That is really about it I am thinking of selling my 1ds mk111 and going with 2 5d mk11's I have one 5d mk11 . I saw a post in another forum the 5d mk11 did not do so well in anartica what happened with it?
Thanks David

It's closer than you think, see here

As you've probably heard there were a number of 5D mk II cameras that failed on the Antarctic trip (6 of the 26 on the trip or 23%). My wife and I accounted for 2 of those. Both failed within minutes of each other during a shore outing with light rain. Both were protected by Kata rain covers and both exhibited the same problem - the shutter release button appeared to be shorted out. When the camera was turned on it would immediately take a picture (or multiple if the camera was in continuous shooting mode). At least some of the other failures on the trip were similar.

When we got back to the ship we dried them out and they eventually (mostly) revived. My wife's acted up again as soon as it was even slightly humid and stopped working altogether in Buenos Aires at +35C, humid but sunny weather.

For a camera that is advertised as having "improved weather resistance" I can't say I'm impressed, and I'm even less so knowing that no other cameras had problems even though many of them were completely unprotected.

Both cameras were sent to Canon for repair and I received a call today saying there was corrosion at or near the shutter release and offering me the following options:

1) Have them fixed as best they could (free of charge) but without further warranty in case of internal failure
2) Trade them for new cameras at 50% off the retail price

I'm not convinced that this camera doesn't have serious problems with moisture compared to similar cameras from other manufacturers and I'm also not convinced I can trust the camera to work in anything other than warm dry air.

I like the camera otherwise and the images it produces are great, but if you can't rely on it, I don't know how useful it is. Make sure you carry a backup if there is any chance there could be moisture. I don't know if I'd buy it again given our experience.

Martin

Quite a horror story.

What strikes me as really curious are the options proposed to you.

Repair free of charge but losing your warranty further down the road? Get a new one for 50% off?

It appears your vendor (or Canon) acknowledges this is a malfunction that falls under warranty. It should be repaired with continued warranty or it should be replaced.

Or is this malfunction not covered by warranty?

Please let us know what comes of your dealings with Canon. Can you provide a reason for these options?

John

They said that water damage is not normally covered under warranty at all. As I understand it, if they fix it and the problem reoccurs, it will be difficult for them to determine whether it was caused by a new episode of water damage or the initial case and that their service people don't want to have to deal with that, hence the end of the warranty.

I don't know how or why they came up with the 50% discount on a new camera.

I'm a little torn about these options as I don't particularly think either one of them is ideal. I don't want to (nor do I feel I should) pay $3000CDN for two new bodies if there is a design defect and the new bodies fail the next time they don't like the humidity or color of the sky.

Getting them fixed but being without a warranty on a camera that I have little confidence in isn't great either and I'm again faced with the situation of what will happen if the camera decides the conditions outside are more than feels like handling that day.

I am careful with all my gear and the use it got in Antarctica was by no means anything that could be even remotely considered abuse of the equipment.

Martin

No insurance that might cover the expenses?

No.

Martin

I was about to put my 1DsMk3 up for sale and buy another 5dMk2 until I read the Antarctica report and this thread.

This is concerning, as is Canon's response so far.

I'm curious why this problem has surfaced with the 5DMk2, as it didn't appear to be much concern with 5D owners (at least I don't believe I've seen anything about it). I assume previous Antarctica expeditions sported a fair number of 5D shooters? I'd be curious if anyone from the previous trips has any insight on this. I am assuming they changed something ... and not for the better.

Perhaps this is a case of Canon not following the adage "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" - some bright engineer decided he could make a better shutter release button, or more likely save a buck or two with a change.

I've forwarded Michael's article and a link to this thread to a contact I have at Canon USA, and I'll be chatting with him about it at PMA. Who knows if it will do any good, but this sounds like a design flaw to me.

This is very odd. Corrosion? In the time frame of what, a few hours? To be honest, it sounds like they accept that there was no user negligence and that it is a manufacturing failure - otherwise, once it's fixed, why wouldn't you continue warranty? What else might cause the problem?

If it happened here, in Australia, I'd be pressing for warranty repair and full warranty to continue as normal. What if you have some other fault with the unit, completely unrelated? How can they deny warranty on that?

You can't cancel a warranty unless you can show user neglect, and if that's the case, why would you offer to repair it for free? The offer smacks of "we know it's a warranty failure, but we don't want to admit it, so we'll try to make it sound like it's your fault but we won't flat out say that because then you might take legal action and we'd lose so we'll try to sweet talk it with an 'offer' to make you think we're being nice".

