5D Mark III NOT Getting Recalled?

[swrightgfx]

At the very least the stock seems to be held back, since I haven't seen any stores in the US come back into stock for a couple weeks now. Canon hasn't made it very clear at all what they are doing with stock and shipments.

And to all those "this is not an issue at all", do you imagine how bold is the decision to hold off selling your hottest product for two weeks, and maybe more? They will never do this unless it is a SERIOUS ISSUE. I am sure that they are working hard to avoid a re-call by all means. Personally i will not wait until my return window expires, mine is going back tomorrow. I'll pretend that the launch date has been postponed till June/July.

No, it has become a serious issue because of idiots on forums making it a serious attack on Canon's reputation. Of course they have to answer the customer-base, even if they are wrong, so as avoid bad press.

Having said that, Canon PR got it wrong this time. Instead of acknowledging the apparent issue and holding back stock (which may actually be for repackaging with new DPP and Firmware updates for Eye-Fi), they should have downplayed it as something that occurs outside of the designed specifications, thus not an issue for concerned parties.

As for the video MrSandman posted, non of us are privy to their testing conditions or the settings being used. In addition, to my eyes at least, the "correctly" exposed image appears over-exposed to me and the "light-leaked" image more what I'd expect or want for that scene. Regardless, the user is probably shooting sub 1EV, so shouldn't be using the inbuilt meter anyway.

 

[Hesham]

At the very least the stock seems to be held back, since I haven't seen any stores in the US come back into stock for a couple weeks now. Canon hasn't made it very clear at all what they are doing with stock and shipments.

And to all those "this is not an issue at all", do you imagine how bold is the decision to hold off selling your hottest product for two weeks, and maybe more? They will never do this unless it is a SERIOUS ISSUE. I am sure that they are working hard to avoid a re-call by all means. Personally i will not wait until my return window expires, mine is going back tomorrow. I'll pretend that the launch date has been postponed till June/July.

No, it has become a serious issue because of idiots on forums making it a serious attack on Canon's reputation. Of course they have to answer the customer-base, even if they are wrong, so as avoid bad press.

Having said that, Canon PR got it wrong this time. Instead of acknowledging the apparent issue and holding back stock (which may actually be for repackaging with new DPP and Firmware updates for Eye-Fi), they should have downplayed it as something that occurs outside of the designed specifications, thus not an issue for concerned parties.

As for the video MrSandman posted, non of us are privy to their testing conditions or the settings being used. In addition, to my eyes at least, the "correctly" exposed image appears over-exposed to me and the "light-leaked" image more what I'd expect or want for that scene. Regardless, the user is probably shooting sub 1EV, so shouldn't be using the inbuilt meter anyway.

Actually IDIOTS who defend a piece of hardware as if it is one of their kids are the reason Canon US published this vague statement "if you have a problem send it to us and we will INSPECT it" while in the UK, they clearly state that they will REPAIR IT...does not the word REPAIR comes as a result of a DEFECT?

I for one, will return my Kit tomorrow, but I'll be getting another "FREE OF DEFECT" version whenever they are available. There is no need to the huge drama about attacking Canon. Canon will not file for CH-11 just because one of their 1000s of products had a defect in the few first batches. END OF STORY...

 

[jchong62]

I am also packing up mine tonight. I have got the RMA from the online retailer I bought from.

This is because I called Canon USA this morning and they were taking my serial number (mine is xxxxx1) and offering me a "modification" to the same unit starting mid-May. That said Canon USA is doing the same thing as Canon UK for repairing the flawed units.

However, I want new hardware, instead of a refurbished one. Do you guys prefer a refurbished one for the same price, huh?

At the very least the stock seems to be held back, since I haven't seen any stores in the US come back into stock for a couple weeks now. Canon hasn't made it very clear at all what they are doing with stock and shipments.

And to all those "this is not an issue at all", do you imagine how bold is the decision to hold off selling your hottest product for two weeks, and maybe more? They will never do this unless it is a SERIOUS ISSUE. I am sure that they are working hard to avoid a re-call by all means. Personally i will not wait until my return window expires, mine is going back tomorrow. I'll pretend that the launch date has been postponed till June/July.

No, it has become a serious issue because of idiots on forums making it a serious attack on Canon's reputation. Of course they have to answer the customer-base, even if they are wrong, so as avoid bad press.

