Canon Camera Design Issues & Quality Control

[BobFisher]

Canon fanboy ranting aside, I too began to wonder some time ago about Canon's technology direction and quality control.  I wrote a blog post about it several months ago.  Mirrors that fall off.  Cameras that won't focus (the new MkIV seems to be continuing that trend).  Inexplicable ghost exposures.  High failure rates as noted elsewhere here on LL.  A friend had the mirror detach in his 5D MkII - yes, MkII.  An isolated incident?  Maybe, but symptomatic of the issue nonetheless.  

And for the record, Nikon was the first to introduce a DSLR with HD video.  720 is HD.

For the record Contax, I believe, was the first to introduce a full frame DSLR.

[tokengirl]

Maybe I'm not picky or spoiled enough for the Internet, but I am delighted with all of my Canon gear.  I don't own any Nikon stuff, but I bet if I did, I'd be delighted with it as well.  Hell, I even like the camera on my iPhone.  I'm starting to worry that maybe there is something wrong with me, because I have absolutely loved every camera I have ever owned.  Perhaps I will buy a Holga or Diana just to see if I can finally find a truly disappointing apparatus to make pictures with.

[Kirk Gittings]

FWIW I have had no significant issues with any of the Canon equipment that I own and I use it heavily in my business. The banding in the 5DII IME is always an issue of insufficient exposure in the shadows-me trying to push the DR beyond its limits. We have all benefited from the DSLR competition and between between C&N in particular. I'm a Canon user simply because when I went digital Canon had a reasonably priced full frame camera (5D) and T/S lenses. I make my living shooting architecture and Canon was clearly superior at the time. Two years latter It was Nikon with their new T/S lenses and ff body and I was recommending Nikon to my students. A year later Canon was back with even better lenses and a 21MP body. They have the slight advantage in my field now as a result of the best glass. IMO at any given time I could do pretty well with either Canon or Nikon these days. We have benefited enormously from this competition. Next year it could all shift again. Since I have been shooting digital there has been no clear leader overall. At any given moment based on ones particular needs yes, but overall I don't see it. After 32 years in this business I think this is the best of times. We have never had such tools and the future promises ever better ones.

[BernardLanguillier]

But you forgot to mention Canon's much greater-quality (and greater options) in the super-telephoto range as well ... and, again, its superior super-telephoto offerings are available at a lower price than comparable Nikon products (as well as the others).

John,

I have to disagree with you on this one. There is no quality gap at all between the 300 f2.8, 400 f2.8 and 600 f4.0 produced by both companies. if anything Nikon has a slight edge thanks to the 200-400 f4 VR. The price is lower in some market, but it is the same in Japan where I live.

Yes, Canon's overall lineup is still in the lead, offering more options, and an overall superior product, at a generally lower price than the competition. Not only did you forget about the super-telephoto segment (mentioned above), but you also omitted discussing the macro segment where Canon not only has the latest and finest macro technology (in the 100mm f/2.8L), but they also offer the only 1:1 - 5:1 super macro in the MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macrophoto lens. No other company has an equivalent product.

I did not mention macro because both Nikon and Canon are far behind Zeiss here.

Check out Digi Lloyd blog on this one, the new Canon 100mm f2.8 takes the hell of a beating from the Zeiss 100mm f2.0 macro. Incredible that such gaps still exist with modern designs.

Finally I indeed agree that Canon still has an overall slight lead, but it has gone from very significant to slight in less than 4 years. They are now positioned more as a great value company focusing more and more on video while they used to be a "high end photography" company.

Cheers,
Bernard

[thierrylegros396]

FWIW I have had no significant issues with any of the Canon equipment that I own and I use it heavily in my business. The banding in the 5DII IME is always an issue of insufficient exposure in the shadows-me trying to push the DR beyond its limits. We have all benefited from the DSLR competition and between between C&N in particular. I'm a Canon user simply because when I went digital Canon had a reasonably priced full frame camera (5D) and T/S lenses. I make my living shooting architecture and Canon was clearly superior at the time. Two years latter It was Nikon with their new T/S lenses and ff body and I was recommending Nikon to my students. A year later Canon was back with even better lenses and a 21MP body. They have the slight advantage in my field now as a result of the best glass. IMO at any given time I could do pretty well with either Canon or Nikon these days. We have benefited enormously from this competition. Next year it could all shift again. Since I have been shooting digital there has been no clear leader overall. At any given moment based on ones particular needs yes, but overall I don't see it. After 32 years in this business I think this is the best of times. We have never had such tools and the future promises ever better ones.

