I want to buy a dSLR... No BS what takes the best picture Canon EOST1i or Nikon D5000

[inTempus]

That's not entirely true. The more hands on something gets and moves away from automation, the more chance for errors. That's also why it only has a 90 day warranty.

Wrong.

The camera was produced via automation already. It is double checked by a human, which unlike a machine can see defects. You do realize that automation produces flawed products all the time, right? That's why a certain percentage of the products are pulled from the assembly line and are inspected by humans. When a defective camera makes it to the shelf, it's usually one that slipped through the QC process and wasn't checked.

You're wrong, sir.
Automation is the reason why you don't see blacksmiths, or gunsmiths mass producing products anymore. Because the quality of one will not be the same as the one made before it, and just hope that that gunsmith isn't having a bad day and feeling lazy, to the point of overlooking everything.

It's also cheaper, but quality can be controlled much easier with automation, as they have but one set of standards, and if it doesn't fit the standards, it's then taken and repaired by, not so much a "skilled technician" as mentioned above, but probably some hood with his pants half way around his butt, and could care less about the company.

That's how it was at Asus for motherboard repair, and I can only imagine Canon is very similar. Also, you'd be surprised at how many of the "repaired" motherboards and video cards end up coming back for more repairs.

I've seen it first hand, I've seen the workers, and it's most likely safe to buy a refurbished product, but I'll always opt for the one that made the cut the first time, and the one that comes with a much longer warranty because of this.

So I guess all those quality control employees don't really do anything? You think that everything that rolls off the assembly line is 100% perfect and a bad product makes it to the shelves when what, a human inspects it?

LOL

Automation produces flawed products routinely, hence Quality Control departments. Plus, as much as you hate humans and trust machines, not all of the production process is done by machines. Humans are still involved.

As for the "much longer warranty", Canon offers a 1 year warranty on new products. Adorama offers a 1 year warranty on all Canon refurbs. Why? Probably because they know there's very little chance they're going to have to pay for anything and they likely have a very low return rate, otherwise it wouldn't make good business sense to make such an offer for free.

 

[Stamp]

Wrong.

The camera was produced via automation already. It is double checked by a human, which unlike a machine can see defects. You do realize that automation produces flawed products all the time, right? That's why a certain percentage of the products are pulled from the assembly line and are inspected by humans. When a defective camera makes it to the shelf, it's usually one that slipped through the QC process and wasn't checked.

You're wrong, sir.
Automation is the reason why you don't see blacksmiths, or gunsmiths mass producing products anymore. Because the quality of one will not be the same as the one made before it, and just hope that that gunsmith isn't having a bad day and feeling lazy, to the point of overlooking everything.

It's also cheaper, but quality can be controlled much easier with automation, as they have but one set of standards, and if it doesn't fit the standards, it's then taken and repaired by, not so much a "skilled technician" as mentioned above, but probably some hood with his pants half way around his butt, and could care less about the company.

That's how it was at Asus for motherboard repair, and I can only imagine Canon is very similar. Also, you'd be surprised at how many of the "repaired" motherboards and video cards end up coming back for more repairs.

I've seen it first hand, I've seen the workers, and it's most likely safe to buy a refurbished product, but I'll always opt for the one that made the cut the first time, and the one that comes with a much longer warranty because of this.

So I guess all those quality control employees don't really do anything? You think that everything that rolls off the assembly line is 100% perfect and a bad product makes it to the shelves when what, a human inspects it?

LOL

Great reply.

And to answer your question, they're there to sample product like you suggested, and keep the machinery in spec, however, if the company uses 6 sigma (which most production companies do among other techniques), they're striving for 3.4 defects per million. Do you know what that means, InTempus? Try thinking if that is even fathomable with human production.

 

[inTempus]

And to answer your question, they're there to sample product like you suggested, and keep the machinery in spec, however, if the company uses 6 sigma (which most production companies do among other techniques), they're striving for 3.14 defects per million. Do you know what that means, InTempus? Try thinking if that is even fathomable with human production.

You're not doing a very good job of making your case that human inspection is problematic or causes defects vs. reducing defects.