If it's not a warranty failure, deny the claim. *IF* a good customer then presses you, then you might consider offering some sort of compromise as a business decision, but doing this sort of thing up front is just poor.

Hello Martin,

sad to hear about your bad experiences with the 5DMKII. What a PITA it must be to worry on location with 2 bodies malfunctioning. I posted another topic a few days ago about the 5D and its mirror fall-out flaws.
The mirror fell out so far 3-times and the CANON service report also stated corrosion problems inside the body of the 5D.
As it was not used in rain, mainly indoor shoots, it only comes down to the general humidity. Thats for the 5D.
But I am surprised CANON quotes corrosion on a mint body the first time its sees the light
I just speak for myself but I see the whole 5D-Series as not as reliable as any 20D-50D.

Michael

I'm very sympathetic with your problem. The problem is that cameras are specified for very benign working conditions, so if you use a camera outside the specified conditions the camera makers go free. This is a nasty thing. Fortunately most cameras work under a wide variety of conditions.

Now, the only cameras that went broke on the Antartic were Canons as far as I understand which is not exactly good for Canon's reputation. Perhaps you should try to act together with fellow Canon users who also had problems.

Hasselblad had a similar problem, with the front lens group falling out on some 50-110HC (?) zoom lenses. At that time Hasselblad essentially claimed that the camera should not be transported or held with the lens pointing down. (Pointing the lens toward the sky keeps of course the front lens from falling out, but limits the usefulness of the camera significantly.) I got the impression that Hasselblad was reluctant to acknowledge the problem.

Best regards
Erik Kaffehr

Hi,

a corrosion problem may be due to improper choice of materials. In that case it must be a construction problem.

Best regards
Erik Kaffehr

Hmm, the 5D Mk II is specified to operate in 0-40C, which is for the most part the conditions they had down there - didn't I see someone say it was on -2C at worst? And 85% or less humidity (shouldn't have been a problem).

I agree, Erik, that they can look for all sorts of reasons to walk away from warranty and the specifications are there for a reason, but it sounds like a very poor response from them.

Yes, I totally agree. My point was that environmental exposure wouldn't seem to be a valid cause of corrsion in this case. As you say, it would be a construction issue and therefore subject ot warranty protection.

Martin,

Did you have grips on either of the cameras?

Jerry

My theory is two-fold:

1. Corrosion was caused by salty seawater
2. Humidity exacerbated by the rain cover (!)

Salty water is pure murder for metals, much more so than plain old rain water. I used to work at a salt plant, and we'd have corrosion resistant piping costing an order of a magnitude more than normal piping - and salt would still eat through it given enough time. Therefore I'm not surprised to hear about camera failures on ships, boats and beaches, especially if there is water spraying about.

On the second point: I don't know how Kata covers are built, but the pictures I've seen suggest they are only partly sealed bags. It could very well be that the bag collects moisture, and/or that moisture condensates on the surface of the bag or camera, seeping into the sealing.

These both combined might explain the failure of the cameras.

now I don't know if I shall upgrade my 5D or go directly to Nikon D3X

Hi,

The 5DII is supposedly sealed, so I'd suggest that no water should be able to enter electronics on top of the camera. It also seems that only the 5DIIs were subject to this problems, so I would suggest that it's a problem with 5DIIs. I would suggest that Canon needs to fix that and call back the cameras having these problems or their customers may go elsewhere for shopping.

Best regards
Erik

I dont beleive so - From memory it has 'improved sealing' from the original 5D - its not fully sealed.

I think Chuck Westfall had a tech tips about this late last year - Again, from memory he said it was better sealed than the original, but no where near the sealing on the 1D series.

Hi,

I would interpret 'improved sealing' as sealing. I'm fully aware that you are not expected to be able to put the 5DII under the shower and have it survive, but I guess I would expect it to survive some rain or snow. All of my cameras have been soaking wet and none has failed me, yet...

Best regards
Erik

Just to give you an idea how well the Nikon tends to be weather sealed. I have been living on board of a ship in 2002 & 2003 (sailing from the Netherlands - Caribean - the Netherlands) I had my D1X with me. Besides the sensor being completely scattered with salt speckles the camera never quit on me.

Most other electronic devices went bust during that period. Sea environment is killing, corrosion by salted moist air is about the most aggressive I have seen.

I never used the 1D series of Canon but I assume they have the same good weather sealing. My D300 has been soaking wet on several occasions as well without problems. Maybe that is where the difference is concerning weather sealing? I don't know. Just guessing but when the manufacturer says weather sealed IMO it should be able to withstand being used under these circumstances (yeah, dropping it in salt water or otherwise completely submerging it is something else).

