Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10   Go Down

Author Topic: canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica  (Read 141987 times)

mrenters

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 80
    • http://www.teckelworks.com/
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #140 on: September 07, 2009, 10:17:32 am »

Quote from: DanLehman
Are warranties transferrable to a buyer if you sold the cameras?
If not, then their lack of such would be a non-issue, per se.
.:.  You could get the repair sans warranty, use and (hope-hope) verify
proper functioning (dry, at least!),
and then sell them.
Maybe that cuts your loss?

Canon service appears to be non-responsive at this point.  If there weren't the cost in switching systems I would have switched by now out of sheer frustration.  My experience has certainly cured me of buying any further Canon equipment.


Quote
To mrenters case:  could your (two) prior usage have been at fault for putting
the cameras into a condition that was then aggravated by the Antarctic conditions?
-- that some moisture effects occurred on a prior time but so far had not the
follow-on moisture to aggravate the condition; but on the trip, got that and so
quickly failed?

The cameras were brand new and had only had a few pictures taken with them.  All of these were taken indoors or outdoors in sunny or overcast conditions (no rain or moisture).

Martin
Logged

telyt

  • Guest
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #141 on: September 07, 2009, 12:36:04 pm »

This (and other 5DII problems) along with the 1DIII focus problems makes me wonder why so many are willing to jump to the next cheap Canon wundercamera, the 7D, before it's been adequately tested.  Rewarding Canon for their recent failures?  Fanboys?  Gottahavethelatest?  It seems Canon is getting the message: cheap is good, QC be damned.
Logged

Slough

  • Guest
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #142 on: September 07, 2009, 05:45:50 pm »

I find this Antarctica saga, parts 1 and 2, very curious. In general forums are not full of whiney Canon users complaining about damaged Canon cameras due to water ingress. And yet the number of failures of Canon cameras on both trips is horrendous. The total number of Nikon bodies probably is statistically significant (a guess, I'm no statistician), in which case Canon are nowhere near as good as Nikon at surviving MR's Antarctica trips. (Note how careful I've been to draw very limited conclusions.) So what is going on? Surely the users have a random sample of cameras. So why so many failures? Could there be some common factor that stresses the cameras more than normal, in such a way that is more harmful to Canon gear? Did the particpants ship their gear in the unpressurised hold of an aircraft? In which case maybe pressure changes stressed the seals? Or were there large temperature differences between the cabins and the outside? I'm guessing, but Canon users on forums get really twitchy when these trips are mentioned. It is bad publicity for Canon, that is for sure.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12164
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #143 on: September 07, 2009, 07:17:16 pm »

Quote from: Slough
Could there be some common factor that stresses the cameras more than normal, in such a way that is more harmful to Canon gear? Did the particpants ship their gear in the unpressurised hold of an aircraft? In which case maybe pressure changes stressed the seals? Or were there large temperature differences between the cabins and the outside? I'm guessing, but Canon users on forums get really twitchy when these trips are mentioned. It is bad publicity for Canon, that is for sure.

From what we hear, conditions during that trip were much milder than what many of us experience on a regular basis in other locations. The key probably lies in the mix of sea wind deposited salt and condensation.

Canon never claimed that the 5DII was fully weatherproof, did them? They just claimed that the sealing had been re-inforced. A body that is not fully weatherproof is not weatherproof. Light rain is not an issue because it doesn't hit many parts of the body. On the other hand condensation will show up everywhere, and is going to dilute salt deposited by sea winds, and this salty water has the potential to enter through these non protected areas and cause corrosion.

On the other hand Nikon clearly insisted on the weather resistance of the D300, D700, D3 and D3x. Is there more to this story than the intended usage of these respective cameras? Canon is still selling the 1ds3 for a reason, and that reason is that they designed and validated the camera in various demanding conditions. Aren't the 5DII users expecting that kind of performance not being a bit un-realistic about their expectations?

Cheers,
Bernard

Slough

  • Guest
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #144 on: September 08, 2009, 06:18:27 am »

Quote from: BernardLanguillier
From what we hear, conditions during that trip were much milder than what many of us experience on a regular basis in other locations. The key probably lies in the mix of sea wind deposited salt and condensation.

Canon never claimed that the 5DII was fully weatherproof, did them? They just claimed that the sealing had been re-inforced. A body that is not fully weatherproof is not weatherproof. Light rain is not an issue because it doesn't hit many parts of the body. On the other hand condensation will show up everywhere, and is going to dilute salt deposited by sea winds, and this salty water has the potential to enter through these non protected areas and cause corrosion.

On the other hand Nikon clearly insisted on the weather resistance of the D300, D700, D3 and D3x. Is there more to this story than the intended usage of these respective cameras? Canon is still selling the 1ds3 for a reason, and that reason is that they designed and validated the camera in various demanding conditions. Aren't the 5DII users expecting that kind of performance not being a bit un-realistic about their expectations?

