Opinion: This patent identifies my ongoing issue with Canon

[Grockle]

They merged so German management would earn US executive salaries so the rumours were at the time. The result was Mercedes quality dropping immediatley to Chrysler ones.

I worked at Merc in Germany for a while, Daimler-Chrysler as it was. The guys there used to joke it was pronounced "Daimler" with a silent "Chrysler"…..

 

[AlanF]

Koenkooi's reply is very useful. My mistake was buying the R7 before seeing, usually I take a long time deliberating, as I usually keep cameras for 8 yrs or so (film cameras longer – my AE-1 and A1 still work and the FD lenses are excellent). When I bought the R7 the R6II and R8 hadn't been announced. Now there are a lot of cameras around "better" than the R7. I have to make the decision either to go FF and R6II or change everything to another brand (Fuji?). Both would cost about the same assuming I keep the RF 70-200 and don’t get the RF100-400. For FF the 100-300 f2.8 would suit me best but I'd need to remortgage the house or get it on HP assuming I'll die before paying it off….. There are a lot of reasons for sticking with Canon, legacy and not least DPP which I find very useful. I recently had the 17-55 repaired by Canon UK (it's 16 yrs old) so I'm going to keep using it for a while, fingers crossed to see what turns up….

Don't underestimate the R7, it's better than you may think regarding the "better" cameras. I use it regularly alongside my R5, and I did have an R6 for a while. DxO PL brings out the best from the sensor in terms of minimising noise from its smaller size. My wife goes out bird shooting with me using the R7 and RF 100-400mm and I the R5 + RF 100-500mm, and her images are as good as mine. In the last week, I've been using the RF 200-800mm and her images at 400mm aren't that much worse than mine at 800mm for small, far off birds. It does have its limitations in terms of rolling shutter in ES mode but you get around those using EFCS or mechanical, and the AF may not be up to the R5, which is a beast, but it's still pretty good. So, don't regret your buy!

Here's an example from yesterday, we both took a quick snap at the same time of a Goldfinch 12m away, the R7 + 100-400mm vs R5 + RF 200-800mm at 800mm, at nearly 3x the weight and price (both centre crops).

 

[AlanF]

It was also a matter of Schremp's ego, his utopia was to become CEO of the world's most powerful car company.
"We are now number one, but our aim is..."
Egomania in its purest form.
Mercedes (and customers!) suffered and Bob Eaton was rewarded with a golden parachute, employees got a cheap watch to celebrate this financial catastrophe.
And, a few years later it was all over. Mercedes experienced "quality optimization" aka cost reduction...
Sic transit gloria mundi.

Merc claimed its cars were over-engineered at the time of the merger. I bought, after a windfall, the CLK convertible when it came out, the first of its new generation for the merger. It rusted away from under me after many expensive repairs, and Merc wouldn't honour its lifetime warranty against rusting. I bought it as a mid-life present just before I was due to give the Upper Rhine Lecture series, which involved travel around Germany and Switzerland, which was going to involve a lot of scenic driving with the hood down. It broke down outside of Besancon on our way from Paris. The local Merc dealer couldn't fix it and loaned us an E class which smelt like an ashtray. We collected it on the way back, and it broke down 2km from Besancon. Merc put us on the Eurostar to get home. Our dealer sent over an engineer to collect the again repaired car from Besancon, but it broke down after 50 km. It was transported back to the UK and the local UK engineer fixed it with a simple soldering of a loose wire from the engine to the engine management system. After the 2-year warranty, just about everything that could fail, did so. My Toyota has now given me 5 years trouble free motoring at 2.5x the mpg.