You admit that human inspections keep machines in spec (they do more than that actually - I work in Quality Assurance) yet you still maintain that humans don't catch defects that machines miss or that perhaps they introduce defects when they review a machines' output.

Please continue with your circular argument, it's entertaining if nothing else.

Also, your strawman argument you've introduced into this post is kind of funny. I have not once in in this thread suggested that cameras should be made by humans. I am only talking about performing quality checks.

 

[Stamp]

You admit that human inspections keep machines in spec (they do more than that actually - I work in Quality Assurance) yet you still maintain that humans don't catch defects that machines miss or that perhaps they introduce defects when they review a machines' output.

Um.. you asked what they do, and I gave you examples of some other things that the QC/QA people do OTHER than spot checks. You crack me up in trying to keep this going... must be a slow day at work, eh? :lmao:

 

[inTempus]

Um.. you asked what they do, and I gave you examples of some other things that the QC/QA people do OTHER than spot checks. You crack me up in trying to keep this going... must be a slow day at work, eh? :lmao:

Fridays are slow, most folks aren't even here today. Are you at work? Last time I checked you were posting here as well.

Most of the refurbs never leave the factory. They are usually bodies that failed the QC process (quite a few more than 3.14 per million fail by the way) and the defects were caught and repaired by humans. With Canon, their internal policies are that if its repaired it can't be sold as new, only as a refurb.

That's why when you get a Canon refurb it looks brand spanking new. It's been completely checked out by a human and made sure it's completely in spec, something you don't get from every body that rolls off the production line.

Search these forums, or others, and see how many people have complained about their factory refurbs. You'll find few to none. I know from first hand experience about the quality of Canon refurbs as I've owned them. How many have you owned?

 

[Stamp]

Um.. you asked what they do, and I gave you examples of some other things that the QC/QA people do OTHER than spot checks. You crack me up in trying to keep this going... must be a slow day at work, eh? :lmao:

Fridays are slow, most folks aren't even here today. Are you at work? Last time I checked you were posting here as well.

Most of the refurbs never leave the factory. They are usually bodies that failed the QC process (quite a few more than 3.14 per million fail by the way) and the defects were caught and repaired by humans. With Canon, their internal policies are that if its repaired it can't be sold as new, only as a refurb.

That's why when you get a Canon refurb it looks brand spanking new. It's been completely checked out by a human and made sure it's completely in spec, something you don't get from every body that rolls off the production line.

Search these forums, or others, and see how many people have complained about their factory refurbs. You'll find few to none. I know from first hand experience about the quality of Canon refurbs as I've owned them. How many have you owned?

So it appears after all that rigmarole, we are starting to agree. And yes, I'm at work and it's slow here too. I bet if you weren't on here so much, and out checking stuff out, you could get closer to that 3.14 parts per million! :hug::

Nope.. never owned a canon refurb. Just going on education that when there's more human involvement, the possibility of error goes up as well. :thumbup:

Also, some people seem to believe that Canon doesn't even refurbish their own stuff... They say it's a 3rd party that does it. Don't know about that one, though..

 

[inTempus]

Nope.. never owned a canon refurb. Just going on education that when there's more human involvement, the possibility of error goes up as well. :thumbup:

We were doing good until you repeated this.

So human QC introduces "errors" eh? QC is "human involvement" and it's designed to catch production (note: automated) errors which happen frequently. It's good to know your "education" teaches you that QC introduces defects vs. reducing them.

Also, some people seem to believe that Canon doesn't even refurbish their own stuff... They say it's a 3rd party that does it. Don't know about that one, though..

I don't know, it sounds like internet rumor mill stuff to me. It's also irrelevant to the conversation.

 

[Mike_E]

I would love to find a website that has the same exact scene with shots from each (not just for the two cams you listed though) to compare.. lol

Here you are..

photoSIG » Main

 

[Stamp]

So human QC introduces "errors" eh? QC is "human involvement" and it's designed to catch production (note: automated) errors which happen frequently. It's good to know your "education" teaches you that QC introduces defects vs. reducing them.

Funny how you can misconstrue something someone is talking about so easily.. you must be married.