Cheers,
Bernard

Well, yes, that is sort of what I might conclude But, mention this on Canon forums and numerous people say they use these cameras in wet conditions, or near the coast without issues (and don't forget some high end ones failed too). So either Canon users with failed cameras are not on forums, or the MR trips were somehow special. Taking what you say, if true then the Antarctic would have to have higher humidity and/or air-salt content than most other coastal situations. My belief is that we really need some kind of database with user experiences i.e. failure, no failure, and length of ownership.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12164
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #145 on: September 08, 2009, 07:16:42 am »

Quote from: Slough
Well, yes, that is sort of what I might conclude But, mention this on Canon forums and numerous people say they use these cameras in wet conditions, or near the coast without issues (and don't forget some high end ones failed too). So either Canon users with failed cameras are not on forums, or the MR trips were somehow special. Taking what you say, if true then the Antarctic would have to have higher humidity and/or air-salt content than most other coastal situations. My belief is that we really need some kind of database with user experiences i.e. failure, no failure, and length of ownership.

Yes, not too sure.

It might have to do with the usage pattern, repeated shooting in a sea environment for several weeks with frequent back and forth between inside and outside, and condensation happening several times a day which could have increased the probability of such an event?

As far as the high end failures, it is indeed strange. Many sports shooters shoot in heavy rain with 1dIII without special protection and that has never seemed to be a major problem, but the sea environment might change the game somehow?

Cheers,
Bernard

Slough

  • Guest
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #146 on: September 08, 2009, 08:14:54 am »

Quote from: BernardLanguillier
Yes, not too sure.

It might have to do with the usage pattern, repeated shooting in a sea environment for several weeks with frequent back and forth between inside and outside, and condensation happening several times a day which could have increased the probability of such an event?

As far as the high end failures, it is indeed strange. Many sports shooters shoot in heavy rain with 1dIII without special protection and that has never seemed to be a major problem, but the sea environment might change the game somehow?

Cheers,
Bernard

Yes, that might be it i.e. use in such conditions over a prolonged period, and going in and out of doors which encourages condensation. That last bit is unlikely for most sports and nature shooters surely. So, more salt, and more inducement for condensation. I am prepared to believe that is the explanation, though it is conjecture.
Logged

Ben Rubinstein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1760
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #147 on: September 08, 2009, 02:49:35 pm »

Quote from: Slough
Well, yes, that is sort of what I might conclude But, mention this on Canon forums and numerous people say they use these cameras in wet conditions, or near the coast without issues (and don't forget some high end ones failed too). So either Canon users with failed cameras are not on forums, or the MR trips were somehow special. Taking what you say, if true then the Antarctic would have to have higher humidity and/or air-salt content than most other coastal situations. My belief is that we really need some kind of database with user experiences i.e. failure, no failure, and length of ownership.

If you're talking about the thread on FM, keep in mind that the canon forum there is full of people who still deny that there was anything ever wrong with the focusing on the 1D mkIII despite all the canon recalls. They blame it on internet hysteria caused by RG that forced Canon to 'pretend' a fix and the problem only ever was user error. I wouldn't really take much notice of them there. The fanboyism to professionalism ratio there is rather horrendous.

According to the 5D mkII white paper it has sealing close to that of the 1N. Now they call the sealing on the 7D equal to the 1N. In other words pretty much the same as the 5D mkII. If only Nikon had a couple more AFS primes, when my 5D's eventually do die (they are both dying from overuse/abuse, 4 years of full time wedding photography) I can't see anything in the Canon stable to even begin to excite me to be honest..

dow

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #148 on: October 28, 2009, 04:06:13 pm »

Hi,

I just have a very special experience with the 5D mk II and Canons attitude towards their products. After about 9 month of careful amateur use and about 11k of pictures a slight haze of dust starts to show up in the LCD and the rear Monitor. In addition the CF Card Doors squeaks since day one. When I send in the Camera to have the sensor and the mirror-box cleaned I requested Canon to fix the Card Door and take care of the dust since it is claimed to be a kind-of sealed camera within their guarranty. Not that it matters for the image-quality produced by the 5D but just since I think that a camera of that price should have a certain standard of build quality.

The answer of Canon was simple (Translated from German) - We checked and there is no material or production error. The sound and the hold of the CF card door is within the standards of that model. The mentioned dust is normal due to electrostatic charges.

So the squeaking noise is normal if you shoot film - that is probably for the atmosphere.
Well they offered to replace the components for a nice charge which I will not comment.

Despite the really nice image quality - I would not buy the 5d mk II again. I am really surprised about the way Canon handles quality issues with their customers. They should just withdraw any claims on sealing, so no one would be disappointed.

At least I am!