However; using it for a long period of time in a sea environment and still having it work is a big bonus and surprise IMO. For this I would only rely on the likes of the Dx series (no experience with the 1D series) and still keep my fingers crossed.

I am pretty sure Canon tested the MKII for (a.o.t.) moist conditions, like any new camera. And I am pretty sure it passed this test, otherwise Canon sux in bringing this on the market anyway.
The only solution to stop the speculating and keep the mkII buyers (like myself) reassured, is for Canon to investigate this issue. Maybe there was a bad batch, maybe there is a design flaw (I don't care as long as it is fixed), maybe it was bad luck (wasn't there someone called Murphy on that boat?), and even maybe it is a bad camera . MR and his website do mean something in cameraland, and in this period of time Canon would be wise to give a satisfactory explanation.

I don't have any malfunction with my mkII, although I didn't use it in rain or heavy fog yet. But I did take it several times from the cold outside (below zero) straight into my warm house, without any problem at all (and not in a plastic bag, as Canon suggests). If this issue can be resolved, people can enjoy a terrific camera.

(PS: Hallo Ray)

The 5DII is an economy product. The failures won't do Canon any good, but they could be expected.

Edmund

From the announce materials the 5dMK2 is supposed to be water resistant to a rate of 10 mm rain in 3 minutes, which is a rate of approximately 8 in/hr. Check out the announcement specifications on DPReview, http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos5dmarkII/.

FWIW, I have had my 5D outside in the rain for quite a while. The camera got quite wet and I did not have any issues. With that said I try to cover all of my cameras (5DMK2 and 1 series) when it rains.

That's about the heaviest rain you could get, typhoon class and even then I don't remember the Japanese weather forecast ever reporting more than 150mm per hour and - having experienced that - it is about twice more intense than a normal bathroom shower... As an example, Belgium is said to be a rainy place, yet the yearly precipitations are average about 760mm of rain, which would correspond to less than 4 hours at the rate mentioned above...

My guess is that the 5DII is said to be able to withstand for 3 minutes a rain of 10mm per hour...

Cheers,
Bernard

I didn't know that Antarctica has salty seawater rain and that this special salt water rain only affects 5D mk II cameras. This is absurd. The camera (along with an original 5D) was in a camera bag during the zodiac trip and the bag was covered by a nylon cover. The failure occurred on land on a day with some light rain. The camera was new and had only been used indoors in Canada and in Ushuaia on a clear dry day and it failed on the second day of shooting on the trip after spending the two days crossing the Drake passage in the cabin with me.

Neither camera got rained on directly. While it is possible that the Kata bag somehow contributed to a humid environment, it would still indicate that our two copies of the 5D mk II are extremely susceptible to moisture and/or humidity. The temperature difference between the inside and the outside of the Kata bag could not have been that different. Remember it failed 1.5 hours into a 2 hour landing, so the argument that it was caused by condensation on return to a warm ship doesn't fly.

Martin

I think Feppe didn't mean there was salt rain but in an oceanic environment there is salt in the air. This causes metals (and basically everything else) to corrode much much faster than under 'normal' circumstances. I know this from first hand experience. After sailing from A to B (from Gibraltar to Madeira for instance) everything on the ship was covered under a thin layer of salt.

Again, the bodies should be able to withstand the experience you are depicting so it remains weird.

(He Rockie, jij ook hier ? )

In my view Canon could easily avoid a crapstorm on the internet and create a lot of product-line good will if the had repaired the failed camera bodies and continued the warranty. The cost of this debate among dedicated photographers is far higher than the reapir and warranty costs. Some manager in warranty repair has made a very short sighted decision that could impact the whole brand.

Even if they repair it the question of reliability remains. I am sure this trip was not cheap and having you new wonderkin camera dies and drop back to a backup camera on a once in a lifetime trip would upset me even if they repaired the camera.

It there is an issue Canon needs to recall the cameras and fix it.

I didn't imply seawater rain, but salty condensate. Also, condensation can occur even when you keep the camera outside.

Just because Canons had a higher failure rate than other cameras doesn't take into account different handling, different storing, different usage and environment. The sample size is way too small to draw any kind of conclusions. But I agree it sounds like the 5D MkII might not have the best weather sealing out there - and Canon never claimed that to be the case.

And I don't appreciate your tone - let's try to be civil.

