Light leak on 5D3 IS a big issue, and should embarrass Canon

[CanineCandidsByL]

From my quick personal tests, I'm not too worried about this except for one thing....

if Canon makes a change to the design but doesn't replace/fix the earlier models, then those of us with the early design may find our cameras with a lower resale value. In short, this could cost *me* money, and I don't like that.

I could just see Canon offering % or fixed $ off coupon in the Canon store. I had that happen before due to a printer design issue, and it was very displeasing since the discounted price was still higher that what I could get on the open market.

 

[PhilDrinkwater]

As noted, nothing is perfect. That you seem to misunderstand, but as I said earlier it's all part of the blame culture we have now.

As an aside, complete guesses on your part:
Visual damage with a repair
Further problems from a repair
They knew about the problem

To be honest we're at completely opposite ends of a very very long room, so there's no point in discussing it further. As far as I'm concerned you can carry on believing that the world should be perfect. Me? I'll go out and take some photos.

Light leaking through the camera body is not an imperfection. It’s a defect in every sense of the word. I’ll bet a million bucks Canon intended for that LCD panel to block out all ambient light, and that this light leak problem is something inadvertent and unforeseen.

No manufacturer ever intends for issues to exist. Yet they do. Everywhere!!

Accept that

 

[nesarajah]

I just want to add 3 things:
1. I love 5dmk3 and the light leak issue is not really an issue
2. There are either a lot of trolls or liars who pretend to own canon gear
3. I am in full agreement about the images popping due to lack of dynamic range. It's not what I would call a feature but I'm sure canon engineers thought about it .

 

[Christian_Stella]

Anybody who returns a camera just to re-purchase it later, rather than get a repair, is not allowed to complain about Canon's raise in price.

But I don’t intend to re-purchase it later. I intend to purchase a different camera: i.e. the EOS 5D Mark III that doesn’t let ambient light hit the meter. That’s a different camera than the one I purchased a couple days ago.

Your re-purchased "different" 5d3 will have simply gone through the same repair job that they'll offer on your current model. Somewhere there's a huge stockpile of the cameras getting prepared for modifications. Depending on how long it takes them to revamp their production line, I'm afraid you may never know if your 5d3 was ever touched by a technician's hands. I think you are best skipping this generation or at least asking for a tour of the factory in Japan before purchasing a new model. This way you will know for certain that Japanese hands enacted the fix in the middle of the assembly line, rather than at the end.

I will patiently wait for Canon's repair information before I get back to work doing my true passion... Taking photos deep in the belly of caves with a motorcycle's headlight strapped downward, into the camera's top LCD screen.

 

[skitron]

I will patiently wait for Canon's repair information before I get back to work doing my true passion... Taking photos deep in the belly of caves with a motorcycle's headlight strapped downward, into the camera's top LCD screen.

Yes...5D3 seems to work just fine in the pitch black if you aim the headlights at something other than the LCD:

http://www.extremeinstability.com/stormpics/2012/v-i36758.jpg

 

[markIVantony]

Either way, I’m returning mine, and will consider buying it again after Canon has satisfactorily addressed the matter. Shipping a brand-new camera back to Canon to have it modified or repaired is completely unacceptable, and utterly out of the question.

Why not just wait to see if there will actually be a recall? It's possible that the fix may come through a firmware update. For example, the camera knows the light level from the exposure meter. The camera also knows when the LCD light is turned on or is active. If the light meter reading is really low, and the LCD light is turned on, and the camera registers a (known) light level increase, the firmware can reduce the exposure proportional to the measured level it increased by at the moment the LCD backlight was turned on. Just an example, but the point is that there may be some clever ways to handle this in firmware that I'm sure Canon is investigating.

 

[MrSandman]

Anybody who returns a camera just to re-purchase it later, rather than get a repair, is not allowed to complain about Canon's raise in price.

But I don’t intend to re-purchase it later. I intend to purchase a different camera: i.e. the EOS 5D Mark III that doesn’t let ambient light hit the meter. That’s a different camera than the one I purchased a couple days ago.

