February 01, 2015, 04:33:46 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - R1-7D

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 21
16
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II Raw Processing
« on: November 16, 2014, 11:44:37 AM »
   I have, for the moment, switched back to Aperture for post processing.  If Apple had not announced that they have stopped further development of Aperture I might make it a permanent switch back,  sigh. 

Sample RAW image from 7D Mark II processed in Aperture:



I feel the same way. Aperture was my main editing software; now LightRoom is. Apple has literally given up on their professional software and computers (the new Mac Pro is a joke). I'd be extremely cautious to invest in anymore of their expensive software, like Final Cut.

17
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X REPAIR HELP URGENT
« on: November 15, 2014, 01:06:30 PM »
seemingly helpless and apathetic.

It sort of a no-win situation.  For many reasons, this being one of the biggies, I prefer to perform my own repairs, service, etc whenever possible.  But fixing my $3500 DSLR isn't something I really want to do if others are more experienced and good at it.

Good luck getting your camera back ASAP and working like new again!

I feel exactly the same way. Car, motorcycles, computers...I'll fix em' all myself! Changing a pentaprism and making sure everything is in alignment is not something I can easily do without the right know-how and tools, unfortunately. And of course, when I do have to depend on someone else's work I'm immediately disappointed. Such is life, I guess.

I will say that the CPS representative I'm speaking to on the phone is a very nice lady. She tries very hard to listen and understand the problem.

18
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X REPAIR HELP URGENT
« on: November 15, 2014, 01:03:23 PM »
The pent prism assembly is likely the part.  I'd say it includes the transmissive screen, which may not be replaceable as a individual part.
 
That's why the service rep can't find it in the parts list.
 
The tech will obviously know what you are seeing, the issue is in getting the problem to him.
 
Sometimes its better to just describe the problem rather than trying to tell them which part is the issue.  The fix may be to move the AF sensor in the bottom of the camera to line up better with the LCD.

Perhaps you're right - I gave too much detail. However, I thought that it would be wise on my part to give all the details simply from reading other threads where people experienced similar issues; Canon gave them the runaround on not being able to find the part too. In one thread I saw the person said that when they change the pentaprism aligning the Transmissive LCD is not something they normally bother doing. My hope was that by giving the name of the exact part and a detailed description they'd be able to sort it all out with little to no problems.

I've sent the link Neuro provided as well as relayed what you've mention in this thread - that the Transmissive LCD is likely part of the pentaprism unit as a whole. Thanks for the help.

We'll see on Monday what happens, I guess. If they can't fix it I'm selling this camera. It's honestly been nothing but headaches since I bought it. I inclined to believe I got a lemon in some regards, and Canon technicians can never fix something to match factory specifications.

19
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X REPAIR HELP URGENT
« on: November 14, 2014, 08:09:46 PM »
"we don't have anything remotely going by the name "transmissive lcd" in the photography world...

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/infobank/digital_camera_features/transmissive_lcd_viewfinders.do

Thanks again for your help Neuro. I will be forwarding the link.


Judging by my past experience with Canon Canada, and how this is going so far, I don't expect an easy resolution.

20
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Gold-trimmed Nikon DF - good, bad, ugly?
« on: November 14, 2014, 07:01:53 PM »
Hey look, someone successfully polished a turd!

21
EOS Bodies - For Stills / 1D X REPAIR HELP URGENT
« on: November 14, 2014, 06:43:47 PM »
I've sent my 1DX into to Canon because the focus points/screen in the viewfinder are misaligned from the actual AF points.

Reading these threads on CR, it appears that I have a misaligned Transmissive LCD:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21897.0

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=14854.0

I wrote a detailed letter indicating to Canon what the problem is and that the Transmissive LCD needs adjusting, showing both a diagram of the focus point misalignment as well as pictures of the focus points in LiveView and the ViewFinder not aligning.

I received the following email from Canon:

"we don't have anything remotely going by the name "transmissive lcd" in the photography world, I have to give the tech more descriptive information that we are used to using here. I googled "transmissive lcd" to find out what it is you had in mind, and the closest thing that comes to that is the focusing screen that you see through the viewfinder.  Built into that screen is what we consider an "SI Plate" (Super impose) which is what you are seeing when the red lights appear to show you where your focusing point is.

I have adjusted the notes to the tech, but I am also including a schematic I would like you to take a look at.  It is a break down of the inside of the camera showing the viewfinder assembly (pentaprism) and the placement of the focusing screen.  If you would like me to add more details, I would really appreciate it if you could reference what you are seeing in this diagram, it would be beyond helpful.
"


If Canon doesn't know what the Transmissive LCD is, then going by the camera schematic attached, what can I tell them to adjust?

