The 5D Mark III Fix

[neuroanatomist]

The problem here is, I KNOW about the tape.  Had I never known about the tape I wouldn't care.  But now I KNOW.  Ignorance is bliss, I guess.  And I am not interested in plunking down $3500 for a piece of equipment with a design flaw fixed by tape.  Thank you very much.

But if you didn't know, then you'd happily plunk down your cash?  Interesting.  I wonder how many other expensive products you've bought that have some kludgy fix in them?  My guess is you've got a few of them. 

According to your signature, you don't even own a 5d3, so what the hell are you so worked up about?

And that's the bulk of the problem, right there.  People bitching about something in which they have no stake.  How many people now, like steven63, won't buy the 5DIII becuase of 'tape-gate'?  Of those, I'd wager that >99% of them weren't going to buy one anyway.

[steven63]

In the case of the 5dmiii, I'll wait until either they resolve the tape issue (I see it as a temporary solution) and engineer the product so it doesn't require tape to keep light out, or I'll look elsewhere.  It really is that simple for me.

I don't think you will ever be able to find out what's in your camera unless you open it up. Canon may use something else later as the "fix" (probably even cheaper) but I don't think they will tell you. And I doubt our wonderful LensRental guys would open up one for each batch of 5D3's received from Canon just to find out what the fix is.  So your only choice to look elsewhere - maybe D800??

Poor Canon.

This is exactly my point.  As I said in an earlier post 'ignorance is bliss.'  Had I never known or seen the fix the world would be fine.  But I saw it.  And I don't like it.  What's so bad about that?  Everyone on here seems to think that because I have an opionion different than theirs, and I outlined WHY I have that opinion, somehow I should be pounced on. 

In my view, Canon has a credibility issue.  You may not agree with that.  Fine.  Spend your money the way you want, let me spend mine the way I want.  Fair enough? 

[steven63]

Steven, good god - sell all you gear and buy a nikon.  Just don't EVER open it up because they use the same kind of shielding in several places as well.  This was already pointed out.  Great, you build computers, congrats - do you frequently take apart laptops?  Apparently not.  I have ZERO credentials to spout, I'm not an engineer, but I am a dumb tinkerer, and this is not surprising to me in the least.  I do, however, own a 5D Mark III, and I'm not in the least bit bothered by this fix.  I DID shell out $3500.  According to your signature, you don't even own a 5d3, so what the hell are you so worked up about?

Apparently you are bothered by someone who has a difference of opinion abou the fix than I do.  You don't see me getting defensive, do you?  So why are you?  Are you a Canon Rep?  Jeez I have an opinion and that opinion happens to not jive with your opinion.  No, I don't own a 5d3 and no I won't be buying one for the reasons I outlined.  I know there are some Canon FanBoys on this site, but they should get used to the idea that other people aren't as easily parted with their money.

Again....AGAIN....had I never seen the fix I wouldn't have cared.  But I saw it and I don't like it.  Simple stuff, really. 

[steven63]

I've been around long enough to remember the 1dmIII focus issues.  As I recall very few if any, photographers would have been affected by that.  Yet, it became an issue and trying to sell the camera required that you list the serial # to show whether or not it was an affected unit.

Now we have this.

I have little doubt the camera will perform flawlessly with the tape.  And I have less doubt anybody would have ever been affected by the issue had it never been discovered.  However, I 100% certain Canon will NOT incorporate the tape as a permanent solution and keep it in the next generation camera. 

It is an engineering design flaw.  Period.  Deny that would you?

The problem here is, I KNOW about the tape.  Had I never known about the tape I wouldn't care.  But now I KNOW.  Ignorance is bliss, I guess.  And I am not interested in plunking down $3500 for a piece of equipment with a design flaw fixed by tape.  Thank you very much.

I think your expectation is not inline with the price you are paying. Although I get your point that you want great engineering for the product for $3500, you are expecting perfect engineering beyond the expected use of the product. To achieve that, you won't be paying $3500 but more like $7000 (or beyond) to have all the test cases, even situation the camera isn't intend to do like taking pictures with the lens cap on, addressed.

What is next? Do we need a solution for taking pictures of the sun without filters? Or does it work in zero vacuum environment? Do we reasonably expect the product to perform outside of the specification?

I have to disagree.  $3500 for a camera is a lot of money.  And correct me if I am wrong, but did the 5dmii have a light leak issue?  That camera cost less when it was introduced.

I do agree with you on the point that our expectations, in some cases, are beyond the norm.  BUT, that is the way of the consumer world and competition allows such high expectations:  If Canon doesn't build it better someone else will, and eventually Canon with either have to raise its standards or go out of business. 