Your re-purchased "different" 5d3 will have simply gone through the same repair job that they'll offer on your current model. Somewhere there's a huge stockpile of the cameras getting prepared for modifications. Depending on how long it takes them to revamp their production line, I'm afraid you may never know if your 5d3 was ever touched by a technician's hands. I think you are best skipping this generation or at least asking for a tour of the factory in Japan before purchasing a new model. This way you will know for certain that Japanese hands enacted the fix in the middle of the assembly line, rather than at the end.

I will patiently wait for Canon's repair information before I get back to work doing my true passion... Taking photos deep in the belly of caves with a motorcycle's headlight strapped downward, into the camera's top LCD screen.

Incorrect, sir. I will wait long enough to be nearly certain that the existing stock of defective cameras is gone. And if by some chance I get one that looks like it has been opened up and repaired, I’ll return that one too. I realize that may sound unreasonable to you, but in my line of work, I know that repaired devices (especially more complex devices) are more prone to problems than ones made correctly the first time around.

 

[swrightgfx]

You are missing the point... It isn't a flaw or a fault. The product behaves as it was intended to by the designers. Try it for yourself, if you don't believe me. If you don't have the camera or have not used someone else's under reasonable shooting conditions (ie. without a lens cap on), then reserve your comments until you have first hand experience.

And just out of curiosity, Canon intended for the LCD panel to leak light into the meter?

I really hope you are joking and not just dense...

I doubt they intended for the LCD to leak, but the consequences of the leak do not warrant you screaming from the rooftops that the camera is a dud. The device meter operates as intended, thus it has not been jeopardised by the LCD leak - therefore, the camera as a whole (at least in relation to this particular issue), is not faulty.

 

[MrSandman]

You are missing the point... It isn't a flaw or a fault. The product behaves as it was intended to by the designers. Try it for yourself, if you don't believe me. If you don't have the camera or have not used someone else's under reasonable shooting conditions (ie. without a lens cap on), then reserve your comments until you have first hand experience.

And just out of curiosity, Canon intended for the LCD panel to leak light into the meter?

I really hope you are joking and not just dense...

I doubt they intended for the LCD to leak, but the consequences of the leak do not warrant you screaming from the rooftops that the camera is a dud. The device meter operates as intended, thus it has not been jeopardised by the LCD leak - therefore, the camera as a whole (at least in relation to this particular issue), is not faulty.

I was trying to be sarcastic, yes.

I’m not screaming off the rooftops saying the camera is a dud. I think it’s a great camera - which is why I chose it over the D800, in fact. But I also think it has a problem that needs to be fixed.

You’re really looking at this issue the wrong way. What’s significant here is not that the defect only produces a problem in ‘extreme’, rarely-encountered environments. What’s significant here is that the defect is a very minor, easily-corrected one. Making the LCD panel more light-proof. It’s a defect that should never have existed in the first place - it’s that easy to do if one pays a little attention. THAT is why it behooves Canon to fix it. We’re not talking about a shutter mechanism blasting away at 14 frames/sec that hesitates once or twice after 30 continuous actuations, or a buffer that sometimes fills up quicker than expected. We’re talking about blocking out light a little better - a very simple task.

 

[swrightgfx]

What’s significant here is not that the defect only produces a problem in ‘extreme’, rarely-encountered environments.

What defect? The camera behaves as it was DESIGNED to behave. If you are shooting beyond the specified limits of the meter, then you are doing so at your own risk in any case, light leak or not. This will NOT affect your shots, if you know what you are doing in those situations and use a meter or your own calculations in the rare situations you are in those conditions. (To reuse someone else's example from the original thread, "This would only be an issue if you are shooting a black cat in a coal pit, with no moon." In which case, you should be using either an exceptionally sensitive light-meter or careful calculations and a strobe set to M.)

 

[Hesham]

STOP MAKING EXCUSES, THIS IS CANON PR's JOB

What’s significant here is not that the defect only produces a problem in ‘extreme’, rarely-encountered environments.

What defect? The camera behaves as it was DESIGNED to behave. If you are shooting beyond the specified limits of the meter, then you are doing so at your own risk in any case, light leak or not. This will NOT affect your shots, if you know what you are doing in those situations and use a meter or your own calculations in the rare situations you are in those conditions. (To reuse someone else's example from the original thread, "This would only be an issue if you are shooting a black cat in a coal pit, with no moon." In which case, you should be using either an exceptionally sensitive light-meter or careful calculations and a strobe set to M.)