Oliver
Logged

reburns

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 144
    • Ralph E Burns Photography
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #149 on: October 28, 2009, 11:51:42 pm »

Quote from: dow
...We checked and there is no material or production error....

OI had two similar experiences.  One, my 5DII got spashed when photographing the regatta club.  I blotted it dry quickly and removed the battery, but to no surpise it croaked and was sent in for repair.  While sending it to repair, I asked for the exposure mode dial to be tightened because the the dial on the new body could spin inadvertently causing missed shots.  It was returned to me without any change but with the same quote, "checked and it is within specification".  By comparison I once sent in a Contax and the tech I spoke to said he'd adjust to my satisfaction (but no secret that those two are on the opposite ends of the spectrum).  Not sure if warranted but the overall exprience added to my restlessness with Canon and I just hawked it all.     - Ralph
Logged

Christopher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1409
    • http://www.hauser-photoart.com
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #150 on: October 29, 2009, 12:35:12 am »

It really is interesting. Perhaps Canon has really wide standards. I can only talk of my 5DMk2, which I used in rain, fog and snow quite often over 10 months now and it works still as it should. No problems at all. However I would never put it into a plastic bag, that kills even a sealed camera. No sealing protects of condensation.
Logged
Christopher Hauser
[email=chris@hauser-p

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11195
    • Echophoto
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #151 on: October 29, 2009, 02:04:28 am »

Hi,

As far as I understand six Canon 5DIIs failed the same day in conditions that were more humid than wet. Very little other equipment failed on the same trip. My guess is that those Canons may have had a weak spot that may have been fixed in later batches as a part of a continuous improvement program. The environmental conditions specified for cameras are normally really narrow and benign, fortunately the camera take much more beating than specified.

The Canon 5DII is not a professional grade model, the 1DsIII is probably better sealed.

Best regards
Erik


Quote from: BernardLanguillier
Yes, not too sure.

It might have to do with the usage pattern, repeated shooting in a sea environment for several weeks with frequent back and forth between inside and outside, and condensation happening several times a day which could have increased the probability of such an event?

As far as the high end failures, it is indeed strange. Many sports shooters shoot in heavy rain with 1dIII without special protection and that has never seemed to be a major problem, but the sea environment might change the game somehow?

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: October 29, 2009, 02:05:05 am by ErikKaffehr »
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

ThomasPoeschmann

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 30
    • elbsandsteinfoto.de
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #152 on: October 29, 2009, 03:32:31 am »

Quote from: dow
I just have a very special experience with the 5D mk II and Canons attitude towards their products. After about 9 month of careful amateur use and about 11k of pictures a slight haze of dust starts to show up in the LCD and the rear Monitor. In addition the CF Card Doors squeaks since day one. When I send in the Camera to have the sensor and the mirror-box cleaned I requested Canon to fix the Card Door and take care of the dust since it is claimed to be a kind-of sealed camera within their guarranty. Not that it matters for the image-quality produced by the 5D but just since I think that a camera of that price should have a certain standard of build quality.

1.200 pictures a month
40 pictures each day

I do not call this "amateur".

Quote
The answer of Canon was simple (Translated from German) - We checked and there is no material or production error. The sound and the hold of the CF card door is within the standards of that model. The mentioned dust is normal due to electrostatic charges.

So the squeaking noise is normal if you shoot film - that is probably for the atmosphere.
Well they offered to replace the components for a nice charge which I will not comment.

Despite the really nice image quality - I would not buy the 5d mk II again. I am really surprised about the way Canon handles quality issues with their customers. They should just withdraw any claims on sealing, so no one would be disappointed.

The CF door issue is not new to canon at all. There are numerous descriptions how to fix it, for example: http://gletscherbruch.de/foto/deckel/deckel.html. And for serious movies you probably use an external mic.

I have never managed to get any dust to my rear LCD, including my 300D that is still alive and in use. There are quite a lot of things that annoy me about a 5D2. But since there is no alternative, as other vendors have a limited selection of lenses, mine will stay until it retires in a few years.

My cameras sometimes get wet - for example my 5D1 that handled one hour in drizzle rain pretty ok after giving enough time to dry with all doors opened.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2009, 03:36:01 am by ThomasPoeschmann »
Logged

WaitingForAnR10

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 28
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #153 on: October 29, 2009, 09:36:30 am »

Quote from: BernardLanguillier
From what we hear, conditions during that trip were much milder than what many of us experience on a regular basis in other locations. The key probably lies in the mix of sea wind deposited salt and condensation.

