Canon's lovely new recall!

IT IS A SIGN!


That the WHITE L lens power is slowly seeping through into the camera bodies. It's hitting the weaker willed rebels first; but I'm sure that, given time, the mid and top range bodies will start to weaken too. Those super sharp white L lenses will cut through the blackness and score the bodies with their white touch!
 
Sweet.. that will take out a few of MWACs and DWACs in my area.
 
I'm sure canon will sue the rubber manufacturer for the recall. Seems canon Has a small run of bad luck right now. They'll def survive it however
 
My grips are fine so far but have been in contact with customer service. They are saying 7 days from ship date for return. I am going to wait a while. I also have the 40mm pancake and have not had any problems with it either. I think they should give some coupons or something for the blunders.
 
Canon has an entire page filled with Service Recalls. Canon U.S.A. : Professional Imaging Products : EF 40mm f/2.8 STM

So does Nikon. The only difference is that Nikon divides their Service Advisories and firmware updates onto two separate pages. Canon does not.

Current Firmware downloads available for Nikon products

Service Advisories

I went to your links and noticed a total of 10 service advisories for Nikon products--dating back to the N55 film camera, in the year 2005. Most are for CoolPix cameras: there are FOUR CoolPIx service advisories listed. The D5000 was the last Nikon SLR with a service advisory, back in August of 2009. Another Nikon service recall out of the 10 is for the CL-L2 Ballistic Nylon Soft Lens Case, and two were battery recalls, one from 2005, the other from April of 2012. Service Advisories

Firmware Updates are listed separately on Nikon's site, yes. That's because a firmware update is not a Service Advisory. Canon has over 60 F&^(-ups listed...not counting FIRMWARE updates--JUST FOR EOS SLR products!!!!!! Not even counting P&S or video cameras!

Is it terribly distressing when the spin you pout out [sic] falls flat, Ty?
 
Canon has an entire page filled with Service Recalls. Canon U.S.A. : Professional Imaging Products : EF 40mm f/2.8 STM

So does Nikon. The only difference is that Nikon divides their Service Advisories and firmware updates onto two separate pages. Canon does not.

Current Firmware downloads available for Nikon products

Service Advisories

I went to your links and noticed a total of 10 service advisories for Nikon products--dating back to the N55 film camera, in the year 2005. Most are for CoolPix cameras: there are FOUR CoolPIx service advisories listed. The D5000 was the last Nikon SLR with a service advisory, back in August of 2009. Another Nikon service recall out of the 10 is for the CL-L2 Ballistic Nylon Soft Lens Case, and two were battery recalls, one from 2005, the other from April of 2012. Service Advisories

Firmware Updates are listed separately on Nikon's site, yes. That's because a firmware update is not a Service Advisory. Canon has over 60 F&^(-ups listed...not counting FIRMWARE updates. Is it terribly distressing when the spin you pout out [sic] falls flat, Ty?

Do you realize that Nikon's firmware updates are to fix issues with the cameras that they are downloadable for? Did you read the description of any of them? Canon manufactures more than just cameras. From what I've seen, they've had about as many recalls as Nikon has, and just as many firmware updates as Nikon has to fix operational errors with the firmware on the camera.

Why do you jump at me with hostility when I state my findings? Are you that old and crotchety that you cannot help but be a dick? Are you literally incapable of presenting your side of the story in a respectful fashion?
 
I can understand how the whole 5DIII thing could have slipped through the cracks...but...white rubber...HOW did they not find that?

Or was it something that occurred during the mass production at the factory after testing...
 
I can understand how the whole 5DIII thing could have slipped through the cracks...but...white rubber...HOW did they not find that?

Or was it something that occurred during the mass production at the factory after testing...

If I recall, it wasn't really on Canon... It was an issue with the rubber supplier. I wouldn't be one to hold a manufacturing company accountable for an inaccuracy on the end of a supplier. Sure, Canon is left holding the bag and has to correct the mistake free of charge, which SUCKS for them. But, they don't manufacture the rubber in-house, so you can't get too angry at them (at least I can't). It happens all the time, lots of companies have to recall stuff because of a supplier's screw up.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top