You have a lot of chance, Kirk.

Good for you, but it's evident that they are some people who acquire defective material.

With Canon, I've mixed experience, but I can say that in Europe, aftersale service is not very good.

So when you have a good one keep it as long as you can !!!

Have a Nice Day.

Thierry

[sojournerphoto]

Maybe I'm not picky or spoiled enough for the Internet, but I am delighted with all of my Canon gear.  I don't own any Nikon stuff, but I bet if I did, I'd be delighted with it as well.  Hell, I even like the camera on my iPhone.  I'm starting to worry that maybe there is something wrong with me, because I have absolutely loved every camera I have ever owned.  Perhaps I will buy a Holga or Diana just to see if I can finally find a truly disappointing apparatus to make pictures with.

Tokengirl

With such an accepting nature I fear that even if you buy a Holga you will be pleased with it and use it make new pictures. You are also in danger of failing to fall into the modern malaise of discontent and should clearly absorb more advertising forthwith.

FWIW all my cameras work and please me, even the film ones.

Mike

[JohnKoerner]

Canon fanboy ranting aside, I too began to wonder some time ago about Canon's technology direction and quality control.  I wrote a blog post about it several months ago.  Mirrors that fall off.  Cameras that won't focus (the new MkIV seems to be continuing that trend).  Inexplicable ghost exposures.  High failure rates as noted elsewhere here on LL.  A friend had the mirror detach in his 5D MkII - yes, MkII.  An isolated incident?  Maybe, but symptomatic of the issue nonetheless.

Well, I would rather briefly be a "fanboy" on a simple post ... than become a dedicated public crybaby to such an extent that I would create a public "boo-hoo blog" lamenting a product.

For the record, I have been more than satisfied with my Canon products ... but I do not need to create a public blog to gush to the whole world about it  

And for the record, Nikon was the first to introduce a DSLR with HD video.  720 is HD.
For the record Contax, I believe, was the first to introduce a full frame DSLR.

Thank you for the corrections, but both have fallen by the wayside to Canon in leadership of this area.

Jack




.

[JohnKoerner]

John,
I have to disagree with you on this one. There is no quality gap at all between the 300 f2.8, 400 f2.8 and 600 f4.0 produced by both companies. if anything Nikon has a slight edge thanks to the 200-400 f4 VR. The price is lower in some market, but it is the same in Japan where I live.

I honestly haven't checked global pricing, but in the US Nikon super-telephotos tend to be more expensive than Canon's.

Not saying the Nikons aren't good, but Canon's super-telephotos have been rated better overall in the reviews I have seen. I do agree that the Nikin 200-400 is a peerless lens, but Nikon doesn't have anything above 600mm, nor as many options up to that size, while Canon does.

I did not mention macro because both Nikon and Canon are far behind Zeiss here.
Check out Digi Lloyd blog on this one, the new Canon 100mm f2.8 takes the hell of a beating from the Zeiss 100mm f2.0 macro. Incredible that such gaps still exist with modern designs.

Digilloyd is pretty much a Zeiss puppet, is he not?

Still, I myself have a Canon 100mm L macro, and I can see instances where the Zeiss would be superior (namely, critical manual focus). However, this edge is only valuable with absolutely stationary subjects and all the time in the world to obtain that critical focus. In field conditions, where the opportunity for catching a live subject holding still is fleeting (and/or when a flower is blowing slightly in the wind), all the advantage goes to the Canon with it's sharp AF and its new-generation IS.

To be honest, the IS in the new macro can be a bit of a pain when trying for critical MF, which is where I could see a clear advantage to the simplicity of the MF Zeiss.

Still, the Zeiss does not offer true 1:1 and it has no answer to the Canon's 1:1 to 5:1 MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macrophoto lens, nor Canon's 180mm L macro lens.