Again, I think the original issue is small.  I think the fix is appalling (as a consumer).  I also think my expectations are high - but it's my money and I can be that way.  I don't like somebody (engineer or otherwise) telling me to get over it/get passed it.  Sorry, I'd rather have the company rise to the expectation of the customer and make the product worth the money they are asking for it.

In the case of the 5dmiii, I'll wait until either they resolve the tape issue (I see it as a temporary solution) and engineer the product so it doesn't require tape to keep light out, or I'll look elsewhere.  It really is that simple for me.

So the question should be if the product is worth the money they are asking for. I guess you can also think of it this way. If you can get the D4 or 1DX for $3500, do you think that is cheap? If you get the D4 with a tape fix, is it unacceptable because you paid $3500 (which is a lot of money for a camera)?

I think most people will take the D4/1DX with the tape because the product is worth more then what they are pay for even with the tape solution.  Your issue is only a relative because you think a high price product should be free of any significant and insignificant flaws. But for the price point of the 5DIII, it should be reasonable.

I can't argue anything you said.  For me, it really comes down to perception and value.  I thought the 5d3 was overpriced already and now for this issue to raise it's ugly head AND for me to know the fix is something I find deplorable I won't be buying.  Really simple stuff but some people are taking it way out of context.  All I was trying to do is outline my reasoning for my thoughts, which are really real-life experiences with engineers, and apparently there are a few on this site that take exception to an opinionated camera buyer.

That's fine.  I see them with the issue not me.

[hhelmbold]

The problem here is, I KNOW about the tape.  Had I never known about the tape I wouldn't care.  But now I KNOW.  Ignorance is bliss, I guess.  And I am not interested in plunking down $3500 for a piece of equipment with a design flaw fixed by tape.  Thank you very much.

Tape is used EVERYWHERE and the only ignorance is turning a blind eye to see that it is the solution. MacBook Pro's use tape to keep cables and connectors in place. (sorry - hope you're not using a MacBook steven63)

The point is that the camera isn't FIXED by tape, it is IMPROVED. People bought the camera and realized that it doesn't take AMAZING pictures all by itself and they still had to do it manually, so they were hoping for a quick and easy refund, but Canon taped that hole closed and now they're upset

[steven63]

The problem here is, I KNOW about the tape.  Had I never known about the tape I wouldn't care.  But now I KNOW.  Ignorance is bliss, I guess.  And I am not interested in plunking down $3500 for a piece of equipment with a design flaw fixed by tape.  Thank you very much.

But if you didn't know, then you'd happily plunk down your cash?  Interesting.  I wonder how many other expensive products you've bought that have some kludgy fix in them?  My guess is you've got a few of them. 

According to your signature, you don't even own a 5d3, so what the hell are you so worked up about?

And that's the bulk of the problem, right there.  People bitching about something in which they have no stake.  How many people now, like steven63, won't buy the 5DIII becuase of 'tape-gate'?  Of those, I'd wager that >99% of them weren't going to buy one anyway.

No. I would not have happily plunked down the cash for it.  I thought it was overpriced already but WAS considering buying until  'The fix,' -  which as I see it, is not acceptable.  I posted my opinion of why I thought it was not acceptable - with a few choice jabs at the engineering field in general because that is my real life experience with them.  Apparently that bent a few people.  Their problem, not mine. 

And just because I don't own one doesn't mean I should not have input regarding my perceptions of the camera's build/design quality.   

Does everyone realize they are complaining about my decisions and perceptions about this camera and my opinions about why?  To me that wreaks of Canon FanBoy-ism.

It's my money.  You people can buy the camera if you want.  I promise I won't beat you up for it.

[LanceF]

My honor has been called in to question and I must defend my opinions to the death because my opinions matter on this subject and must be heard at all costs!

They see me trollin', they hatin!

[bp]

I promise I won't beat you up for it.

Whew!  That's a relief

I apologize.  I didn't mean to harsh your high after honestly venting about the camera you haven't purchased.  You're right, it's your money you won't be spending, so you have every right to hold onto questionable expectations about the insides of compact electronics, and none of us should attempt to shatter them

So yes, in that spirit, you're 100% right: tape-like shielding is never used in high quality electronics
high priced restaurants never have messy kitchens
supermodels don't ever poop

[steven63]

I promise I won't beat you up for it.

Whew!  That's a relief

I apologize.  I didn't mean to harsh your high after honestly venting about the camera you haven't purchased.  You're right, it's your money you won't be spending, so you have every right to hold onto questionable expectations about the insides of compact electronics, and none of us should attempt to shatter them

So yes, in that spirit, you're 100% right: tape-like shielding is never used in high quality electronics
high priced restaurants never have messy kitchens
supermodels don't ever poop

...and idiots don't have access to computers.  Would you like to add anything constructive to the thread other than sarcasm? 