When a device operates outside its operational limits, it should warn the user and not operate under those circumstances. That's what we get when exposure requires more than 30 seconds, the number flashes indicating that you are trying to operate outside device limits. That's engineering 001 (not even 101)

 

[skitron]

Re: STOP MAKING EXCUSES, THIS IS CANON PR's JOB

What’s significant here is not that the defect only produces a problem in ‘extreme’, rarely-encountered environments.

What defect? The camera behaves as it was DESIGNED to behave. If you are shooting beyond the specified limits of the meter, then you are doing so at your own risk in any case, light leak or not. This will NOT affect your shots, if you know what you are doing in those situations and use a meter or your own calculations in the rare situations you are in those conditions. (To reuse someone else's example from the original thread, "This would only be an issue if you are shooting a black cat in a coal pit, with no moon." In which case, you should be using either an exceptionally sensitive light-meter or careful calculations and a strobe set to M.)

When a device operates outside its operational limits, it should warn the user and not operate under those circumstances. That's what we get when exposure requires more than 30 seconds, the number flashes indicating that you are trying to operate outside device limits. That's engineering 001 (not even 101)

Do you really want the camera to blurt out "WARNING! You are shooting with the lens cap on!"???

 

[Hesham]

Re: STOP MAKING EXCUSES, THIS IS CANON PR's JOB

What’s significant here is not that the defect only produces a problem in ‘extreme’, rarely-encountered environments.

What defect? The camera behaves as it was DESIGNED to behave. If you are shooting beyond the specified limits of the meter, then you are doing so at your own risk in any case, light leak or not. This will NOT affect your shots, if you know what you are doing in those situations and use a meter or your own calculations in the rare situations you are in those conditions. (To reuse someone else's example from the original thread, "This would only be an issue if you are shooting a black cat in a coal pit, with no moon." In which case, you should be using either an exceptionally sensitive light-meter or careful calculations and a strobe set to M.)

When a device operates outside its operational limits, it should warn the user and not operate under those circumstances. That's what we get when exposure requires more than 30 seconds, the number flashes indicating that you are trying to operate outside device limits. That's engineering 001 (not even 101)

Do you really want the camera to blurt out "WARNING! You are shooting with the lens cap on!"???

I bet you don't own a 5DM3. Ok, at least check the videos where night scenes exposure changes (without lens cap on). I can't believe how people defend a brand blindly. CANON THEMSELVES ACKNOWLEDGE THE PROBLEM!! IS THIS NOT ENOUGH PROOF?? I understand that this could happen to any company\product, it is a fact which we all will forget three months from now!

somewhere in this forum, Calumet Photo informed a customer that shipping will probably continue by Mid. May, once Canon fixed the problem.

I am so ti

 

[skitron]

Re: STOP MAKING EXCUSES, THIS IS CANON PR's JOB

I bet you don't own a 5DM3. Ok, at least check the videos where night scenes exposure changes (without lens cap on). I can't believe how people defend a brand blindly. CANON THEMSELVES ACKNOWLEDGE THE PROBLEM!! IS THIS NOT ENOUGH PROOF?? I understand that this could happen to any company\product, it is a fact which we all will forget three months from now!

somewhere in this forum, Calumet Photo informed a customer that shipping will probably continue by Mid. May, once Canon fixed the problem.

I am so ti

I own a 5D2, a model which has the same issue that was interestingly enough, not discovered until the advent of the 5D3 and testing with the lens cap on.

Look, I'm not defending anyone and totally agree Canon should fix it if for no other reason, to eliminate threads like this one. But my point is to put the thing in perspective. Bottom line is if it can shoot shots like this:

http://www.extremeinstability.com/stormpics/2012/v-i36758.jpg

Then in a practical sense, just how much of a "problem" exisits?

