canon recalls shipment of 5d iii

[rhommel]

how about now?

http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/04/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-recall/

[skitron]

Well, two of the retailers are actually one in the same Beach Camera = Buydig from what I've seen digging around.

But hey, now that it made the breaking headline here, I suppose it should be discussed ad-nauseum!

I will say if this turns [CR5] I agree Canon should pull them out of the supply chain as opposed to selling them and then doing warranty on all of them.

[Astro]

Admins can see IP sig and know if it is the same person. Usually that's how I get them as a MOD, but there are other tricks via admin panel.

ever heard of dynamic IP ??

and even when he has a static IP he could use a proxy.

[skitron]

Three posts from three brand new ID's that were created today within a span of under 15 minutes.

Hmmmm..........

I've been viewing this site for almost a year now...there's another post on potn as well.  This isn't some troll post.  Why would I go out of my way to say that I'm not going to be getting my much anticipated 5d3 if it wasn't true

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=14254067#post14254067

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5619.0

Well, there you go! But you gotta admit the circumstances surrounding the first three posts were a bit odd to say the least...

[marekjoz]

Obviously, it's being recalled because the RRS camera plate doesn't fit properly.   

They packed a bunch of 1dx instead. Neuro - you'll need to wait even longer

[Tracy Pinto]

Three posts from three brand new ID's that were created today within a span of under 15 minutes.

Hmmmm..........

Trying to scare the already skittish herd...it is funny no one can detail a problem serious enough that would require a recall.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Yup, they accidentally packed 1D X's into 5D MK III boxes.  They don't want a bunch of unhappy customers to file a lawsuit

[LetTheRightLensIn]

This isn't some troll post.

That's not a very convincing, you know. It's like saying "I am not lying".

But why would someone make such a silly thing up and go to trouble to make multiple accounts? Come on.

And it's been proven true now anyway.

[Viggo]

I'm not sending mine back, I'm sure they put the 1d X af in it, mittens off Canon!!

[Jamesy]

Obviously, it's being recalled because the RRS camera plate doesn't fit properly.   

Is this a fact? I have ordered one - or are you just kidding?

[kidnaper]

Obviously, it's being recalled because the RRS camera plate doesn't fit properly.   

Is this a fact? I have ordered one - or are you just kidding?

Check it out, there are fittment issues resulting in marking the body.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5446.0;topicseen

[ocabj]

RRS issued a voluntary recall on their 5DM3 plates.

Got an email from them last night.

[Orion]

Admins can see IP sig and know if it is the same person. Usually that's how I get them as a MOD, but there are other tricks via admin panel.

ever heard of dynamic IP ??

and even when he has a static IP he could use a proxy.

Well I have caught the same person using different accounts all with the same IP . . . so I was simply talking about experience. Either way, you need to take care once you see posts like that. . . Besdes, most are not smart enough to fool admins and mods.

anyhoot, I really hope there is no recal . . .  even though I wuld not mind it (it is what it is), it would be devastating to Canon. But the reason they have the camera in the field durring the pre-production phase is to avoid such issues. .. . if not, then they should have a postproduction phase so that they can test the final model in the field just as long as they did with the pre-production. Otherwise, it would be hard to contemplate how they could miss such a big issue that would result in a recal.

[JR]

Otherwise, it would be hard to contemplate how they could miss such a big issue that would result in a recal.

If some how they were "forced" to release faster then they wanted due to market pressure (like the D800 hitting the shelves) then maybe they cut some of the testing short.  Just seem odd they the mkIII hits the market before the 1DX.

I think competitive dynamic has influence some of these dates here...

[Orion]

Otherwise, it would be hard to contemplate how they could miss such a big issue that would result in a recal.

If some how they were "forced" to release faster then they wanted due to market pressure (like the D800 hitting the shelves) then maybe they cut some of the testing short.  Just seem odd they the mkIII hits the market before the 1DX.

I think competitive dynamic has influence some of these dates here...

I guess that could be a case for that. . . but I just can't see them working on the camera "in house" where the actual engineers and other technicians go through EVERY setting, and then have the camera go out in the field tested by pros, only to have a major fault with the final production camera. Only a freek fluke could possibly cause such a missed problem. . . . I don't think they were forced to release anything, really. We all know that in photogrpahy forusm alone, it does not matter when a camera is released or if it reaches the stores first or second . . . as long as it is a kick arse camera, it will gather attention and the consumers. And it will be all the rage on the fourms and that will trickle down to the stores. 1Dx is a good example of a non rush (Olympics notwithstanding, for now). . . . BUT, I guess you can say that it is also an example of how fast the mkIII was released, compared to 1Dx, making you wonder if it was a BIT prematurely.