Having said that, Canon PR got it wrong this time. Instead of acknowledging the apparent issue and holding back stock (which may actually be for repackaging with new DPP and Firmware updates for Eye-Fi), they should have downplayed it as something that occurs outside of the designed specifications, thus not an issue for concerned parties.

As for the video MrSandman posted, non of us are privy to their testing conditions or the settings being used. In addition, to my eyes at least, the "correctly" exposed image appears over-exposed to me and the "light-leaked" image more what I'd expect or want for that scene. Regardless, the user is probably shooting sub 1EV, so shouldn't be using the inbuilt meter anyway.

Actually IDIOTS who defend a piece of hardware as if it is one of their kids are the reason Canon US published this vague statement "if you have a problem send it to us and we will INSPECT it" while in the UK, they clearly state that they will REPAIR IT...does not the word REPAIR comes as a result of a DEFECT?

I for one, will return my Kit tomorrow, but I'll be getting another "FREE OF DEFECT" version whenever they are available. There is no need to the huge drama about attacking Canon. Canon will not file for CH-11 just because one of their 1000s of products had a defect in the few first batches. END OF STORY...

 

[archangelrichard]

Thanx guys, I needed a good laugh tonite

Apparently I have to learn how to take good pics with the lens cap on to replicate this (or in light so low my Trusty Sekonic would just say "NO")

Seriously, Canon says you don't take pictures in this light and they can not duplicate the issue within specs

.... but to please the idiots who can not read and insist on abusing their equipment and then bad mouth the manufacturer for their childish camera abuse; they are making a "repair" (if it can be called such) so you won't have a problem shooting with the lens cap on (or in light levels so low they are far exceeding manufacturer's specifications for that device)

This is like claiming the camera is broken when it won't take a picture with no lens mounted; isn't it?

I can just see someone putting up a flickr group for lens cap on photos .....

and see the comments on them

Just too funny for words

 

[Hesham]

Thanx guys, I needed a good laugh tonite

Apparently I have to learn how to take good pics with the lens cap on to replicate this (or in light so low my Trusty Sekonic would just say "NO")

Seriously, Canon says you don't take pictures in this light and they can not duplicate the issue within specs

.... but to please the idiots who can not read and insist on abusing their equipment and then bad mouth the manufacturer for their childish camera abuse; they are making a "repair" (if it can be called such) so you won't have a problem shooting with the lens cap on (or in light levels so low they are far exceeding manufacturer's specifications for that device)

This is like claiming the camera is broken when it won't take a picture with no lens mounted; isn't it?

I can just see someone putting up a flickr group for lens cap on photos .....

and see the comments on them

Just too funny for words

Let me guess, you either don't own a 5DM3 or you have one, but you missed the return window ...so you are stuck with it :'( I can imagine when you offer it for sale everybody would ask you is this one of them? There is no doubt that the camera is excellent with this defect, but its value is never the same. Got it?

If what you say is true, then they will not have a problem releasing those cameras back to re-tilers? why is it not happening?

 

[swrightgfx]

Thanx guys, I needed a good laugh tonite

Apparently I have to learn how to take good pics with the lens cap on to replicate this (or in light so low my Trusty Sekonic would just say "NO")

Seriously, Canon says you don't take pictures in this light and they can not duplicate the issue within specs

.... but to please the idiots who can not read and insist on abusing their equipment and then bad mouth the manufacturer for their childish camera abuse; they are making a "repair" (if it can be called such) so you won't have a problem shooting with the lens cap on (or in light levels so low they are far exceeding manufacturer's specifications for that device)

This is like claiming the camera is broken when it won't take a picture with no lens mounted; isn't it?

I can just see someone putting up a flickr group for lens cap on photos .....

and see the comments on them

Just too funny for words

Let me guess, you either don't own a 5DM3 or you have one, but you missed the return window ...so you are stuck with it :'( I can imagine when you offer it for sale everybody would ask you is this one of them? There is no doubt that the camera is excellent with this defect, but its value is never the same. Got it?

If what you say is true, then they will not have a problem releasing those cameras back to re-tilers? why is it not happening?

Do you own a Mark III? If you do, have you tested it? If you had, you'd realise how ridiculous this whole saga is.

 

[Hesham]

Thanx guys, I needed a good laugh tonite

Apparently I have to learn how to take good pics with the lens cap on to replicate this (or in light so low my Trusty Sekonic would just say "NO")

Seriously, Canon says you don't take pictures in this light and they can not duplicate the issue within specs

.... but to please the idiots who can not read and insist on abusing their equipment and then bad mouth the manufacturer for their childish camera abuse; they are making a "repair" (if it can be called such) so you won't have a problem shooting with the lens cap on (or in light levels so low they are far exceeding manufacturer's specifications for that device)

This is like claiming the camera is broken when it won't take a picture with no lens mounted; isn't it?