Further, neither does Nikon or anyone else. Thus, again, overall Canon provides the better and more varied macrophotography technology and options.

Finally I indeed agree that Canon still has an overall slight lead, but it has gone from very significant to slight in less than 4 years. They are now positioned more as a great value company focusing more and more on video while they used to be a "high end photography" company.
Cheers,
Bernard

Well, I believe that (lens-wise) Canon offers the best and most high-end macrophotography options, telephotography options, and portrait photography options ... but at this point in time, I have to agree with you that Nikon offers the finest high-res camera as well as the finest super-wides for landscape photography.

Jack




.

[BernardLanguillier]

Not saying the Nikons aren't good, but Canon's super-telephotos have been rated better overall in the reviews I have seen. I do agree that the Nikin 200-400 is a peerless lens, but Nikon doesn't have anything above 600mm, nor as many options up to that size, while Canon does.

I am genuinely interested in hearing about your info source.

Mine is a few years old but was Chasseur d'Image very rigorous test done on an optical bench before they moved to DxO.

As far as the 300 f2.8 VR I own it does clearly outresolve the sensor of my D3x even at f2.8 from center to far corners... I don't see how a lens could be significantly better on the cameras available today.

As far as line up goes, if you look at high end then Canon and Nikon have exactly the same line up to 600mm, very few people use longer for various reasons I think you understand as well as I do.

Cheers,
Bernard

[BobFisher]

Well, I would rather briefly be a "fanboy" on a simple post ... than become a dedicated public crybaby to such an extent that I would create a public "boo-hoo blog" lamenting a product.

For the record, I have been more than satisfied with my Canon products ... but I do not need to create a public blog to gush to the whole world about it  






Thank you for the corrections, but both have fallen by the wayside to Canon in leadership of this area.

Jack




.

Is hyperbole your middle name?

I didn't 'create' my blog to complain about Canon.  There's a single post.  Given the zeal and misstatements of fact made by you in this discussion, it seems your self-description as being 'briefly' a Canon fanboy is probably a pretty gross mischaracterization.  Had you actually taken the time to read the blog post, the ridiculousness of your description of me as a 'dedicated public crybaby' would become self-evident to even as ardent a fanboy as you.  

I guess Rob Galbraith is a dedicated, public crybaby as well for continuing to discuss Canon's AF problems.  I guess the reviewer of the 5D MkII on this very site is a dedicated, public crybaby for stating that it may not even be the best camera in its class.  Or that Canon has a 'solid B+' lens lineup.

[DAV33]

This topic appears to have gone off course.  It is was not intended to start a controversy of Canon vs. Nikon, etc.  Rather, it was primarily concerned with falling Canon quality standards and product leadership.  You can have the best product in the world, but if you can’t consistently reproduce it for sale at consistent hi quality, then who cares?  If the whole industry turns out lenses of highly variable quality, does it make it right and should we accept it?

If we agree that IQ [but not necessarily utility] is the measure of camera system “goodness”, then here is how the top ten cameras rank according to DxO Mark: 1/ Phase 1 D65; 2/ Nikon D3X ; 3/ Phase 1 P40;  4/ Nikon D3S; 5/ Nikon D3; 6/ Nikon D700; 7/ Canon EOS 1DS MKIII; 8/ Canon 5D MKII; 9/ Sony Alpha 850; 10/ Sony Alpha 900. The Canon 7D is ranked 32 and bound on either side by the Sony Alpha 550 and the EOS Rebel T2i.  This does not seem to support continued “Canon Leadership”.

Finally, I would like to thank all those who found it necessary to add ad hominem remarks that add virtually nothing to the subject at hand.

[DaveCurtis]

This topic appears to have gone off course.  It is was not intended to start a controversy of Canon vs. Nikon, etc.  Rather, it was primarily concerned with falling Canon quality standards and product leadership.  You can have the best product in the world, but if you can’t consistently reproduce it for sale at consistent hi quality, then who cares?  If the whole industry turns out lenses of highly variable quality, does it make it right and should we accept it?