22
You know what would be the best way for Canon to really demonstrate commitment to customer support? If they could get their service centers to stop sucking.

The service center here in Canada has made my decision to purchase a 1DX a huge mistake. I'm now dealing with a replaced pentaprism filling with debris and a misaligned transmissive lcd because of them.

23
I am using the iPhone 6 Plus. I only occasionally take photos with the camera, preferring to use my Fuji X20 if I need something portable. If I ever shoot videos, which is hardly ever, I almost exclusively use my iPhone. The new 240 FPS slow mo is really cool.

I will say that the new sensor in the iPhone 6 is pretty damn good for a phone camera. I just find it hard to go to it after being spoiled by larger sensor cameras.

24
Site Information / Re: Canon Rumors Site & iOS 8 Issues
« on: September 24, 2014, 05:17:45 PM »
iOS 8 has a ton of bugs. I have been using it for most of the summer through my Developer Account. There were actually very few betas for this release...makes me wonder if they wanted to just get it out in time for the new phones.

Either way, Wifi is slow or doesn't connect, apps crash like crazy, and battery performance is a mess. Location Services keeps running in the background for system services too, which is strange.

iOS 8.0.1 which was released today is a mess too. The over-the-air update through the phone or iPad system preferences caused the devices to drop cellular reception and Touch ID capabilities.

Is there any way of re loading the previous iOS ?

Yes, there's three ways of fixing the issue:

1) I believe Apple is still pushing iOS 8.0.0 through iTunes. So, if you've updated to the newest version through Over The Air, then you can connect to your phone and have it restored to the old version.

2) You can manually download the 8.0.1 IPSW file from another source online. Check www.MacRumors.com in the iPhone forums for download links.

3) Similar to step 2. Find an iOS 7 IPSW file and restore through iTunes using the Option + Restore method.

25
Site Information / Re: Canon Rumors Site & iOS 8 Issues
« on: September 24, 2014, 05:11:06 PM »
iOS 8 has a ton of bugs. I have been using it for most of the summer through my Developer Account. There were actually very few betas for this release...makes me wonder if they wanted to just get it out in time for the new phones.

Either way, Wifi is slow or doesn't connect, apps crash like crazy, and battery performance is a mess. Location Services keeps running in the background for system services too, which is strange.

iOS 8.0.1, which was released today, is a mess too. The over-the-air update through the phone or iPad system preferences caused the devices to drop cellular reception and Touch ID capabilities.

26
R1-7D, reading through this reminded me of a previous thread

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=17619.0

maybe worth a read if you haven't already

regards

Zim,

Thank you for the link. I had not seen that thread. I'm somewhat at a loss over this... It's beginning to look more and more like a design flaw issue Canon is aware of but wants to do nothing about. I'm sure it's not got the traction the Nikon D600 had simply because it's a less common camera, costing three times as much.


Does anyone remember the leaks of Canon documents outlining known defects in their products they weren't going to do anything about from earlier this year? I'm beginning to wish Canon Rumors posted more of those leaks... I have a sneaky suspicion the debris in the viewfinder issue I am, and a lot of others, are experiencing would be in one of those documents.

27
Hi Folks.
If I may attempt to add my interpretation, I think where this is going is that the quality of the OP's 1DX with respect to dust in the viewfinder falls short of the quality experienced in previous cameras from the same supplier namely Canon used in the same manner by the same user, the original poster.
I would be peeved to have a pro camera body multiple times the cost of a previous body fill up with crud internally if I had not experienced the same issue from the cheaper camera used the same way!
I have to say that I would be extremely concerned at where this material was coming from, if it is not getting it in when lenses are changed (accepting the similar use would have allowed the same amount of crud in to a previous body) is some part of the internal mechanism eating itself?
Was the previous body better internally sealed at a lower price point?
I fully sympathise with the OP regarding this situation, especially having it returned with a fingerprint and a mechanical issue that was not present before!

Cheers, Graham.

Hi Graham,

Thank you for your response and taking the time to go through this thread. I also appreciate the support.

You pretty much covered the gist of it, and yes, absolutely, the thought that something could be wearing inside of the camera has definitely crossed my mind. I don't know if what I'm seeing is actually dirt/dust or whether it's maybe filings from some components wearing unnecessarily. It's a big concern.


I'll be sitting down either tonight or tomorrow to write a letter to Canon detailing my experiences.

28
No it isn't, that is a perfect example of a camera collector, a person I have great respect for.

I well understand the collecting mentality, and I have been a strong supporter of a slightly different variant of people here who want the best simply because they want the best.
Private, I was just being funny - but yes, the Leica collectors have their place, as do collectors of all types.