I never said human qc introduces a higher possibility of error. I'm saying more human involvement in the DIRECT manufacturing process (i.e. the **** that needs to take place for a final product to be produced), and QA/QC isn't that. It's a supplement department that ensures quality, hence where you say you work, quality assurance.

I don't know, it sounds like internet rumor mill stuff to me. It's also irrelevant to the conversation.

I brought it up because you said that Canon does its own refurbs. Therefore, your theory could be flawed, if in fact, they don't even refurbish the products themselves. I was hoping someone else would jump in with some more info on that one.

 

[inTempus]

I never said human qc introduces a higher possibility of error. I'm saying more human involvement in the DIRECT manufacturing process (i.e. the **** that needs to take place for a final product to be produced), and QA/QC isn't that. It's a supplement department that ensures quality, hence where you say you work, quality assurance.

Here, let me quote you since you can't seem to remember what you post.

Nope.. never owned a canon refurb. Just going on education that when there's more human involvement, the possibility of error goes up as well.

I'm good, but I'm not psychic. You said "human involvement" increases the possibility of errors. QC is "human involvement". Now that I've pointed that out, you've changed your tune.

I brought it up because you said that Canon does its own refurbs. Therefore, your theory could be flawed, if in fact, they don't even refurbish the products themselves. I was hoping someone else would jump in with some more info on that one.

There's nothing to be "flawed". Good Lord. It's COMPLETELY irrelevant who someone works for that does the refurb. It's a name on a paycheck, the process is the same. My comments were never intended to imply that 3rd parties might not be involved as it's completely irrelevant. All that matters is that it's something which is done by Canon and sold by Canon. 3rd parties are involved in the entire production process, vendors are a way of life in modern manufacturing.

Let's see how many irrelevant directions we can take this discussion.

 

[Dao]

I agree that it does not matter who do the job. As long as it meet the specification.
(That's why Toyota took all the blame on their recent recall problem even the part is manufactured by a 3rd party company. And the part is made to their specification.)


As mentioned before, I also believe refurbished products do not always mean a defective product that sell back to the market after repair. Even if that is the case, it is already repaired. Unless for some odd reasons that the camera has multiple problems and only one area is addressed.

I heard from another forum that when they received an refurbished camera from Canon directly, it looks brand new and he could not tell it is a refurbished except the refurbished sticker. And the reps from Canon said some of the cameras sold through that channel were over-production cameras and they were brand new. (of course, no way to confirm this)

And I can understand this. They have a excessive inventory and do not want to affect the market value of a particular product.

 

[Stamp]

I never said human qc introduces a higher possibility of error. I'm saying more human involvement in the DIRECT manufacturing process (i.e. the **** that needs to take place for a final product to be produced), and QA/QC isn't that. It's a supplement department that ensures quality, hence where you say you work, quality assurance.

Here, let me quote you since you can't seem to remember what you post.

Nope.. never owned a canon refurb. Just going on education that when there's more human involvement, the possibility of error goes up as well.

I'm good, but I'm not psychic. You said "human involvement" increases the possibility of errors. QC is "human involvement". Now that I've pointed that out, you've changed your tune.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we got on this subject talking about people refurbishing a product, right? Well, the people who do the repairs ARE NOT QC/QA people, therefore, I assumed most people would be able to follow this discussion in a reasonable way, and know that when we're talking about human involvement in refurbishing, and that we're not talking about the guy who drives the lunch wagon, who feeds the manager, who tells the qc guys which batch to check, who gives the defects to the person doing the repair.

No.

We're talking about the person doing the repair. Get with it.

I'm done with this little bickering about what your job is. But another tid bit to back up the well know theory... check the history of airplane crashes and the ratio of direct pilot error vs mechanical malfunction. :er:

 

[inTempus]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we got on this subject talking about people refurbishing a product, right? Well, the people who do the repairs ARE NOT QC/QA people, therefore, I assumed most people would be able to follow this discussion in a reasonable way, and know that when we're talking about human involvement in refurbishing, and that we're not talking about the guy who drives the lunch wagon, who feeds the manager, who tells the qc guys which batch to check, who gives the defects to the person doing the repair.