 

[Hesham]

Re: STOP MAKING EXCUSES, THIS IS CANON PR's JOB

I bet you don't own a 5DM3. Ok, at least check the videos where night scenes exposure changes (without lens cap on). I can't believe how people defend a brand blindly. CANON THEMSELVES ACKNOWLEDGE THE PROBLEM!! IS THIS NOT ENOUGH PROOF?? I understand that this could happen to any company\product, it is a fact which we all will forget three months from now!

somewhere in this forum, Calumet Photo informed a customer that shipping will probably continue by Mid. May, once Canon fixed the problem.

I am so ti

I own a 5D2, a model which has the same issue that was interestingly enough, not discovered until the advent of the 5D3 and testing with the lens cap on.

Look, I'm not defending anyone and totally agree Canon should fix it if for no other reason, to eliminate threads like this one. But my point is to put the thing in perspective. Bottom line is if it can shoot shots like this:

http://www.extremeinstability.com/stormpics/2012/v-i36758.jpg

Then in a practical sense, just how much of a "problem" exisits?

I am currently using the 5DM3 (used it with the 8-15 fisheye today, loads of fun), it's the best cam I ever used. I might not be affected by the leak issue but the fact is it is defective instrument, period. Yes it takes wonderful pictures 99% of the time, but still it is defective. Since 20D, I have been using canon gear and upgrading every other model. I keep my cameras in good condition to maintain reasonable re-sale value. The 5DM3 in its current state will not hold its value compared with newer "fixed" versions after one or two years from now. I am waiting for canon's verdict while making sure I don't miss my return window. I hope we hear something today or Monday....

 

[skitron]

Re: STOP MAKING EXCUSES, THIS IS CANON PR's JOB

The 5DM3 in its current state will not hold its value compared with newer "fixed" versions after one or two years from now. I am waiting for canon's verdict while making sure I don't miss my return window. I hope we hear something today or Monday....

I don't think you'll need to worry about diminished value. My guess is they fix the ones in the wild via the warranty channel and of course also fix it on the production line. I'm guessing the unreleased stock probably gets fixed by the same team that does the warranty jobs. LOL, my 5D2 is still in warranty, I should ask them about it, not that I'd actually send it in. Sandman expressed he's uncomfortable with a reworked copy, and that's fair enough, depending on how invasive the fix is I'd probably feel the same way.

 

[swrightgfx]

There is no defect

 

[MrSandman]

There is no defect

Ok, well, you go on thinking that. That’s fine. There are plenty of people (myself included) who think there is. And more importantly, the people who actually make the camera think there is a defect - a defect that is, at very least, worth looking into and possibly correcting.

So no matter how much you insist that there’s no problem, there are people whose opinions deserve more weight than yours saying that there is.

 

[MrSandman]

Re: STOP MAKING EXCUSES, THIS IS CANON PR's JOB

Sandman expressed he's uncomfortable with a reworked copy, and that's fair enough, depending on how invasive the fix is I'd probably feel the same way.

Well, a repair that requires them to open up the camera is pretty invasive in my book.

 

[chimpmitten]

Re: STOP MAKING EXCUSES, THIS IS CANON PR's JOB

Ok, at least check the videos where night scenes exposure changes (without lens cap on). I can't believe how people defend a brand blindly. CANON THEMSELVES ACKNOWLEDGE THE PROBLEM!! IS THIS NOT ENOUGH PROOF?? I understand that this could happen to any company\product, it is a fact which we all will forget three months from now!

Hesham,

Can you point to some of the videos of the lens cap off that demonstrate the issue? I did a quick look and the videos I saw of the lens cap off did not have the issue. They only ones I saw demonstrating the issue were when the lens cap was on or no lens at all with the body cap.

If this is all that it is, when in the complete absence of light a few stray light waves manage to get in an effect the metering of a completely black scene so that it is a slightly different shade of completely black, then I am not worried in the least. I doubt that Canon would even make any fix to the camera at all.

If someone could demonstrate how this effects things while actually taking a picture of something, then that would be great, but I haven't seen that yet, and I've been trying to look for it.

Here, I'll even give an example that should demonstrate the issue. Maybe MrSandman can do this and post results. Stand outside in bright sunlight with a telephoto lens and take a picture through a window into a darkened room. Then go into the darkened room and take another picture. When outside the direct sunlight should cause the light leak issue and screw up the metering. Post both pictures so we can see the difference.

chimpmitten