R1-7D, I meant this as a side joke, not about you, and I hope that was clear.  Also, I haven't been able to find my FoCal report yet, but I need to look in one other place.  I remember it being sharp at f/2.8 and then dropping off considerably at f/5.6 which didn't make any sense to me.

Mackguyver,

No offence taken. My response is soley to Private, who I'm not sure really appreciates my situation, which is different than what he's talking about.

29
No it isn't, that is a perfect example of a camera collector, a person I have great respect for.

I well understand the collecting mentality, and I have been a strong supporter of a slightly different variant of people here who want the best simply because they want the best.

But lets not lose sight of the fact that the 1DX and 24-70 f2.8 MkII are the current production top of the line tools, they are made to do a job, they are not limited edition pink alligator covered Leica's. They are not advertised as hermetically sealed and for people to not only expect them to be, but to be very verbose and critical of them because they are not not only illustrates a fundamental lack of understanding of the product, but a distinct lack of appreciation for what the tool is actually designed and capable of doing.

If R1-7D had put his 1DX and 24-70 in that glass cabinet, one, it wouldn't have got any dust in it, and two, he wouldn't have noticed if it had.

As per my post on the last page, I do not exhibit a "fundamental lack of understanding of the product" or a lack of "appreciation for what the tool is used for."

The amount of debris in my viewfinder would have raised eye-brows on just about anyone who just spent $7000 on a camera. People also buy expensive high performance machines such as cars and motorcycles, and while the paint doesn't necessarily affect the overall performance of the machine, it sure is unsettling to see it start peeling right after purchase for no reason. You may claim that vehicle paint is warrantied in such situations where camera viewfinders are not, to which I'll respond that even Canon thought there was an issue with my prism, otherwise they would not have replaced it. Also, there is no perfect analogy; if you can't see the parallels I'm drawing then the point has simply been missed...

In my case, I did not even get chance to misuse the camera that would cause a massive accumulation of debris in the prism. It happened all on its own within a very short period of time. I have enough of an understanding of how expensive products should be to realize that experiencing what I have is not right or normal under the circumstances.

I also have enough understanding of customer service to know that when I do send something in for repair it should not come back with something else not operating properly. 

30
Roger Cicala of lensrentals has dealt with Canon repair a lot, as well as with other repair, for problems that lensrentals staff haven't yet learned to fix in house. He has a VERY SIMPLE SUGGESTION. If you go to the trouble of testing your lens with FoCal or with a home-brew test (even the "brick wall"), you need to send the test photos and the test methods that you used along with the lens, and a list of the defects that you found (eg. "lower left corner consistently soft, see photos #1,3,4..."). Load up your images and text on a $5 thumb drive labelled with your lens SN and your name, and ship it in the box with the lens.

For more details, see his lensrentals blog. But really, this is common sense, service personnel appreciate being shown the specifics of the user's issue with the product, and are likely to look harder when diagnosing the lens's problem - human nature. A lot of people return products with complaints of "it doesn't look sharp" but there may be unrealistic expectations or the product is defective under some conditions but not others, and it is hard to ID some problems in a quick inspection.

Nancy,

I have done that, only I burnt the images to CD, my experience is they don't even look at them, they sent the disc back unopened.

I believe they put the lens on a reference body or rig and draw their own conclusions from the results from those results and that alone.

As for the OP, I did write a rather blunt reply early on in the thread but it got taken down, naughty me! The crux of it though was that these things are tools, they are not hermetically sealed pieces of jewelry. They get dust in them, they get scratches and they end up needing servicing, that is the nature of tools. They are not collectables and they are not precious, they demand to be used as the makers intended, regularly and without compromise, if you do that then you will not only get the best out of them, but you will get dust in them and scratches on them.

Privatebydesign,

Thank you for your responses, although I never did see the first post that was removed.

I always enjoy your "blunt[ness]" on the forum and your posts are very educational.

I fully appreciate and understand what you are saying, and I also agree with you to some extent. Debris in viewfinders is an inevitable issue, and one I fully expect to experience with the ownership of any camera; debris to the point of clouding up a viewfinder after two weeks of ownership is not an appropriate issue to experience for any customer of a new camera product, though. There's still crud in there, I'm dealing with it...and I most likely wouldn't have continued to go on about the issue in the first place had I not received the camera back with another issue which was more mechanical in nature and would/does affect the overall operation of the camera. The finger print was also the cherry on top or the icing on the cake.


Again, I don't feel like I'm being unreasonable or unrealistic about this.


And the thing is, you are absolutely right: cameras are meant to be used, and especially if they are part of the elite 1D line; they are built like tanks and are intended for the worst conditions one can realistically take a camera into. I fully intend on using mine for whatever situations I might encounter. I still, however, expect a certain level of quality control with regards to components and workmanship. Is that unreasonable?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 21