If we agree that IQ [but not necessarily utility] is the measure of camera system “goodness”, then here is how the top ten cameras rank according to DxO Mark: 1/ Phase 1 D65; 2/ Nikon D3X ; 3/ Phase 1 P40;  4/ Nikon D3S; 5/ Nikon D3; 6/ Nikon D700; 7/ Canon EOS 1DS MKIII; 8/ Canon 5D MKII; 9/ Sony Alpha 850; 10/ Sony Alpha 900. The Canon 7D is ranked 32 and bound on either side by the Sony Alpha 550 and the EOS Rebel T2i.  This does not seem to support continued “Canon Leadership”.

Finally, I would like to thank all those who found it necessary to add ad hominem remarks that add virtually nothing to the subject at hand.

Just one quick comment.
After reading dozens of Diglloyds  Canon and Nikon lens reviews, he has had many problems with the assembly quality of Nikon lenses as well as Canon.

[dseelig]

The canon 1d mk 1v focus is great, the only negative review was from Galbraith and guess who he gets advertising form, Nikon. All the negative reviewers of the mk111 at sportsshooter.com seem to love the mk 1v. I have had both and the mk 1v is great. I had one bad mk 111 which canon fixed, before the official fixes came out. David

[JohnKoerner]

Is hyperbole your middle name?

No, my middle name is Arthur.

Speaking of hyperbole and rhetorical BS, if I recall correctly you initiated it, and it seems that you are the one furthering it. A little kidding is fun, but your attempt at escalation only proves you got a little butt-hurt in the exchange  

I didn't 'create' my blog to complain about Canon.  There's a single post.  Given the zeal and misstatements of fact made by you in this discussion, it seems your self-description as being 'briefly' a Canon fanboy is probably a pretty gross mischaracterization.  Had you actually taken the time to read the blog post, the ridiculousness of your description of me as a 'dedicated public crybaby' would become self-evident to even as ardent a fanboy as you.  

I am sorry I wasn't interested in reading your blog, as you've said nothing to compel me enough to do so. Since you called me a fanboy for having good things to say about Canon, I merely flipped the lens around and called you a crybaby for saying bad things about Canon. Funny how that works, isn't it?

In truth, had you actually just stuck to the facts, and omitted the initial hyperbole and name-calling yourself, I wouldn't have needed to hurt your feelings by calling you a crybaby. And it seems you're still crying  

Yes, I am an ardent fan of good camera technology, as I have a developing interest in photography. I am a fan of Canon because I believe they offer the most complete set of tools of any vendor, that are highly-competitive (or better) in every segment, and that they do so for the least overall expense to the consumer. Regarding the imperfections in particular models or samples, I have a more positive outlook on things, and I don't really like to spend too much time complaining about imperfections here and there; I would rather spend my time appreciating the benefits of what I have. I think one of the posters here, Kirk Gittings, summed-up my views best when he said, "After 32 years in this business I think this is the best of times. We have never had such tools and the future promises ever better ones."

Except for the fact I don't have 32 years in the business, this is my view exactly (that the available options are great), and so I get a little annoyed when I read crybaby posts over a few things that may not be perfect yet.

I guess Rob Galbraith is a dedicated, public crybaby as well for continuing to discuss Canon's AF problems.  I guess the reviewer of the 5D MkII on this very site is a dedicated, public crybaby for stating that it may not even be the best camera in its class.  Or that Canon has a 'solid B+' lens lineup.

I don't read Galbraith's site either and I am not much of a name-dropper.

I do read some of the topics and reviews on this site, as well as others, and the reviewer of the 5DMkII on this site is entitled to his opinion. I don't own a 5DMkII and have no intention of buying one. The reason I posted what I did originally was to address the contention that Canon is "slipping" to the point it will soon be "too late" for them ... which I thought was a bit melodramatic. Nothing more. My own view is more positive, namely that other companies have their own good products and ideas to offer, some of which have surpassed Canon in other segments, which forever means that new innovations will continue to happen and thereby make photography better for everybody ... which I regard as a good thing. Anyway, I have rambled enough.

Take care and I hope you feel better and that you learn to enjoy what's good, rather than always complaining about what's bad. I think each mentality tells a lot about a person.

Jack





.