 

[EricN]

Merc claimed its cars were over-engineered at the time of the merger. I bought, after a windfall, the CLK convertible when it came out, the first of its new generation for the merger. It rusted away from under me after many expensive repairs, and Merc wouldn't honour its lifetime warranty against rusting. I bought it as a mid-life present just before I was due to give the Upper Rhine Lecture series, which involved travel around Germany and Switzerland, which was going to involve a lot of scenic driving with the hood down. It broke down outside of Besancon on our way from Paris. The local Merc dealer couldn't fix it and loaned us an E class which smelt like an ashtray. We collected it on the way back, and it broke down 2km from Besancon. Merc put us on the Eurostar to get home. Our dealer sent over an engineer to collect the again repaired car from Besancon, but it broke down after 50 km. It was transported back to the UK and the local UK engineer fixed it with a simple soldering of a loose wire from the engine to the engine management system. After the 2-year warranty, just about everything that could fail, did so. My Toyota has now given me 5 years trouble free motoring at 2.5x the mpg.

That's one sad story.
My last car was a 27 year old Toyota when I sold it.

 

[Del Paso]

Merc claimed its cars were over-engineered at the time of the merger. I bought, after a windfall, the CLK convertible when it came out, the first of its new generation for the merger. It rusted away from under me after many expensive repairs, and Merc wouldn't honour its lifetime warranty against rusting. I bought it as a mid-life present just before I was due to give the Upper Rhine Lecture series, which involved travel around Germany and Switzerland, which was going to involve a lot of scenic driving with the hood down. It broke down outside of Besancon on our way from Paris. The local Merc dealer couldn't fix it and loaned us an E class which smelt like an ashtray. We collected it on the way back, and it broke down 2km from Besancon. Merc put us on the Eurostar to get home. Our dealer sent over an engineer to collect the again repaired car from Besancon, but it broke down after 50 km. It was transported back to the UK and the local UK engineer fixed it with a simple soldering of a loose wire from the engine to the engine management system. After the 2-year warranty, just about everything that could fail, did so. My Toyota has now given me 5 years trouble free motoring at 2.5x the mpg.

I remember that time well. Corrosion issues, if I'm not mistaken, many years having passed, were due to a new brilliant "environmental-friendly" concept.
Most cavities were no longer waxed, because "when recycling car-bodies after so and so many years", waxes burned in the furnace and emitted "toxic fumes"(untrue!). Nice excuse for a stupid cost saving concept. But in the countries I know (France, Germany), the company did replace body elements (doors and hoods), even entire cars, without the customer having to pay one single penny. Sometimes many,many years after the legal warranty, good-will was an absolute rule. Your case is quite shocking. Engine trouble was not common at all, exceptions always existed. Car electronics were a different affair yet. The "over-engineered claim" I've never heard, despite my being very close to those people who dealt with these issues...
Yes, indeed, this marriage in heaven made many unhappy! The 65+ billion Euros had to be saved back...
A friend of mine had similar issues with a Lexus...no company was immune when the electronic revolution came. Bad luck also exists, like "Oktober Fest" cars.
And once again: the best address to send a complain to is always the CEO. It could have helped in your case!

 

[Del Paso]

That's one sad story.
My last car was a 27 year old Toyota when I sold it.

Those times are over, even for Toyota.
Small, efficient engines intead of big, thirsty, but long lasting ones. Emission control is necessary, but often has a negative incidence on longevity.
The Toyota BJ 6 cylinders couldn't be killed (ask an Australian farmer!) like the Mercedes 6 and 8 cylinders, or the US made V8s. But they drank and polluted.
So, it boils down to one question: what is more environmental-friendly, a product lasting 30 years or a cleaner one, lasting 10?

 

[SteveC]

Merc claimed its cars were over-engineered at the time of the merger. I bought, after a windfall, the CLK convertible when it came out, the first of its new generation for the merger. It rusted away from under me after many expensive repairs, and Merc wouldn't honour its lifetime warranty against rusting. I bought it as a mid-life present just before I was due to give the Upper Rhine Lecture series, which involved travel around Germany and Switzerland, which was going to involve a lot of scenic driving with the hood down. It broke down outside of Besancon on our way from Paris. The local Merc dealer couldn't fix it and loaned us an E class which smelt like an ashtray. We collected it on the way back, and it broke down 2km from Besancon. Merc put us on the Eurostar to get home. Our dealer sent over an engineer to collect the again repaired car from Besancon, but it broke down after 50 km. It was transported back to the UK and the local UK engineer fixed it with a simple soldering of a loose wire from the engine to the engine management system. After the 2-year warranty, just about everything that could fail, did so. My Toyota has now given me 5 years trouble free motoring at 2.5x the mpg.