I can just see someone putting up a flickr group for lens cap on photos .....

and see the comments on them

Just too funny for words

Let me guess, you either don't own a 5DM3 or you have one, but you missed the return window ...so you are stuck with it :'( I can imagine when you offer it for sale everybody would ask you is this one of them? There is no doubt that the camera is excellent with this defect, but its value is never the same. Got it?

If what you say is true, then they will not have a problem releasing those cameras back to re-tilers? why is it not happening?

Do you own a Mark III? If you do, have you tested it? If you had, you'd realise how ridiculous this whole saga is.

I had one which I just sent back to retailer. I know that i will be affected in extreme cases, but the camera is NOT CHEAP. being a serial 1 or 2 (even if fixed) automatically degrades its value which translates of the fact that I, the consumer will pay for Canon's mistake.

 

[jchong62]

That's the most correct way to put it. And also why would I keep it knowing there is a defect if I have a choice?

I am offered free return shipping by my retailer. Why would I turn it down?

I have a chance to buy a genuine 5D3 next week from another retailer and to have the serial number verified to NOT be xxxxx1 or xxxxx2. And I have my old Digital Rebel to fill in temporarily. That's the choice I am making.

More importantly, it DOES affect my shooting scenarios, for example, in a room at night when happy birthday song is being sang. I tested this myself! The shutter speed changed from 1/8 to 1/6! Isn't that a scenario within the specs? Or some are still arguing 5D3 isn't designed for kids' parties?

When people pay that premium, the expectation is there!

Thanx guys, I needed a good laugh tonite

Apparently I have to learn how to take good pics with the lens cap on to replicate this (or in light so low my Trusty Sekonic would just say "NO")

Seriously, Canon says you don't take pictures in this light and they can not duplicate the issue within specs

.... but to please the idiots who can not read and insist on abusing their equipment and then bad mouth the manufacturer for their childish camera abuse; they are making a "repair" (if it can be called such) so you won't have a problem shooting with the lens cap on (or in light levels so low they are far exceeding manufacturer's specifications for that device)

This is like claiming the camera is broken when it won't take a picture with no lens mounted; isn't it?

I can just see someone putting up a flickr group for lens cap on photos .....

and see the comments on them

Just too funny for words

Let me guess, you either don't own a 5DM3 or you have one, but you missed the return window ...so you are stuck with it :'( I can imagine when you offer it for sale everybody would ask you is this one of them? There is no doubt that the camera is excellent with this defect, but its value is never the same. Got it?

If what you say is true, then they will not have a problem releasing those cameras back to re-tilers? why is it not happening?

Do you own a Mark III? If you do, have you tested it? If you had, you'd realise how ridiculous this whole saga is.

I had one which I just sent back to retailer. I know that i will be affected in extreme cases, but the camera is NOT CHEAP. being a serial 1 or 2 (even if fixed) automatically degrades its value which translates of the fact that I, the consumer will pay for Canon's mistake.

 

[swrightgfx]

Thanx guys, I needed a good laugh tonite

Apparently I have to learn how to take good pics with the lens cap on to replicate this (or in light so low my Trusty Sekonic would just say "NO")

Seriously, Canon says you don't take pictures in this light and they can not duplicate the issue within specs

.... but to please the idiots who can not read and insist on abusing their equipment and then bad mouth the manufacturer for their childish camera abuse; they are making a "repair" (if it can be called such) so you won't have a problem shooting with the lens cap on (or in light levels so low they are far exceeding manufacturer's specifications for that device)

This is like claiming the camera is broken when it won't take a picture with no lens mounted; isn't it?

I can just see someone putting up a flickr group for lens cap on photos .....

and see the comments on them

Just too funny for words

Let me guess, you either don't own a 5DM3 or you have one, but you missed the return window ...so you are stuck with it :'( I can imagine when you offer it for sale everybody would ask you is this one of them? There is no doubt that the camera is excellent with this defect, but its value is never the same. Got it?

If what you say is true, then they will not have a problem releasing those cameras back to re-tilers? why is it not happening?

Do you own a Mark III? If you do, have you tested it? If you had, you'd realise how ridiculous this whole saga is.