Umm, I thought I pointed out that most refurbs are bodies that failed QC. Perhaps you missed that comment.

Refurbishing isn't manufacturing, previously it was human "manufacturing" that was your point of contention. That's apparently shifted.

You made a broad brush statement about human involvement reducing quality, you mentioned no qualifiers on the department in which the human may work. It's not my fault you're not clear in your statements.

We're talking about the person doing the repair. Get with it.

So now we've narrowed it down from manufacturing to repairs. Ok, so it's your belief that a human is incapable of making a repair. So when they are handed a defective product that has a screw missing, you think that it's more likely they'll not be able to replace the screw vs. being able to replace it properly? I'm sure you have some statistics to back this claim up. I would enjoy reading them. I assume this is at least partially where your education in all things related to manufacturing, I'm sorry, repairs, comes from.

I'm done with this little bickering about what your job is. But another tid bit to back up the well know theory... check the history of airplane crashes and the ratio of direct pilot error vs mechanical malfunction. :er:

My job? I'm not bickering about my job. LOL.

Now you want to group pilot error into a discussion about refurbs? Are you kidding me? How desperate can you be to try to make a point?

It's probably best we do drop it here before you start talking about the meaning of life or something equally unrelated.

 

[frommrstomommy]

A refurbished canon I looked at also says 90 day warranty.

Since 1st May 2009 all Canon refurbs from Adorama come with a 12-month return-to-Adorama warranty; if it says 90 days, it is a typo - I'd be grateful if you could forward the SKU to me and I can get it changed on the website.

All other refurbs from Adorama carry a 90-day warranty.

Please don't hesitate to contact me directly if I can offer any additional information or support.

Helen Oster
Adorama Camera Customer Service Ambassador
http://helenoster.blogspot.com


[email protected]
www.adorama.com

I PM'ed you with a few links I found easily.. though I didn't check every Canon that came up lol. I know I was probably looking at the Rebel XSi when I was on there so I sent a couple links to those whose warranty information says 90 day, 2 of 3 I sent show 1 year at the top, but then contradict at the bottom of the page by saying 90 day.

 

[Stamp]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we got on this subject talking about people refurbishing a product, right? Well, the people who do the repairs ARE NOT QC/QA people, therefore, I assumed most people would be able to follow this discussion in a reasonable way, and know that when we're talking about human involvement in refurbishing, and that we're not talking about the guy who drives the lunch wagon, who feeds the manager, who tells the qc guys which batch to check, who gives the defects to the person doing the repair.

Umm, I thought I pointed out that most refurbs are bodies that failed QC. Perhaps you missed that comment.

Refurbishing isn't manufacturing, previously it was human "manufacturing" that was your point of contention. That's apparently shifted.

You made a broad brush statement about human involvement reducing quality, you mentioned no qualifiers on the department in which the human may work. It's not my fault you're not clear in your statements.

We're talking about the person doing the repair. Get with it.

So now we've narrowed it down from manufacturing to repairs. Ok, so it's your belief that a human is incapable of making a repair. So when they are handed a defective product that has a screw missing, you think that it's more likely they'll not be able to replace the screw vs. being able to replace it properly? I'm sure you have some statistics to back this claim up. I would enjoy reading them. I assume this is at least partially where your education in all things related to manufacturing, I'm sorry, repairs, comes from.

I'm done with this little bickering about what your job is. But another tid bit to back up the well know theory... check the history of airplane crashes and the ratio of direct pilot error vs mechanical malfunction. :er:

My job? I'm not bickering about my job. LOL.

Now you want to group pilot error into a discussion about refurbs? Are you kidding me? How desperate can you be to try to make a point?

It's probably best we do drop it here before you start talking about the meaning of life or something equally unrelated.

Well, I'd say that I leaned you have a very single track mind, and are in capable of using different examples or analogies in order to understand something.

And if you want statistics on how the more human involvement gives more room for error, well visit your local library and pick up a quality control text book... I've read many of them, and I'm not going to keep trying to draw you a picture, or give you other things to back my theory up, because you'll just nit pick those, and figure out a way they don't relate, then we'll be off on another topic.