[neuroanatomist]

No. I would not have happily plunked down the cash for it.  I thought it was overpriced already but WAS considering buying until  'The fix,' - 

It's overpriced.  It has tape inside.  The chrome lettering on the front isn't shiny enough.  Whatever.

Hey, I'm thinking of buying a new house.  In the kitchen, one of the curtains doesn't quite close all the way, and some light gets in.  It really bothers me.  I mean, I don't plan to sleep in the kitchen, I won't develop B&W film there, it's not like I need it to be dark, but it's a problem and it bothers me.  I contacted the owner, and he offered to re-hang the curtain rod.  That's total BS.  It's a bandaid and a substandard fix to the problem.  I demanded that he tear out that wall, rebuild it from scratch with a copletely light-tight curtain - that's the only acceptable, truly high quality engineering fix. 

I think that anyone who would not buy the 5DIII over this issue wasn't SERIOUSLY considering buying it anyway.  Considering?  Sure - just like I have considered buying a Ferrari or Lamborghini. 

The bottom line is that this 'problem' isn't one that affects anything approaching a significant proportion of users, or even a tiny proportion of users, it got blown out of proportion, Canon responded even though there was no real need, and now people find that response inadequate despite the fact that it's a perfectly simple and functional solution.

I do think you're making the right choice, and I support you 100% - don't buy a 5DIII.  I'm not going to buy that house with the light leak in the kitchen, either.

[Razor2012]

I've seen it called black foil.  It looks ok to me, I don't have a problem with it.  Didn't stop me from buying one (should be picking it up tomorrow). 

[steven63]

The problem here is, I KNOW about the tape.  Had I never known about the tape I wouldn't care.  But now I KNOW.  Ignorance is bliss, I guess.  And I am not interested in plunking down $3500 for a piece of equipment with a design flaw fixed by tape.  Thank you very much.

Tape is used EVERYWHERE and the only ignorance is turning a blind eye to see that it is the solution. MacBook Pro's use tape to keep cables and connectors in place. (sorry - hope you're not using a MacBook steven63)

The point is that the camera isn't FIXED by tape, it is IMPROVED. People bought the camera and realized that it doesn't take AMAZING pictures all by itself and they still had to do it manually, so they were hoping for a quick and easy refund, but Canon taped that hole closed and now they're upset

I have no doubt tape is used in the example you've given.  But from my perspective it is because that is the way they are engineered.  The tape is 'worked into' the original design for a specific purpose.  In the case of the 5dmiii the tape is not part of the original design.  It's simply a fix (and I think a temporary one) to a problem that, while very small to begin with, Canon felt it needed to be addressed.  Personally, I think the fix is simply a bandaid to the issue - it was never designed to be that way.  Canon will, I am sure, engineer the proper solution eventually.  Until then, I'm not a buyer. 

 

[thepancakeman]

Steven63: You're avatar statement is "Always learning" but I don't see much of that happening in this thread.  You seem a whole lot more interested in trying to convince everyone else that you're opinion on the matter is well thought out.  You don't want the camera because it has tape in it, that's fine: don't buy it.  You think it's overpriced, that's fine: don't buy it.

Buy whatever you like, and go take some pictures with it.  But don't drive a car to get to the pictures (cars have lots of tape in them--some of it even to fix recall notices) and please stop trying to justify your decision to the rest of us--we heard you, we get it.

[steven63]

No. I would not have happily plunked down the cash for it.  I thought it was overpriced already but WAS considering buying until  'The fix,' - 

I'm not going to buy that house with the light leak in the kitchen, either.

Wow, that is one heck of a kitchen you expected to be built.  I was unaware that they could design them to be light-proof.  Same with Canon cameras, I guess.

Way beneath even you, Neuro.


Regardless.

YOU GUYS WIN.

I SURRENDER.

HERE IS ME, FALLING ON MY SWORD:

1. CANON HAS ENGINEERED THE BEST CAMERA IN THE WORLD.
2. CANONRUMORS ISN'T FULL OF FANBOYS.
3. NO ONE ON THIS SITE EVERY FLAMES FOR OPINIONS DETRIMENTAL TO CANON, AS ALTERNATE OPINIONS AND PERCEPTIONS ARE ALWAYS WELCOME.

Signed,

you can all go to hell.

C'ya...or not.

[Z]

I have a 5D mark III on pre-order, stock expected "some time" this month (UK). Personally, I hope I get one with tape. I don't want them adding some other fix that will add to the camera's weight .