Mercedes has a bad reputation for reliability now, at least where I live.

A damned shame.

 

[AlanF]

The "over-engineered claim" I've never heard, despite my being very close to those people who dealt with these issues...

What they meant by that was they were building cars to too high a standard, and they then lowered the prices and quality. The previous generation of cabriolets to the CLK were twice the price. The dealers loaned me one while I was waiting for my new generation model to be shipped back from France. It was an indestructible beast. Anyway, after renting a modern Nissan for a birding trip in Florida, I decided I just had to have the all-surround sensors, reversing camera, adaptive cruise control and lane warning. So, my much restored 20-year old CLK 320 was sold to some enthusiast garage mechanics, and I've never had a moment's remorse - just as I am now happier with my RF 200-800mm rather than my EF 400mm DO II + 1.4 and 2xTC.

 

[EricN]

And once again: the best address to send a complain to is always the CEO. It could have helped in your case!

You mean it's better than complaining on an unaffiliated message board?

 

[EricN]

what is more environmental-friendly, a product lasting 30 years or a cleaner one, lasting 10?

It could be a dangerous questi-
FBI! OPEN UP!

 

[Del Paso]

You mean it's better than complaining on an unaffiliated message board?

In situations where no one seems willing to help, and you know you deserve help or a fix, the CEO can be the last resort.
I once had a very expensive camera, given for 600 to 1000 shots on a battery load. Despite the most energy-efficient settings, I hardly obtained more than 250 shots per load.
I sent it three times to the Service Dept., and always got the unsatisfactory answer "everything is ok".
Having spent Euro 6500 on this body, and read or heard that 800 pictures or more were the rule in practice, I couldn't accept this answer.
So, I wrote a very polite Email to the CEO, without criticizing the Service Dept., and asked for a solution.
The solution came in form of a brand-new camera, after I had sent back mine.
I know from extremely well informed sources that it works for cars as well...

 

[Del Paso]

What they meant by that was they were building cars to too high a standard, and they then lowered the prices and quality. The previous generation of cabriolets to the CLK were twice the price. The dealers loaned me one while I was waiting for my new generation model to be shipped back from France. It was an indestructible beast. Anyway, after renting a modern Nissan for a birding trip in Florida, I decided I just had to have the all-surround sensors, reversing camera, adaptive cruise control and lane warning. So, my much restored 20-year old CLK 320 was sold to some enthusiast garage mechanics, and I've never had a moment's remorse - just as I am now happier with my RF 200-800mm rather than my EF 400mm DO II + 1.4 and 2xTC.

It was a typical case of conflict between engineers and "merchants".
"Put in whatever is technically possible, but for not more than XXX D.Marks".
But at that time, not a single company had fully reliable electronics (data-bus oblige!)

 

[EricN]

In situations where no one seems willing to help, and you know you deserve help or a fix, the CEO can be the last resort.
I once had a very expensive camera, given for 600 to 1000 shots on a battery load. Despite the most energy-efficient settings, I hardly obtained more than 250 shots per load.
I sent it three times to the Service Dept., and always got the unsatisfactory answer "everything is ok".
Having spent Euro 6500 on this body, and read or heard that 800 pictures or more were the rule in practice, I couldn't accept this answer.
So, I wrote a very polite Email to the CEO, without criticizing the Service Dept., and asked for a solution.
The solution came in form of a brand-new camera, after I had sent back mine.
I know from extremely well informed sources that it works for cars as well...

It's a beautiful story. I'm surprised the service department didn't offer the same solution, but I'm guessing it could be that it was against policy to test that long. Although it doesn’t seem like much, service departments in my limited experience are already too busy with repairs so there logicly should be limitations in their policy of what the service department will do.
I think this is where some people demandingly say, "let me talk to your supervisor! "

 

[Del Paso]

It's a beautiful story. I'm surprised the service department didn't offer the same solution, but I'm guessing it could be that it was against policy to test that long. Although it doesn’t seem like much, service departments in my limited experience are already too busy with repairs so there logicly should be limitations in their policy of what the service department will do.
I think this is where some people demandingly say, "let me talk to your supervisor! "

The trouble is that the service departement tests in an unrealistic way (like fuel consumption tests for cars). I suggested someone takes the camera for a walk, takes pictures, switches it sometimes off and on, like one does in real life. They kept answering that their tests confirmed, using my settings, like low luminosity, no reviews etc..., a yeald of at least 800 pictures.
Strangely, with the new camera, I get between 600 and 1200 shots...
Edit: they said they performed CIPA testing.

 

[EricN]

The trouble is that the service departement tests in an unrealistic way (like fuel consumption tests for cars). I suggested someone takes the camera for a walk, takes pictures, switches it sometimes off and on, like one does in real life. They kept answering that their tests confirmed, using my settings, like low luminosity, no reviews etc..., a yeald of at least 800 pictures.
Strangely, with the new camera, I get between 600 and 1200 shots...
Edit: they said they performed CIPA testing.

I don't think they would lie, but it seems strange - even understanding CIPA testing isn't going to match everyone human's actual results. The important thing is writing the CEO resulted in being able to trade the camera for a new one.

 

[Del Paso]

I don't think they would lie, but it seems strange - even understanding CIPA testing isn't going to match everyone human's actual results. The important thing is writing the CEO resulted in being able to trade the camera for a new one.

I'm also convinced they did actually test, without finding anything wrong with the camera.
But I also know that testing and reality don't always produce similar results...
In the end, I was indeed satisfied with the outcome!

 

[EricN]

I'm also convinced they did actually test, without finding anything wrong with the camera.
But I also know that testing and reality don't always produce similar results...
In the end, I was indeed satisfied with the outcome!

Right, I guess the only real test would be if they followed you around while you took photos. That kind of testing must be too expensive for a business to even think about for anyone faraway... What could be interesting is if the cameras were able to record detailed information about usage and power consumption, but giving this the ability might cost more money than the manufacturers could agree is reasonable.

 

[SnowMiku]

Don't underestimate the R7, it's better than you may think regarding the "better" cameras. I use it regularly alongside my R5, and I did have an R6 for a while. DxO PL brings out the best from the sensor in terms of minimising noise from its smaller size. My wife goes out bird shooting with me using the R7 and RF 100-400mm and I the R5 + RF 100-500mm, and her images are as good as mine. In the last week, I've been using the RF 200-800mm and her images at 400mm aren't that much worse than mine at 800mm for small, far off birds. It does have its limitations in terms of rolling shutter in ES mode but you get around those using EFCS or mechanical, and the AF may not be up to the R5, which is a beast, but it's still pretty good. So, don't regret your buy!

Here's an example from yesterday, we both took a quick snap at the same time of a Goldfinch 12m away, the R7 + 100-400mm vs R5 + RF 200-800mm at 800mm, at nearly 3x the weight and price (both centre crops).

View attachment 214715View attachment 214716

I'm surprised at how similar they both look. It would be interesting to see both without the DxO processing if you have the time.

 

[AlanF]

I'm surprised at how similar they both look. It would be interesting to see both without the DxO processing if you have the time.

It's standard software with standard conditions using no additional sharpening, noise reduction, brightness, saturation, vibrancy etc. It's easy and I'm an not going to spend time tweaking DPP4 - you might as well ask me to go out and buy a bottle of the cheapest wine...

 

[David_B]

As an example of what this means Canon shooters are missing out on, 27mm f/1.2:

Viltrox AF 27mm F1.2 Pro E/Z Large Aperture Autofocus APS-C Lens For Sony and Nikon

The AF 27mm F1.2 Pro lens is the second ultra-large aperture prime lens of the Pro flagship series launched by Viltrox after the AF 75mm F1.2 Pro. Continuing the amazing ultra-high resolution of the Pro series and F1.2 super large aperture for extremely pleasant bokeh.

viltroxstore.com