Michael:
This is my first interaction with you on your web site, so let me begin by praising the outstanding quality of the articles and reviews on Luminous Landscape. I also recommend the Video Journal to everyone that I know -- and urge them to buy all of the back issues! '
'
Having said that, I must respectfully disagree:
(1) I have owned Canon -- and Canon only -- for over 20 years. IMHO it is the best 35 mm system for landscape use. I'm a member of the Holy Grail club as well from that perspective.
(2) Is my posting a tirade? I believe that manufacturers only devote the necessary engineering resources -- or will devote even more resources -- when they are sharply criticised for an obvious and serious problem. All too often those who use a particular system just defend it rather than sharply criticising it even when such comments are warranted.
(3) The dust problem may be minor for you and others -- but you are clearly a minority in light of the postings from those complaining about the problem. Just check out the postings on the Galbraith forum -- they go on for page after page after page. When so many Canon owners are reporting serious problems the issue simply can't be ignored -- notwithstanding your own experience.
(4) Indeed, the many web pages devoted to cleaning strongly support my view that we should sharply crticize Canon. Those who use these cameras have tried saran wrap, spatulas, alocohol and other cleaning products. This is really an absurd situation. Canon sells an $8000 camera that includes such serious defect that we driven to trying saran wrap and spatulas to clean it! Frankly, it is remarkable that there are not more protests of indignation.
(5) Indeed, your own article violates the express written instructions from Canon included with the 1Ds. Some have expressed concern that using any of these methods may violate the warranty. Despite that concern, we have all tried these cleaning methods.
And why? Why do we run the risk of voiding the warranty? Because the method recommended by Canon is grossly inadequate.
Let's see -- Canon markets a product with a serious problem and then recommends a solution that we all know is inadequate.
If that isn't cause for protests to Canon -- what does it take?
(6) IMHO it is simply indisputable that the current technology is entirely unacceptable for the average consumer. The price of full frame CMOS sensors will signficantly drop in price at some point in the future. Even when that happens, Canon could never sell this technology to the mass public. The public would not waste hours and hours cleaning their cameras.
If the goal is to undermine public support for digital -- well just market this technology to the public and the results will speak for themselves. I'd argue that if the technology is not acceptable for the average consumer -- it is equally unacceptable in an $8000 professional camera.
(7) If your own recommended solution worked -- and did so every time without concern -- we would all be happy campers. Unfortunately, many of us (myself included) have found that Eclipse leaves as many spots as it cleans. I welcome any suggestions in that regard, but I gave up on Eclipse and the swabs after trying it in countless variations. In my own experience they just make the problem worse. As far as I can tell Eclipse evaporates so quickly it leaves spots behind which then can't be easily removed. I welcome any advice in that regard, as maybe I am simply doing it wrong.