I had one which I just sent back to retailer. I know that i will be affected in extreme cases, but the camera is NOT CHEAP. being a serial 1 or 2 (even if fixed) automatically degrades its value which translates of the fact that I, the consumer will pay for Canon's mistake.

Yes, but it wouldn't have degraded the value if no one made such an issue out of a non-issue. Regardless, this issue will be laughed at. There are plenty of second-hand buyers that will know this whole thing is a joke and will pay an equal amount for a well-looked-after "affected" Mark III.

 

[ramon123]

It is an issue, if it wasn't Canon wouldn't have:

1. offered to fix the problem
2. fixed this issue on models manufactured later eg. xxxxx3xxxxx

 

[briansquibb]

It is an issue, if it wasn't Canon wouldn't have:

1. offered to fix the problem
2. fixed this issue on models manufactured later eg. xxxxx3xxxxx

The word 'issue' implies a major flaw

The light leak is not a major flaw, it does not impinge on its ability to produce stunning photos. It only affects metering in a very limited circumstances which for the most part are caused by the user not following best practice. The metering error (should it every be met) can easily be rectified in pp

By turning this minor glitch into a major incident the complainers have drastically effected the credibility of the 5DIII and possibly impacted the used price of the camera - which will affect the complainwea as well as the other millions of 5DIII.

Three cheers to the whiners

 

[ramon123]

It is an issue, if it wasn't Canon wouldn't have:

1. offered to fix the problem
2. fixed this issue on models manufactured later eg. xxxxx3xxxxx

The word 'issue' implies a major flaw

The light leak is not a major flaw, it does not impinge on its ability to produce stunning photos. It only affects metering in a very limited circumstances which for the most part are caused by the user not following best practice. The metering error (should it every be met) can easily be rectified in pp

By turning this minor glitch into a major incident the complainers have drastically effected the credibility of the 5DIII and possibly impacted the used price of the camera - which will affect the complainwea as well as the other millions of 5DIII.

Three cheers to the whiners

You incorrectly have the premise that "issue" implies "major".

Major is an adjective therefore intrinsically separate from the subject itself.

Issue means that there is problem with something no matter what the size.

 

[briansquibb]

You incorrectly have the premise that "issue" implies "major".

Major is an adjective therefore intrinsically separate from the subject itself.

Issue means that there is problem with something no matter what the size.

I think you will find that people associate ' issue' with 'major flaw' in common usage

A glitch is the common usage for 'minor flaw'

Just the way language develops

 

[mh1973]

No matter it will affect your captured images or not. However, Canon roughly announced serial number of flawed 5D3 at the same time.

-->

Affected Product
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Digital SLR Camera
*Products whose sixth digit in the serial number is 1 or 2 are affected.
　　　For example,　“xxxxx1xxxxxx”　or “xxxxx2xxxxxx” ([x] represents any optional number.)
<--

Obviously, Canon has no consideration of first users. Also, it indirectly hit and hurt first users again. it caused that first user will lose good price of 5D3 at 2nd hand market in the future once they would like to sell. Becuase all buyers in the future know serial number is a flaw ones... Even if it has been repaired... buyer also are concern about disassembled body. Canon should handle this affair more carefully. Because most of first users are loyal and believe Canon's product. Unquestionably, Canon will lose goodwill if no good repairation for first users.

 

[ramon123]

You incorrectly have the premise that "issue" implies "major".

Major is an adjective therefore intrinsically separate from the subject itself.

Issue means that there is problem with something no matter what the size.

I think you will find that people associate ' issue' with 'major flaw' in common usage

A glitch is the common usage for 'minor flaw'

Just the way language develops

What do you mean "people"? I generally try not to follow what "people" say or think ???

Again you have the premise that issue = major flaw and that is where I don't agree.

The much bigger issue is the terrible PR Canon has received from this issue

 

[briansquibb]

What do you mean "people"? I generally try not to follow what "people" say or think ???

Again you have the premise that issue = major flaw and that is where I don't agree.

The much bigger issue is the terrible PR Canon has received from this issue

We will have to agree to disagree on the use of english language then 8) 8)

 

[ramon123]

What do you mean "people"? I generally try not to follow what "people" say or think ???

Again you have the premise that issue = major flaw and that is where I don't agree.

The much bigger issue is the terrible PR Canon has received from this issue

We will have to agree to disagree on the use of english language then 8) 8)

I agree ;D