are also filled with posts form users mentioning having to send in their equipment multiple times.
April 26th, 2008 at 8:15 am
And yet another day, more posts with issues:
40D Sensor Focus Adjust?
Four Canon Items – Five Focus Problems
Mark III back to canon…
Yikes – Mark III body falls off of lens
Any comments, Doug?
April 27th, 2008 at 8:34 am
New day = More posts with issues:
40D lockup problem?
Help please: 40D focus and calibration problem…
the moment is to buy the mk III
No Lens or Camera problems – what’s wrong?
I like the first post of the last thread. Here’s a quote:
Looks like I am not the only one who noticed. So Doug, are you going to say something?
May 26th, 2008 at 12:31 am
Just in case any of you Canon fans have thought about running to Nikon to circumvent your problems, I will save you the trouble and suggest you save your money. I own a D70s and 13mo after purchase I ran into the infamous Nikon “CHA” issue (Google it). This problem runs the gammut through all the Nikon DSLR models from the least expensive to the high-end. Put simply, the problem appears as “CHA” on your LCD readout and causes problems with everything from your flash not firing, memory card not working, and/or your entire camera failing. I’ve had my D70s serviced twice now for the same problem (recurred 6 mos after first fix) and this led me to research Canon DSLR’s in consideration of making the brand switch. Now after reading Karels’ problems with Canon – I’m unsure what to do!
August 3rd, 2008 at 5:16 pm
I have experienced similar results with canon quality. I have just purchased a 70-200 f/4L and it consistently has rear focus issues on my 40D, and also is very soft at 200mm and minimum focus distance. I am very unimpressed with Canon QC myself.
March 18th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
this “error 99″ issue that many Canon users seem to face has prompted me to leave Canon and go else where (I am stuck between Olympus, Sony and Nikon). Wake up people, Canon has a serious quality control issue, no one should ever accept this “error 99″.
“Shooting is not possible” could canon give us explanation why? Canon should give us a honest message like this:
“Shooting is not possible, we screwed up big time, we made you miss a fantastic shot, send this Camera for repairs so we can screw you some more. If you’re out of warranty then you’re truly and royally screwed, and we will charge you the same price for a new camera to send it back to you un-repaired. You’re better off buying a new Canon camera so you can face this vicious “error 99″ cycle again.”
I had it with Canon.
May 25th, 2009 at 11:37 am
Canon fanboys use certain tactics when the integrity of their equipment or their deity (Canon) is put into question. I have compiled a list of the most common apologetics and accusations:
- you don’t know how to use your equipment.
- error 99′s are a normal feature.
- Nikon have errors as well, so it’s normal for Canon to have them.
- there is nothing wrong with the auto focusing system, it’s your fault.
- quality control costs money.
- it’s normal to recalibrate your lenses, even from a “L” range lens.
- lens hood are additional accessory and should be sold separately.
as we can see, circular reasoning and lying is a trait of the Canon fanboys and of Canon executive.
what I find most insulting is that a once great leader in photography will sell faulty DSLR cameras in exchange for your hard earned cash. Canon are seriously taking you for a bunch of fools, wake up people, there are alternatives.
November 6th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
I find the tone of some of the replies here, unnecessary rude towards Karel
I for one am glad I found this blog. All Karel is doing is, in my opinion is warning people to spend their hard earned cash on low quality mass produced stuff by canon or nikon, or any other brand. That’s the bottom line, for me.
again, HARD EARNED money. And I for one don’t want to hand it over to a bunch of execs worried more about the bottom line, and how to increase share holder value, at the cost of quality control, … then customer satisfaction, … When I hand over 1500 or 2000 EUR to someone I expect something of quality in return, and something that delivers on it’s promise.
I guess this is all just a logical result of the transformation of society, corporations and business philosophy. Examples of the rise of “the low cost society” Affordable, mass produced, disposable goods for the people.
I’d like to know if people had these issues with canon, nikon lenses, bodies, … 20 – 30 years ago, when reputation, quality was still important, critical to business.
I bet revenue & profits of canon, nikon have exploded this last decade. due to a number of factors at which I can only hint at, but won’t. Sad that there’s isn’t more reaction from customers, but maybe most of them indeed don’t know, or aren’t well informed about these issues. I wonder what would be a good way to put pressure on a company like canon to improve their quality.
I’m buying a hand-made, Swiss Arca, that way I’m sure I get value for money!
May 13th, 2010 at 2:52 am
finally… someone speaking the truth !! well all i can share with you is that my experience with canon’s film is good and never bad… but when the digital era showed up, im totally (read again TOTALLY) dissapointed at canon.
not becoz of IQ, but becoz of QC just as karel says… and strangely some early post above is mad when someone pointed out (or sharing more likely…) their opinion (or experiences) when all along its true.
sure, there are non faulty canon dslr… lots of ‘em. but you have to accept the fact (even without backup link karel provided) that there are the faulty one. Now even nikon have them as well, just look at charles nibbana post… a faulty d70, while my d70 works damn well for 6 years and never showed the famous CHA or BGLOD (ask google). the only faulty i had was with my recently purchased tamron 17-50 f2.8.
The problem was that if i took picture with the tammy, it wont record the data to the CF correctly (half of the pic’s are blank, sometimes only jpeg data but cant be shown) and that’s about it. I solve it just by re-attaching the lenses. Of course it hinders my work and i already decided to upgrade anyway so its still not a problem (remember… 6 years old body being banged around).
ok back to the stupid QC i think some of the people here who (clearly) dont like what karel says think that he is bashing canon’s product while what he is mad at was canon’s QC (is there any bigger fonts?)
peace out
June 3rd, 2010 at 11:50 am
I have been a serious semi-pro photographer for over 35 years. Starting in 1974 I shot with Olympus OM 1 & 2 Series SLR film cameras and 10 prime Olympus Zuiko lenses from 18mm to 300mm, and Macro. Wonderful equipment, not one (1) item requiring exchange and replacement due to performance issues.
I moved to the Canon Digital Rebel (300D) in 2004 only to find the 18-50mm kit lens was soft on all focal lengths on the left side. Canon Repair Depot in Jamesburg, NJ fixed it under warranty. Then I discovered the 300D body viewfinder image was off center and slightly tilted, causing framing errors. Canon Depot claimed it was within tolerances and declined to repair. OK, it’s the lowest end DSLR body Canon has ever manufactured, but give me a break!
I have since purchased a 5D MKII body, 17-40mm F4 L, and 70-210mm F4 L lenses, with no problems. But I recently purchased a 24mm F3.5 TS-E II lens ($2,199!) only to discover my 5D MKII body has a misaligned lens mount causing the left side of the image to be soft with this expensive shift lens. There appears to be an issue with this lens on my 5D MKII body, causing the focus plane to be tilted with all lens adjustments on ZERO. Ironic, since this is a “Tilt & Shift” lens.
Critical review at 100% of images shot on the 5D MKII with my other lenses shows this same “tilted” focus plane, to a lesser degree, with the left side of all images focusing at a closer point than the center. This is an obvious “compound issue” due to assembly defects with BOTH the expensive 5D MKII body ($2,699) and this VERY EXPENSIVE 24mm TS-E MKII lens!
The 24mm TS-E lens goes back to B&H for replacement and the 5D MKII body to Canon’s Repair Depot, thankfully still under warranty!
For you “Non-Believers” – Call it what you like, but from my 35-year perspective on professional camera equipment – CANON CAN DO WAY BETTER!
BTW- I am a B.S.E.E. and 40-year veteran of the computer technology manufacturing industry.