Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Canon EOS 5D MkI Owners ** IMPORTANT WARNING **  (Read 9063 times)
Simon J.A. Simpson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 164


« on: May 07, 2011, 04:11:39 AM »
ReplyReply

This is an important and urgent warning to all Canon EOS 5D owners.

In April I was in Turkey on a photographic trip – fortunately some private work and not a commercial assignment.
On the fifth day of my three week visit the reflex mirror of my Canon EOS 5D fell out having detached itself from the cradle !

After some extensive research on the internet I found that this is a common and frequent problem with EOS 5Ds (the MkI not the MkII) and is as a result of the glue, which holds the mirror onto the cradle, failing.  In my case all four glue spots failed at the point of contact with the cradle.  The mirror was irrevocably damaged when it fell out of the body.  Sadly, since I only had one EOS body with me, this was the end of the photography I had planned for the trip.

Further research on the internet reveals that Canon have known about this problem since 2008, and published an advisory on their US and European websites in February 2009 (it has also been reported on this forum). 
Furthermore it appears that all EOS 5D MkIs are effected (mine was from a late production batch and certainly earlier batches are documented as having be effected).  It is only a question of time, therefore, before the glue fails and the mirror will detach itself from the cradle.  Thus all Canon EOS 5D MKI owners will need to get their cameras fixed as a matter of some urgency before they suffer the same consequences.

Canon have not issued a product recall even though there is a clear and pressing need for one.  Moreover they appear not to have taken any steps whatsoever to inform 5D owners that their cameras are seriously at fault and that they risk losing full functionality without warning.  Although an “advisory” note is posted on their US and European websites this is not immediately obvious nor accessible (http://tinyurl.com/amnyyr).  In my case, my 5D is registered with Canon online.  I receive regular marketing emails but not one informing me of this problem.  Had I known, in 2009, that this was an issue I would have sent my camera to Canon for repair without any hesitation.  And then would not have wasted an expensive trip to Turkey in 2011 for a photographic project which I was unable to even get started.

Canon offer a free repair service although in the UK you will have to pay for sending the camera to the repairer yourself (a number are listed on Canon’s website: http://tinyurl.com/oseayj .  My research, so far, reveals that the problem is confined solely to the EOS 5D MkI and that no other Canon models appear to be effected.

All Canon EOS 5D MkI users are likely to be effected by this issue and they should get their camera back to Canon for repair as a matter of some urgency.
Logged
Keith Reeder
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 216


WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 07, 2011, 11:24:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Hardly "urgent", Simon - as you've now found, this problem and its solution have been in the public eye for years.

And there's no need for a product recall - many folk will never have this happen, and it's well-enough publicised, one way or another, that anyone who's worried about it can get the work done proactively if they want.

I guess I'm saying that this might be news to you, but it's not news.

Oh - and while I sympathise about the spoiled holiday, I wouldn't dream of going on a "photographic trip" without a back-up body...
« Last Edit: May 07, 2011, 11:27:15 AM by Keith Reeder » Logged

Keith Reeder
Blyth, NE England
uaiomex
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 973


WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 07, 2011, 12:42:13 PM »
ReplyReply

What if he has no second body? Just asking.
Eduardo

Hardly "urgent", Simon - as you've now found, this problem and its solution have been in the public eye for years.

And there's no need for a product recall - many folk will never have this happen, and it's well-enough publicised, one way or another, that anyone who's worried about it can get the work done proactively if they want.

I guess I'm saying that this might be news to you, but it's not news.

Oh - and while I sympathise about the spoiled holiday, I wouldn't dream of going on a "photographic trip" without a back-up body...
Logged
schrodingerscat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 369


« Reply #3 on: May 07, 2011, 01:00:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Based on over 25 years of experience as a repair tech, I can state that...

It is not a common problem, and not "all" 5Ds are going to suffer from this. So far I've re-glued mirrors in a total of three cameras(have also re-glued mirrors in Minoltas). The general consensus is that the combined cause is both environmental and the use of an adhesive that didn't show it's limitations until well after the product was brought to market. Unfortunately the days of extensive field testing of prototypes is mostly over and this sort of problem is possible with any new consumer product. The automotive industry is a good example. And when any product is cranked out by the tens of thousands, or more, there's bound to be some defective units, and some are bound to get by QC.