I can't find the thread, but I remember reading here about one of these Anartica trips a couple of years ago, wasn't there a high number of failure rates on earlier Canon bodies?

The article is here: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/aa-07-worked.shtml

There must be something wrong with Canons & Antartica

I specialise in underwater photography in temperate conditions. I use Canon 1D series and 5D cameras and I have used them on boats (even liveaboards) and in very damp conditions with no problem. But perhaps I am very aware of the potential problems of damp salty conditions and electronics, although, other than ensure that everything stays as dry as possible there is little else that I can do. But my point - well corrosion is rarely caused by fresh water. In my experience it is almost invariably caused by electrolysis due to salt water, especially if there is power running through the affected components, and this can take place very quickly indeed (I have seen a lot of flooded cameras and some have shown corrosion before being removed from the housing at the end of an aborted dive - minutes !). So if there is corrosion present it indicates that salt water had got onto the damaged components - and it doesn't take much. 1.5 hours after being on a zodiac could well be plenty of time if salt water had somehow got into the shutter release on the trip to land.

The problem is not the "few hours" that it took until the cameras died, the problem is that it took a a few more days before they arrived at Canon and during that time periond the corrosion is built up. So, Canon claims the problem being corrosion, while the real problem probably was the actual water getting into the camera.

Anyway, it sure seems like canon has failed in some way to implement the "better weather sealing" into the 5D mkII.


For all that were on the trip and had cameras or other gear that mailfunctioned, I hope it will be solved in a smooth and good way in the end.

No grips on either camera.

Martin

I've never had corrosion on a camera, but I have had corrosion on guns, and always (I believe) because they were kept inside "waterproof" cases for too long. I think if I were using a camera under these conditions I'd be damned sure to protect it from any water, as much as possible, and then to dry it off when I got back to shelter, and leave it *out* so any other water could evaporate. I've had visible rust on rifle bolts after a couple of days of being just barely damp inside a waterproof rifle case. (The wet rifles were wiped and put away, but apparently not dried enough.) I wonder if a warm, but not hot, hair drier would be effective with cameras?

JC

i'd like to get some additional input from the 20 5d2 users also on the trip who had no issues...what did they do differently?

I used a hair dryer on the cameras when we got back to the ship.

In our case it appeared that the issue was related to the shutter release button. Canon told me there was corrosion visible, so I wonder if any steps were taken during manufacture to prevent corrosion such as gold plating.

Martin

I don't know. Maybe they were just lucky or maybe the problem is related to a particular batch. I'm trying to get a list of serial numbers along with whether they failed or not from people on the trip.

Martin

I just wanted to share my experiences that resulted in a MkII failure (non-permanent...knock on wood) on the same trip:

• I was using full rain covers on both my 5D and 5DMII, keeping any drops that hit them (you have to look at the histogram somehow) mopped up using a microfiber rag.
• I was not using grips on either camera, but I did have to break the cameras down to get them back in my camera pack (which went into a waterproof SealLine bag) for travel from the shore to the ship. I did not change lenses while on-land.
• My mistake was letting the cool cameras get exposed to the air once I got back on the boat (so that I could charge batteries and download my card). Didn't make the mistake again on the trip.
• Both my 5D and 5DMII had condensation inside and out, only the 5DMII had problems (and the problems happened immediately).
• It came back to life for the rest of the trip after air-drying all night with everything open plus two stints with a hair-drier in a pillow case.
• Lots of other people came back on-board and had their cameras out pretty much at once. Only the Canons seemed to have problems with the resulting condensation (odd). I saw many D700 owners shooting in the rain with no cover.
• Canon 5DMKII manual page 216: Operating conditions 32F-104F (0C-40C), humidity 80% or less. Page 9 - what to do coming in from the cold. 5D manual says same thing. We were within the operating temperature, above operating humidity. Coming inside some of us violated the "put it in a sealed bag and let it warm up" rule.

So, mistakes and lack of common sense/exhaustion/impatience on my part were behind my problems, but of two cameras exposed to identical situations, only one had problems. Probably I was lucky...or unlucky. Of probably 150 cameras used during that day in those conditions, pretty much only the 5DMIIs had problems. Best I can recall, all of the failures happened after that one landing.