Cheers,
Bernard

Could I throw in another suggestion to the mix.  Maybe it's a combination of high humidity, salt in the air, and *high winds*.  The winds would increase the ability of humid salty air to penetrate any opening in the body.  Perhaps under more benign conditions this penetration wouldn't occur?
Logged

Slough

  • Guest
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #154 on: October 29, 2009, 03:54:56 pm »

Quote from: WaitingForAnR10
Could I throw in another suggestion to the mix.  Maybe it's a combination of high humidity, salt in the air, and *high winds*.  The winds would increase the ability of humid salty air to penetrate any opening in the body.  Perhaps under more benign conditions this penetration wouldn't occur?

I don't see what is wrong with Bernard's suggestion. The unusual factor here is a group of people moving from warm heated rooms, to a cool outdoors with plenty of moist salty air. The 5D2 is not well sealed. Salty moist air gets inside, they come indoors, and the air condenses onto the circuits, and bang, the camera fries. It is a consequence of light sealing, which is normally enough to keep out light rain.
Logged

WaitingForAnR10

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 28
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #155 on: October 29, 2009, 06:15:59 pm »

Quote from: Slough
I don't see what is wrong with Bernard's suggestion. The unusual factor here is a group of people moving from warm heated rooms, to a cool outdoors with plenty of moist salty air. The 5D2 is not well sealed. Salty moist air gets inside, they come indoors, and the air condenses onto the circuits, and bang, the camera fries. It is a consequence of light sealing, which is normally enough to keep out light rain.

I wasn't suggesting that Bernard's suggestion was wrong, just pointing out that if there were high winds at the time (don't know one way or the other, I wasn't there) that the effect would be even worse than usual.  Highs winds might have created enough extra air pressure to make it easier to penetrate the seals.

It seems that something occurred on this trip that was out of the normal pattern for this camera.  Other people must have gone out in similar humid salt air conditions, but I haven't heard of this many examples going down at once, hence the speculation of what may have been a bit different here.

Just a thought.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2009, 06:35:31 pm by WaitingForAnR10 »
Logged

telyt

  • Guest
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #156 on: October 30, 2009, 08:13:16 am »

Quote from: ThomasPoeschmann
1.200 pictures a month
40 pictures each day

I do not call this "amateur".

I've seen amateur Canon-using photographers make far more than 40 pictures per minute.  Mash the shutter switch and edit later.  40 per day is not heavy use.
Logged

Slough

  • Guest
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #157 on: October 30, 2009, 02:21:24 pm »

Quote from: WaitingForAnR10
It seems that something occurred on this trip that was out of the normal pattern for this camera.  Other people must have gone out in similar humid salt air conditions, but I haven't heard of this many examples going down at once, hence the speculation of what may have been a bit different here.

Yes, and in my opinion what is different is going suddenly from a warm room, to the cool outdoors, and vica versa. It is that sudden transition that may well be key.  Normally the transition would be more gradual: photographer shoots, packs camera in case, places camera in cool car, drives home, with car heating up, camera warms gradually with no condensation, takes warmed up camera into house. It is the fact that here a group of people are in a heated room on a cruise ship in the middle of a cold place surrounded by salty humid air.

As to whether or not wind is an issue, I have no idea. My guess is no, but that is no more than a guess, and I could well be wrong.
Logged

thecyclists

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17
    • http://www.dahl-stamnes.net/Foto/index.php?ref=ll
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #158 on: November 04, 2009, 08:33:00 am »

I'm one of those unlucky owners of a 5DmkII. It failed after 4 weeks. As I have written before, until the day it failed it has been used in warm nice weather only.

I contacted specialists in production of printed circuit boards (PCB) and showed them the pictures of the damage. He told me that this damage has nothing to do with water damages. It must have been something else that has damaged the PCB and that this "something" must has been present when the camera was produced, unless it has been opened later.

I wrote a letter to Canon in Norway with this claims. In the letter I ask how they can tell that this is is a "severe moisture and water damage". After waiting several weeks for the answer, I got a short email without any answers at all. They do not want to answer my questions!

I just wonder why they do not want to answer my questions...
Logged

NigelC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 565
canon 5d mk11 in Antarctica
« Reply #159 on: November 04, 2009, 08:50:52 am »

Quote from: thecyclists
I'm one of those unlucky owners of a 5DmkII. It failed after 4 weeks. As I have written before, until the day it failed it has been used in warm nice weather only.

I contacted specialists in production of printed circuit boards (PCB) and showed them the pictures of the damage. He told me that this damage has nothing to do with water damages. It must have been something else that has damaged the PCB and that this "something" must has been present when the camera was produced, unless it has been opened later.

I wrote a letter to Canon in Norway with this claims. In the letter I ask how they can tell that this is is a "severe moisture and water damage". After waiting several weeks for the answer, I got a short email without any answers at all. They do not want to answer my questions!

I just wonder why they do not want to answer my questions...

So essentially, what this whole "5D2 Antartica" episode could amount to is a batch manufacuring fault? An impurity in the solder for example?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10   Go Up