No one is happy when on the receiving end, but life is not perfect. Myself, I've been having some difficulties, including on a recent trip, with a very high end piece of gear. But it's my personal experience and in no way feel compelled to publicly condemn the company. Many others are using the product with no problems whatsoever. Yeah I'm a bit miffed, but...

However, I could go on about another large camera company who ported several engineering designs over from their film lines that have a much higher failure rate than the 5D and there seems to be no screeching in the blogosheres.

PS - As far as I know the factory repair for this, mirror detached or not, is still to replace the entire mirror box and Canon service would probably not perform the repair if the mirror was intact.This is a very expensive repair, so if you saved the mirror it might be better to have it performed by an independent tech.  If the mirror is still attached to the frame there is a good possibility of damaging the mirror while removing it for re-gluing. The mirror is only sold with the mirror box box assembly.
Logged
Clearair
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


« Reply #4 on: May 08, 2011, 05:08:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Nuts

Bought a 5D about five years ago as I was in Namibia for two years as my first FF body.
Bounce, dust and heat on 36k of road trips.
Sold to a mate on leaving. It had the same use for two years or so before being sold to a tour guide who uses this camera A LOT.

We are all friends so I know how it's used.

WE are talking camping in riverbeds, wildlife, landscape, seascapes lots of hiking.

I get fed up with bitching about this body. Yes there have been issues but it's not the drama it's made out to be.
The cost of this camera for the performace when it hit the market was exceptional and if you want a rock deal with the weight and heft of the Pro built version.

I now have a 5D 11, two years and guess what,

1 It focusses.
2 I only see banding noise in the sort of light that is rubbish
3 It has not fallen apart.
4 The battery door does not creak.
5 There are different battery options that work.
6 I am still not using all of the cameras potential.
7 I'm gagging for the next version but don't expect it soon and may hang onto this one.


Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #5 on: May 08, 2011, 02:13:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, I'm totally with Simon on this one.

It isn't a matter of brands, it's a matter of the hapless public doing the final inspection and buying the duds that should have never made it to market.

It's a despicable practice, and I believe one should name and shame until they decide to do something about the woeful state of affairs that's currently accepted, as some of the repies indicate it obviously is. It isn't enough to feel miffed and do zilch; you have to make your displeasure felt!

Rob C
Logged

thierrylegros396
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 636


« Reply #6 on: May 09, 2011, 03:21:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Now I'm very deceived with Canon !

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=50384.0

I bought the CP800 in december and return it ASAP, received another one, same problem !

And now you can see that I'm not the only one, and the problem is still not fixed !!

Very deceived with Canon.
Logged
Simon J.A. Simpson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 164


« Reply #7 on: May 09, 2011, 03:34:06 AM »
ReplyReply

It's interesting isn't it…

My aim was to inform not criticise.

You try to do folk a favour by informing them of a critical problem which may well have a profound effect their photography and you get some people who seem to delight in rubbishing one's efforts by sarcastic and patronising remarks.

It's a real shame.

Sighs heavily.

Notes:
1:  'Clearair', no one's "bitching" about this camera.  It's a great camera – unstuck mirrors notwithstanding.  There's no "bitching" in my post.  If you don't avail yourself of Canon's free prescriptive repair that's your choice.
2:  'schrodingerscat', I can only go on the numerous reports of this problem posted on the internet which seem to indicate that this problem is not confined to an unfortunate few as you suggest.  Given the evidence I have gathered it seems only reasonable to conclude that it is only a question of time before the glue holding the mirror onto the cradle fails and this is likely to happen to all of the 5D MkI bodies Canon produced.  Canon have not provided any evidence to the contrary.
Logged
Cineski
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


« Reply #8 on: May 09, 2011, 09:11:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Combined, my 2 5D1's have 350,000 shots taken with them.  Just had to replace the shutters and they're still going strong.  I hope the 5D3 gets back to 5D1 image quality because the 5D2's are lackluster.  Yeah there's resolution, but there's no soul.
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #9 on: May 09, 2011, 01:32:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Combined, my 2 5D1's have 350,000 shots taken with them.  Just had to replace the shutters and they're still going strong.  I hope the 5D3 gets back to 5D1 image quality because the 5D2's are lackluster.  Yeah there's resolution, but there's no soul.