I'm not sure we can come to any useful conclusions about this other than you should take proper care of your camera when you move into areas of different temperatures and humidity. Always bring a garbage bag or something like that with you so that the camera can warm up without being in contact with warmer, more humid air

I was one of those users. The 5DMkII was my primary shooting body for the trip and did not experience any issues. I used it in the same weather conditions as everyone else, and at times did not have my rain cover because I forgot it and resorted to using the hood off my Quark parka in an attempt to keep things dry. (No, I didn't have a vertical grip)

Neil

So this means that the camera is not efficiently sealed around the release button and the click wheel next to it (I am sure that the wheel is the most difficult area to seal). Salt creeps are very different from just rain water. Water will evaporate but salt water will leave the salt behind and will attract humidity and then creep further into the camera. Salt creeps have a different viscosity (like oil) and will get everywhere, that is why Canon wants to end warranty because the camera will come back.

I would not take the repaired camera back.

The described symptoms clearly mean that you had salt at work. The rain/high humidity just exacerbated things. On the seas there are always enough salt water droplets/mist in the air around to create as smeary salty film on everything.

In the 80's we would just open bottom plates and top covers of F1s to dry and lubricate everything after sailing travels. I guess you can't do that anymore. I wonder if anyone has taken apart a 5D MK2 or if anyone has a repair manual so that one could evaluate if there is indeed any kind of seal at the release and top wheel? I doubt that there is anything special.

I had no problems. I didn't use a rain cover; when there was rain about I used a towel to protect the camera. Upon returning to the ship I almost always left the camera in my camera bag for an hour or two. I managed not to change lenses on those shore excursions when there was rain; nor did I change lenses on the zodiac cruises. Otherwise, it was business as usual -- I took several thousand frames (less than some of you, I know!).

I'm rather startled by the number of failures we saw: Canon made quite a point at the local 5D II launch that the weather sealing was "improved" over the 5D, although not up to 1 series level. Part of my surprise is that the fairly numerous 40Ds, 50Ds, etc didn't appear to have the same number of problems. I don't know if anyone took a count, but many of us who had a 5D II had a second Canon body of some sort along too.

How statistically significant the failures we saw are I don't know, but 20+ percent is suggestive of a problem. :-(

Giles

Hi!

One trick I often do is that when I'm shooting in cold I remove the memory card before going inside. I don't ever put the camera in a sealed bag, but simple keep it in my backpack all zipped up. Never had problems, except once when I was walking in heavy rain without raincower and eveything got soaking wet. Focusing was stuck mechanically on my 80-200/2.8 APO after having it soaking wet and the batteries were exhausted after very short. I could exercise the 80-200/2.8 back to working order and it still works just fine, I hade it around 20 years. I guess I have been lucky.

Best regards
Erik

I note that the corrosion reported by Canon occurred around the release button. I do a lot of outdoor photography, often near the sea - in response to this report I have stuck a piece of black duck tape over the release button. The button still operates perfectly - do other people think that this is a sensible approach to the problem?

if it works for you i think it could indeed give some additional protection. but i'd definitely take it off when back inside so that any moisture that may have gotten in, can dry off and doesn't get trapped inside by the tape.

Hello!, could be possible to post the 5DMKII pictures of the trip!?...

Regards!

I suppose it goes back to the old saying, "When all else fails, follow the instructions."

I think what Canon is essentially doing is letting people know where the extra money is going in the 1Ds. There is a huge difference between the wording "improved weather sealing" and "weatherPROOF." I know, for example, in wristwatches if you buy a watch that says "weather resistant," don't think you can go scuba diving with it. If you do, it will fail. You have to buy a waterproof watch if you want to go diving.

If Canon says you must put your camera in a bag, and allow it to acclimate, before bringing it into a new drastic environment ... and a person doesn't do this ... then I can't see how they're liable in a warranty situation. The person who doesn't follow the instructions simply becomes the author of their own misfortune.

I would suspect that the 5DMkII is designed mostly for high-quality portraits in a calm environment, but that their 1Ds remains their "take anywhere" high-res safari camera. And the extra money goes to the extra durability. That the 50D didn't experience any probs is indicative it too is kind of a "all-use" budget camera. I think the 5DMkII is designed to give you super image quality economically, but also without the same protection or "all use" function either.

That is how I perceive things at any rate ...





.

Not to argue, but take a look at the 2007 report, 1Ds cameras had just as bad of a time, maybe statistically worse: 2007

So, maybe it is Canon thing and not just spending enough money Since that report, I have not seen a whole lot of reports that the 1Ds Mark II had major issues in any weather conditions. It is curious that the xxD line has not been identified as an issue, wonder what design points figure into that?

I hope Canon does the right thing here and does a recall when they find the issue. The bad news is that it may take a lot of failures to identify what is actually causing the problem, and it is no fun to be the one who 'helps' identify a issue.