Not Happy With Canon..........after 30+ Years

[PATTERSON]

Back in July or Aug of this year I finally narrowed down my choices of digital cameras to the Canon S5 IS 8mp.

Everything was great until I was out shooting some night shots of the lights reflecting off the waters of Hood Canal a couple of weeks ago. While setting the camera up on the tripod, I had turned towards the car, and happened to be looking at the lens of the camera, when I noticed some very, very, small specks of something on the lens. Grumbling, I went back to the car....used some lens cleaner, and the recommended tissue, and cleaned it up.

The next day, I looked closer at the lens, and saw that there was some more of this stuff on the lenses comprising the telephoto/macro parts. Stuff that I could not get access to, to clean. Because it was under warranty, I sent it to the Canon repair facility in Illinois with a short letter explaining my findings.

About a week ago, my wife got the email saying that the cost to repair the camera was going to be $138 and change. Well, w/o asking any questions, she went ahead and paid the bill. Yesterday, the camera comes back to the house, and inside is a short letter from the facility with the following "Service Details" note: "We have examined the product according to your request, and, it was found that the optical assembly was inoperative causing dirt to attach to the part. The optical assembly was replaced. Other electrical adjustments and inspection and cleaning were carried out. Tech# CXB19142"

Now.....does that not sound like the "inoperative part" allowed the dirt to attach to the part?? That's the way it sounds to me. Because the part was inoperative...it allowed the dirt to get inside. Is there any other reasonable understanding of their statement?? One of the ladies I talked to kept telling me that "it was the dirt that caused the damage"....when their note clearly says the opposite. Sounds to me like, if the part had been operative, the dirt wouldn't have been able to attach to the part............... :eek: :eek:


30 plus years with nothing BUT Canon cameras.....and now I get to pay for an "inoperative part".....just doesn't make me feel good, ya know.

Other than this...the camera is really great......does all kinds of things I couldn't have imagined a camera being capable of.

Pat

[OKUIII]

It's just that same attitude that caused me to buy a Nikon 8D instaed of a Canon.

[kdog]

Not sure I understand. Was the dirt causing a malfunction? Or did you merely send it in to be cleaned? Was the camera under warranty?

The wording of the tech's note doesn't really make any sense. Perhaps he meant to say this: "it was found that the optical assembly was inoperative due to dirt to attached to the part".

I dunno. Either way, letting a little thing like this cause you to dump Canon after 30 years of happiness seems a bit hasty. From what I've heard, Canon service is typically better than Nikon.

Cheers,
-joel

[dmatson]

Had the same thing happen with my Olympus E1. It always has taken a long time to lock the auto focus and I was lazy and didn't take it in during the warranty period. So I got around to taking it in and the contact ring between the lense and the body was bad so they replaced it and updated it and so on but it cost me $275. I asked if this was a bad part from new and they said yes it probably was and i asked why did I have to pay then, they should replace it just for "good will". I won't be lazy any more.

[PATTERSON]

Not sure I understand. Was the dirt causing a malfunction? Or did you merely send it in to be cleaned? Was the camera under warranty?

The wording of the tech's note doesn't really make any sense. Perhaps he meant to say this: "it was found that the optical assembly was inoperative due to dirt to attached to the part".

I dunno. Either way, letting a little thing like this cause you to dump Canon after 30 years of happiness seems a bit hasty. From what I've heard, Canon service is typically better than Nikon.

Cheers,
-joel

I can't honestly say that there was any malfunction...that assembly only moves when using the zoom feature, which I did not use that night.....or even later on.

What the tech said, and what he "meant" to say, reminds me of how my wife says things sometimes.......another woman could understand it....but as far as I'm concerned, if you don't say what you mean....then don't get excited if I don't understand you.........in this case (with the camera) what he says is pretty clear to me. I never thought, for one instant, that he may have been trying to say something else.

"Dumping Canon"?? I didn't go back to look.....but whoever said that wasn't me. I started out buying Canon a long, long time ago, because I felt that they were the "underdog" back then.......and to a point, even today, I think they still are. But......they do have some of the best R&D and production facilities known.....and a lot of the other camera mfg's are having problems coming up their own stuff. There was a GREAT article in DIGITAL PHOTOPRO titled "The Road Ahead"...and after reading it......I'll continue to stick with Canon. A bunch of the other photography folks have really fallen along the wayside.............KODAK....MAMIYA to name just a few. Others are collaborating with their past competitors....Sony and Konica-Minolta with Sony eventually buying all of Minoltas camera patents, and snagging 200 of their best employees in the process. Olympus and Panasonic started working on a digital SLR system. Kodak has moved ALL their production capabilities off-shore. All of Polaroids assets were sold in 2002. Even though Minolta was acquired by Konica in 2003.....they exited the camera business just last year. Samsung and Pentax announced their collaboration in October 2 years ago. Nikon announced in January just last year, that they were halting film camera production. So...........watch out, shooting with film may soon become cost prohibitive!! Estimates are, that for 2007 they (digital camera Mfg's) will ship something like 27.5 million units. I think that, in the future....Canon will become #1, with Nikon and Sony vying for #2.

Ok....my wrists are crying.......gotta go eat some White Cheddar popcorn.

Later dudes.

Pat

[kb6yaf]

Was it actual dirt or was it in need of a "sensor-cleaning" ?? I have to clean the sensor on my 20D almost everytime I use it beause of the lens changes I do on a shoot. That is very important to do to keep the images from displaying those dark blobs that show up mostly in the 'sky' part of the frame.

[Randy]

Was it actual dirt or was it in need of a "sensor-cleaning" ?? I have to clean the sensor on my 20D almost everytime I use it beause of the lens changes I do on a shoot. That is very important to do to keep the images from displaying those dark blobs that show up mostly in the 'sky' part of the frame.The OP was referring to an S5 IS, which is a 1/2.5" Point & Shoot camera. It does not have interchangeable lenses.

You are correct about the sensors on digital SLRs, especially if you change lenses often.

[dmatson]

This is one thing i love about my Olympus E-1 and 510 is the sonic sensor cleaning. You should remember to turn any digi camera off when you change lenses ( i forget sometimes). I am now waiting for sometime in Nov for the E-3 that was just released, incredible camera and features can't wait to get my hands on it.

[Dan-A]

This is one thing i love about my Olympus E-1 and 510 is the sonic sensor cleaning. You should remember to turn any digi camera off when you change lenses ( i forget sometimes). I am now waiting for sometime in Nov for the E-3 that was just released, incredible camera and features can't wait to get my hands on it.

Also, keep it face down, and do it quickly.