Ah, soul; for that, you'd best try film again...

;-)

Rob C
Logged

Cineski
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


« Reply #10 on: May 09, 2011, 10:01:40 PM »
ReplyReply

I have since Feb of this year  Grin  Yeah, THAT'S got some soul.  For recording with 1's and 0's the 5D1 does pretty well.



Ah, soul; for that, you'd best try film again...

;-)

Rob C
Logged
Kirk Gittings
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1543


WWW
« Reply #11 on: May 09, 2011, 10:39:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Combined, my 2 5D1's have 350,000 shots taken with them.  Just had to replace the shutters and they're still going strong.  I hope the 5D3 gets back to 5D1 image quality because the 5D2's are lackluster.  Yeah there's resolution, but there's no soul.

What a load of crap.
Logged

Thanks,
Kirk

Kirk Gittings
Architecture and Landscape Photography
WWW.GITTINGSPHOTO.COM

LIGHT+SPACE+STRUCTURE (blog)
Clearair
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


« Reply #12 on: May 10, 2011, 01:39:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi simonS      The tone (use of bold text) of your post came across as more of a rant than a heads up information piece.
This subject has been discussed before after all.

The bitching comment was global. Not confined to one individual but to this camera. Success has it's detractors.

Film??
As an aside, But not to throw wood on the fire, two bodies have failed in the field that I owned.
Both film. As to soul, eeerrr it's a machine. IQ does the job.
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #13 on: May 10, 2011, 02:55:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi simonS      The tone (use of bold text) of your post came across as more of a rant than a heads up information piece.
This subject has been discussed before after all.

The bitching comment was global. Not confined to one individual but to this camera. Success has it's detractors.

Film??
As an aside, But not to throw wood on the fire, two bodies have failed in the field that I owned.
Both film. As to soul, eeerrr it's a machine. IQ does the job.




Really?

Rob C
Logged

Simon J.A. Simpson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 164


« Reply #14 on: May 10, 2011, 03:42:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Bold type also attracts attention to important pieces of information …

Another point of information about whether or not this problem is likely to effect all or most 5D MkIs:

Canon have offered a free pre-emptive or prescriptive repair irrespective of whether the mirror has fallen out or not.  This would seem to suggest that Canon may believe that all 5D MkI bodies can develop this problem.
Logged
Clearair
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


« Reply #15 on: May 10, 2011, 04:59:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Really what?
Logged
Clearair
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


« Reply #16 on: May 10, 2011, 05:12:38 AM »
ReplyReply

I think for once top marks to Canon.
Free repair of some kind even if no problem with the camera. I'm sure you are right on this but I have doubts as to trying it here in the UK. I will drop my contact in Parks or directly to CPS to get a response.

How many of us would send in a perfectly working camera for a repair that is not needed. It's not like a potential fault on a car's brake or throttle.

I indicated that in my limited experience in handling only about three of these, that it was not needed.

Anyway enough, I hope you got your 5D fixed and all is well.
Logged
Cineski
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


« Reply #17 on: May 10, 2011, 08:51:40 AM »
ReplyReply

What is, my opinion?  Or your extremely unintelligent and unhelpful response?

What a load of crap.

Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #18 on: May 10, 2011, 10:33:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Really what?



Really as in do you really believe that film has no intrinsic quality to offer that is beyond the capability of digital to replicate.

Rob C
Logged

Clearair
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


« Reply #19 on: May 10, 2011, 12:36:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Not sure what to say.
I was stating that a machine, film or otherwise does not have a soul. Not yet anyway, maybe the next Nikon or Leica. (ouch!)
But if pushed as you have asked, I will say that there is nothing that the film stocks we all generally used did that digital capture can't do and do better in some cases.......

Lets leave out the military & science film stocks, or any anorak home made stuff.

Now I will duck under the parapet and hide.

We have gone off topic now anyway.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad