# Canon USA: Canon Professional Services



## canonnews (Aug 15, 2018)

> Canon USA has released a new video discussing the features and benefits of CPS (Canon Professional Services).  Unlike other programs, the only qualification needed is how much eligible Canon gear you have.  You don’t have to have professional credentials unlike both Sony and Nikon services, anyone can take advantage of CPS.
> With three tiers of photography related memberships (Silver, Gold and Platinum), Canon CPS provides a high level of support for professionals.  CPS is one of the core strengths of the Canon ecosystem, yet is often understated.
> Check out the various CPS levels of membership as well as further information on CPS here.



Continue reading...


----------



## unfocused (Aug 15, 2018)

Interesting that they have apparently abandoned any requirement that the member be a professional photographer.


----------



## Maximilian (Aug 15, 2018)

unfocused said:


> Interesting that they have apparently abandoned any requirement that the member be a professional photographer.


Maybe the collection of cutomer data is more important to them than that. 
By the way: in Germany/Europe that wasn't needed for years. 
Again a sign that Canon is trying to align their different regional CPS programs.


----------



## NancyP (Aug 15, 2018)

Well, plenty of wealthy amateurs joined up in the past, ignoring the "pro photographer" requirement. I suspect that Canon is recognizing that fact. Pros will always get the extra services (beyond CPS) at major sporting events. Canon knows that there are fewer and fewer pro photographers and more and more wealthy amateurs who own a large number of up-to-date cameras and lenses. It is hard to make a living from photography alone, most people have other gigs - computer consultant, photography classes and tours, etc. Fewer newspapers have even a single full-time photographer. Pros keep their cameras and lenses a long time, and as often as not have other expenses - lighting gear, studio, maybe video, for example. If the client needs properly lit and composed architecture shots at average resolution for an annual report, likely an old 5D2 or 1DX, the 24 and 17mm TS lenses, and a box of lighting gear will be fine for a career.


----------



## michi (Aug 15, 2018)

I don't even have that much stuff but have 54 points and so would qualify for Platinum. Honestly, I think this is like the insurance business for them. The more people pay for the insurance, the more revenue, and the majority will barely if ever use the services they offer. I sent two lenses ever to them. One was a refurbished Fisheye from them which was faulty on arrival, and the other was my original 70-200 f4 L which was never as sharp as I thought it should be and they adjusted it and it came back MUCH better. So all in all, in about 30 years of owning Canon, I need their services twice. Had I paid for CPS Gold or Platinum these 30 years, I would have spent $3,000 / $9,000 for these two services. Don't get me wrong, I understand that if you are a pro, you need quick turnarounds and the loaner perks I am sure are nice, but for the average Joe like myself, I don't think Gold or Platinum is worth it.


----------



## fullstop (Aug 15, 2018)

unfocused said:


> Interesting that they have apparently abandoned any requirement that the member be a professional photographer.




I like that. A lot. I'd like a legal obligation for corporations to offer any sort of customer service program in a totally non-discriminatory way = only differentiation allowed based on dollars/Euros spent on purchases from said corporation. No discrimination allowed based on customer biographics, no matter what profession, age, sex, sexual orientation, country of residence or whatever other personal parameters. None of the corporations business. If they want to differentiate amongst their customers, then strictly on sales volume only. 

Should this not be an obvious standard in 2018?


----------



## magarity (Aug 16, 2018)

Ever notice whenever there's a long row of white lenses one never sees even one of the big green Sigmas?


----------



## transpo1 (Aug 16, 2018)

This is Canon trying to differentiate itself from the competition ahead of the Nikon FF release and Sony buzz. It’s a significant advantage.


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 16, 2018)

magarity said:


> Ever notice whenever there's a long row of white lenses one never sees even one of the big green Sigmas?



Ever notice that Canon doesn't make an equivalent lens?
Have you ever seen one of these lenses in the wild?
Maybe Canon knows that 35 lbs $25K monsters like that one will not sell well.
Perhaps Canon marketing isn't as dumb as some think.


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 16, 2018)

fullstop said:


> I like that. A lot. I'd like a legal obligation for corporations to offer any sort of customer service program in a totally non-discriminatory way = only differentiation allowed based on dollars/Euros spent on purchases from said corporation. No discrimination allowed based on customer biographics, no matter what profession, age, *sex*, *sexual orientation*, country of residence or whatever other personal parameters. None of the corporations business. If they want to differentiate amongst their customers, then strictly on sales volume only.
> 
> Should this not be an obvious standard in 2018?



When I signed up for CPS several years ago, I do not remember being offered or asked for either.

But notice the name Canon "Professional" Service.
Not Canon "Amateur with disposable income" Service.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 16, 2018)

CPS Canada still has the Pro requirement on the two upper levels.

Jack


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 16, 2018)

NancyP said:


> Well, plenty of wealthy amateurs joined up in the past, ignoring the "pro photographer" requirement. I suspect that Canon is recognizing that fact. Pros will always get the extra services (beyond CPS) at major sporting events. Canon knows that there are fewer and fewer pro photographers and more and more wealthy amateurs who own a large number of up-to-date cameras and lenses. It is hard to make a living from photography alone, most people have other gigs - computer consultant, photography classes and tours, etc. Fewer newspapers have even a single full-time photographer. Pros keep their cameras and lenses a long time, and as often as not have other expenses - lighting gear, studio, maybe video, for example. If the client needs properly lit and composed architecture shots at average resolution for an annual report, likely an old 5D2 or 1DX, the 24 and 17mm TS lenses, and a box of lighting gear will be fine for a career.



Poor amateurs like me can qualify too.


----------



## dswtan (Aug 16, 2018)

I haven't watched the video, but when you try to sign up, even for silver level, the terms and conditions (dating from 2014) still say pro is required. :-(

"
Canon Professional Services Program
Terms and Conditions: SILVER MEMBERSHIP - Updated as of January 18, 2014 

1. Membership is available only for those individuals, (a) *that are full time self-employed, or an employee of a professional imaging business, who plays a direct role in the creation of moving or still images for third parties on a professional basis*, (b) are legal residents of the 50 United States or the District of Columbia and (c) who are at least 18 years of age at the time of enrollment. At this time, membership benefits, and repair service are available in the 50 United States and the District of Columbia only.
"


----------



## Talys (Aug 16, 2018)

fullstop said:


> I like that. A lot. I'd like a legal obligation for corporations to offer any sort of customer service program in a totally non-discriminatory way = only differentiation allowed based on dollars/Euros spent on purchases from said corporation. No discrimination allowed based on customer biographics, no matter what profession, age, sex, sexual orientation, country of residence or whatever other personal parameters. None of the corporations business. If they want to differentiate amongst their customers, then strictly on sales volume only.
> 
> Should this not be an obvious standard in 2018?



As a professional software engineer, speaking for my own industry, NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT. I don't care if it's Cisco, Microsoft, Google, Oracle, IBM, SAP, or whoever -- even the largest of the industry giants have a very limited number of experts. Their time is extremely valuable, and access to them as a professional service should not solely be based on a matter of dollars paid, because it dilutes their availability to industry professionals who will have an much larger overall impact to the channel. 

If you look at most companies in the software industry, access to the highest level of professional services that can be purchased require a blend of certifications, proof of work or performance and third party references. And frankly, I'm happy it's that way, because there are far too few resources at the top end to go around.

Looking at CPS, there are some benefits that are scalable and others that are not. For example, the repair benefits should pay for themselves. However, if they fixed cameras and lenses for anyone at major sporting events as long as they paid a professional fee, this would take away from the limited space they'd have to service the real pros.


----------



## RGF (Aug 16, 2018)

Perhaps Canon realized that they let too many people slip through the "pro" requirement so they are being honest and trying to make a bit of more money off of CPS


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Aug 16, 2018)

This not the case in Australia, Canon CPS insists you must be a pro no matter how much gear you own. So why does Canon allow different rules in different countries. Most likely the continued gouging of Australians an endeavor taken up by all foreign companies down under


----------



## RGF (Aug 16, 2018)

Mr Majestyk said:


> This not the case in Australia, Canon CPS insists you must be a pro no matter how much gear you own. So why does Canon allow different rules in different countries. Most likely the continued gouging of Australians an endeavor taken up by all foreign companies down under



Or the Aussies did their job better and learned to live within the rules. Us Yanks bent the rules one time too many, too hard and how they are broken???


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 16, 2018)

In Europe the FAQs say "CPS is aimed at professional and semi-professional photographers and videographers. "
And "Yes, it is absolutely free to sign up. Your membership level depends on the Canon equipment you register with us that you already own. "

So it is 'aimed at' professionals but not obligatory.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 16, 2018)

For many amateurs, I think a major draw is the evaluation program. At $100/year, it's cheaper than lensrentals. 

With 143 points I certainly qualify, but I haven't felt any need to sign up.


----------



## michi (Aug 16, 2018)

fullstop said:


> I like that. A lot. I'd like a legal obligation for corporations to offer any sort of customer service program in a totally non-discriminatory way = only differentiation allowed based on dollars/Euros spent on purchases from said corporation. No discrimination allowed based on customer biographics, no matter what profession, age, sex, sexual orientation, country of residence or whatever other personal parameters. None of the corporations business. If they want to differentiate amongst their customers, then strictly on sales volume only.
> 
> Should this not be an obvious standard in 2018?



All you are really getting is a sort of insurance you pay for. It's the same type of thing as a extended warranty


----------



## michi (Aug 16, 2018)

michi said:


> All you are really getting is a sort of insurance you pay for. It's the same type of thing as a extended warranty



Actually, it's not even that. It's just a faster turn-around for your repair which you have to pay in full or at a slight discount depending on which level you purchase.


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 16, 2018)

dswtan said:


> (a) *that are full time self-employed, or an employee of a professional imaging business, who plays a direct role in the creation of moving or still images for third parties on a professional basis*,
> "



When they come to your house, go through your financial records and determine that you do not meet this requirement will they then revoke your membership?


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Aug 16, 2018)

If that is not the norm at Sony or Nikon, that really is something that would stop me from buying there products. 

The only complain I had about CPS in the past, is that you needed TWO professional bodies to qualify. I hope they changed that. If Canon is really confident with the quality of their lenses, a single camera should be enough for most photographers unless they need wide and long lenses at the same time. Instead of wasting the money on two cameras, I would rather buy more lenses.

I also hated that after a while a camera did not longer qualify.


----------



## kaptainkatsu (Aug 16, 2018)

I keep meaning to sign up. The $100/year is worth it just for cleanings. My 1DX2 splatters oil on the sensor and I've already had it cleaned by Canon once (189K clicks)


----------



## canonnews (Aug 16, 2018)

I may have misspoke a bit. I meant that as far as I know, you don't have to show proof of professional standing. 

as far as I know at least, CPS doesn't have that requirement anymore. they used to.

for instance, NPS you must have an official letter of introduction in your company's letterhead, and examples of tearsheets,etc. of your work to qualify.
Sony Professional Services (which basically means, better support than the nothing you get normally) used to have the same qualifications as Nikon, however looking at their site again, it seems they have dropped for all purposes the professional qualification and now do like Canon. it seems no longer that you need proof of professional standing. For Sony Europe you have to go through a jury that decides if you are professional or not. But I see no such requirement for Sony USA.


----------



## sportskjutaren (Aug 16, 2018)

Talys said:


> ...
> However, if they fixed cameras and lenses for anyone at major sporting events as long as they paid a professional fee, this would take away from the limited space they'd have to service the real pros.


I´ve covered some of these really big sports events where both Canon and Nikon offers both service and loaners.
This is offered inside the working areas for media. A place you won't get even close to without the proper accreditation (a.k.a. "credential").
I.E. It´s only available for people that are actually working at these events.
(Image from the World Cup in Russia).


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 17, 2018)

I've been a CPS member for years. I've sold some photos to magazines, but would not qualify as "pro" in that it was my primary income. (My latest quarterly stock photo earnings were more than a Tall Latte and less than a Venti). It has been a great program. I've borrowed a couple dozen lenses over the years, and I've wound up purchasing a couple and a new body (and then a 2nd of same) after having done the evaluations. I think it's an easy win-win for both me and Canon. That they would expand this makes perfect sense for everyone.

I think some other countries might not have the economy of scale to have enough equipment in inventory to offer this to all comers. It makes sense that different circumstances might make for diverging policies. 

I highly recommend the program to people who qualify, as the loans are quite educational.


----------



## RGF (Aug 17, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> For many amateurs, I think a major draw is the evaluation program. At $100/year, it's cheaper than lensrentals.
> 
> With 143 points I certainly qualify, but I haven't felt any need to sign up.



143 points - well done. I noticed that they include smaller printers but not my Pro-2000. Strange.

The draw for me is the service and cleaning services. I have only borrowed equipment a few times to try it and then ending up buying it. I think I better not borrow anything else, the closest already too full.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 18, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> For many amateurs, I think a major draw is the evaluation program. At $100/year, it's cheaper than lensrentals.
> 
> With 143 points I certainly qualify, but I haven't felt any need to sign up.



Not really. It's for one-time evaluation of a particular lens on Canon's timetable, not yours.

There's a lifetime limit of only one loan on any particular camera body or lens model for the Gold level membership. (Platinum gets up to three loans of each piece of equipment over the entire lifetime of a membership.) Once you've evaluated a particular lens, you can't borrow the same model lens again. If you evaluated the "II" version of a lens or camera, you can also evaluate the "III" version when it comes out. But only once.

You can't really schedule an evaluation loan, either. You may get it immediately (plus shipping transit time), or you may get it three or four weeks after you request it. You can't schedule in advance, either.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 18, 2018)

The cost of Gold is only $100/year. Return shipping from the CPS Service Center is free for Gold members.

The last time I sent a lens to CPS it cost me over $50 to ship/insure it for $2K (UPS 2nd business day by close of business). Canon shipped it back overnight at no additional cost to me. The invoice showed it would have been $27 for return shipping without the Gold Membership.

The repair itself was invoiced at $269 less a 20% discount ($53.80). So between shipping and the discount that single repair recovered $80.80 of the $100 I spent upgrading my (free) Silver membership to Gold _earlier the same day _I opened the repair order online.

Basically, I paid $20 for "guaranteed" two-day instead of 3-5 day turnaround.

The gamble was that if I'd need another repair on something in the next 365 days, I'd already have the free return shipping, 20% discount, and expedited turnaround.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 18, 2018)

Skyscraperfan said:


> If that is not the norm at Sony or Nikon, that really is something that would stop me from buying there products.
> 
> The only complain I had about CPS in the past, is that you needed TWO professional bodies to qualify. I hope they changed that. If Canon is really confident with the quality of their lenses, a single camera should be enough for most photographers unless they need wide and long lenses at the same time. Instead of wasting the money on two cameras, I would rather buy more lenses.
> 
> I also hated that after a while a camera did not longer qualify.



Part of being a pro is that you always have a backup for every piece of equipment you own. It does stink if your backup body is older and drops off the list.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 18, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> Not really. It's for one-time evaluation of a particular lens on Canon's timetable, not yours.
> 
> There's a lifetime limit of only one loan on any particular camera body or lens model. Once you've evaluated a particular lens, you can't borrow the same model lens again. If you evaluated the "II" version of a lens or camera, you can also evaluate the "III" version when it comes out. But only once.
> 
> You can't really schedule an evaluation loan, either. You may get it immediately (plus shipping transit time), or you may get it three or four weeks after you request it. You can't schedule in advance, either.


Yes, I'm sure everyone reads all that fine print before they sign up. Most amateurs aren't on a schedule for when they need gear, vacations notwithstanding. But most amateurs can read the prices on rental sites, and read $100 and free evaluation loans from CPS, and realize that one is cheaper than the other.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 18, 2018)

michi said:


> Actually, it's not even that. It's just a faster turn-around for your repair which you have to pay in full or at a slight discount depending on which level you purchase.



There's no charge for the SIlver Membership, which is the only level that does not get a discount on repairs, shipping, or loaners.

For Gold level the annual cost is $100. It includes a 20% discount on parts/labor for up to 10 repairs per year and free return shipping (overnight). It also includes a loaner if they don't ship your equipment back to you within the guaranteed turnaround time. In other words, if they don't fix it in two days, they'll ship you a loaner on the second day. I've never sent them anything that wasn't finished on time. (Although the day they receive it is 'Day 0', the beginning of the next day is 'Day 1').

For Platinum level the annual cost is $300 and includes a 30% discount on parts/labor for up to 15 repairs per year and free overnight shipping both ways. It also includes a loaner shipped (overnight) the day they receive your equipment at their facility.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 18, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Yes, I'm sure everyone reads all that fine print before they sign up. Most amateurs aren't on a schedule for when they need gear, vacations notwithstanding. But most amateurs can read the prices on rental sites, and read $100 and free evaluation loans from CPS, and realize that one is cheaper than the other.



It's all right there in the marketing materials. There's no 'fine print'. Geesh.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 18, 2018)

Talys said:


> As a professional software engineer, speaking for my own industry, NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT. I don't care if it's Cisco, Microsoft, Google, Oracle, IBM, SAP, or whoever -- even the largest of the industry giants have a very limited number of experts. Their time is extremely valuable, and access to them as a professional service should not solely be based on a matter of dollars paid, because it dilutes their availability to industry professionals who will have an much larger overall impact to the channel.
> 
> If you look at most companies in the software industry, access to the highest level of professional services that can be purchased require a blend of certifications, proof of work or performance and third party references. And frankly, I'm happy it's that way, because there are far too few resources at the top end to go around.
> 
> Looking at CPS, there are some benefits that are scalable and others that are not. For example, the repair benefits should pay for themselves. However, if they fixed cameras and lenses for anyone at major sporting events as long as they paid a professional fee, this would take away from the limited space they'd have to service the real pros.



The venues in which major sporting events occur won't let anyone in with pro photography gear unless they are working media that have jumped through whatever hoops they require to issue you a media credential for that event. The CPS booth is inside areas that are only accessible to credentialled media, not to the general public or even ticket holding spectators.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 18, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> It's all right there in the marketing materials. There's no 'fine print'. Geesh.



I've done both, and I agree with you. The Canon program is fine if you only want to have a lens for a couple of days to decide whether or not you want to buy one. But, not being able to schedule the loan and having a very shortened time period (since you must have it back in Canon's hands before the end of the evaluation period), plus knowing that you have only one shot to borrow a lens, makes it non competitive with lens rentals.

If I am traveling somewhere or trying to time a rental to match a specific event, a rental house is the only practical choice. If I just want to play with a lens for a few days then the Canon program is fine for that.


----------



## Talys (Aug 18, 2018)

sportskjutaren said:


> I´ve covered some of these really big sports events where both Canon and Nikon offers both service and loaners.
> This is offered inside the working areas for media. A place you won't get even close to without the proper accreditation (a.k.a. "credential").
> I.E. It´s only available for people that are actually working at these events.
> (Image from the World Cup in Russia).



Indeed, and that is the way it should (and I'm sure, will) remain. I was responding to Fullstop's argument that basically, anyone who pays a fee should be able to treated as a professional. Sometimes, it really just isn't about the money


----------



## tpatana (Aug 18, 2018)

I'm mostly happy with CPS, although had strange reply on my email couple weeks ago. Next month there'll be Japanese sword fight world championship tournament in Korea and I'll be there. I was making Plan B and Plan C in case something breaks. PlanB is to find local rental place in Korea, and PlanC is to find local Canon store in Korea. Then I thought maybe Canon-Japan is there since the competition is kinda japan-related, and close to Japan anyway. So if something breaks, maybe they have loaners for 70-200 at least.

So I emailed CPS-Usa if Canon will be there. They replied "Canon CPS Usa will not attend". 

Duh. I tried browsing the Canon Japan CPS website, but boy is it difficult to navigate around. I found few pages worth CPS-JP information, but not one single email address how to contact them.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Aug 19, 2018)

If you pay the same amount of money for the service and bought the same expensive cameras, you should get the same service. There should not be any privileges for "professionals". It is the same with journalists. It always makes me very angry if "professional" journalists get any kind of special access, because today basically everyone is a journalist. We all publish things on blogs or platforms like Instagram or Facebook. In the past a small group of editors in chief acted as a kind of filter between the truth and the readers. I am glad that those times are over.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 19, 2018)

Skyscraperfan said:


> In the past a small group of editors in chief acted as a kind of filter between the truth and the readers. I am glad that those times are over.



Ye gods! Someone who believes 'all points of view are equally valid'. In the good old days most (and yes, I said 'most',not 'all') organs of journalism actually went to the trouble of checking their facts whereas now anyone with a point of view can be called a journalist.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 19, 2018)

Skyscraperfan said:


> If you pay the same amount of money for the service and bought the same expensive cameras, you should get the same service. There should not be any privileges for "professionals". It is the same with journalists. It always makes me very angry if "professional" journalists get any kind of special access, because today basically everyone is a journalist. We all publish things on blogs or platforms like Instagram or Facebook. In the past a small group of editors in chief acted as a kind of filter between the truth and the readers. I am glad that those times are over.



What you get when 'everyone' is allowed 'media' access at close range is one of two things:

1) A front row that stands fully erect surrounding the subject from two feet away while holding up their phones and iPads blocking the view of anyone shooting with a wider than 20mm (35mm equivalent) lens.

2) No event at all because whoever is putting it on isn't willing to let unvetted people get that close to the person(s) of interest. They don't want to be the one that allows the next Sirhan Sirhan, John Hinkley, Jr., Mark David Chapman, John Wilkes Booth, etc.


----------



## michi (Aug 20, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> There's no charge for the SIlver Membership, which is the only level that does not get a discount on repairs, shipping, or loaners.
> 
> For Gold level the annual cost is $100. It includes a 20% discount on parts/labor for up to 10 repairs per year and free return shipping (overnight). It also includes a loaner if they don't ship your equipment back to you within the guaranteed turnaround time. In other words, if they don't fix it in two days, they'll ship you a loaner on the second day. I've never sent them anything that wasn't finished on time. (Although the day they receive it is 'Day 0', the beginning of the next day is 'Day 1').
> 
> For Platinum level the annual cost is $300 and includes a 30% discount on parts/labor for up to 15 repairs per year and free overnight shipping both ways. It also includes a loaner shipped (overnight) the day they receive your equipment at their facility.



I don't know why you quoted my comment with an explanation of how CPS works? I understand how it works. People were saying it is like a extended warranty to which I replied it is not, because it doesn't extend any warranties. It just speeds up service and possible reduces cost of repair if you pay for a higher level...


----------



## RunAndGun (Aug 21, 2018)

Everyone wants to be "special"... And no one wants to be excluded or told they can't do something. I've had the thought for years that that's why so many amateurs pitch a fit about wanting to be in CPS.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 21, 2018)

michi said:


> I don't know why you quoted my comment with an explanation of how CPS works? I understand how it works. People were saying it is like a extended warranty to which I replied it is not, because it doesn't extend any warranties. It just speeds up service and possible reduces cost of repair if you pay for a higher level...



Probably because I don't consider a 20% or 30% discount on a several hundred dollars repair to be "slight."


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 21, 2018)

RunAndGun said:


> Everyone wants to be "special"... And no one wants to be excluded or told they can't do something. I've had the thought for years that that's why so many amateurs pitch a fit about wanting to be in CPS.


There's a lot of wiggle room between "amateur" and "full time professional, the majority of whose income is derived from producing images."

Consider the (increasingly rare) full-time photojournalist who is lucky to be making $40K a year in some markets.

Compare that to a dentist who makes $250,000 as a dental surgeon, but also makes $50,000 from selling large prints to her dentist friends to hang in their lobbies, doing senior portraits for many of her teen patients, shooting weddings of her twenty-something patients, baby photos for her thirty-something patients, etc.

Even though she actually earned more from imaging related activities than the "full-time professional", is the dentist who generated $50K from photography an amateur because she made more from her "day job" than from shooting every weekend and editing several nights a week?

(Okay, so that is maybe an extreme example, but you should get the point)


----------



## chrysoberyl (Aug 21, 2018)

I'll pass on CPS and the Canon Factory Service Center; I had them do two repairs and both had to be sent back for glaring damage down there. KEH has down it right the first time on two repairs.


----------



## RunAndGun (Aug 22, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> There's a lot of wiggle room between "amateur" and "full time professional, the majority of whose income is derived from producing images."


Not really. That's pretty black & white, especially using your example of percentage of income earned from photography.

The spirit and intent of the original requirements for CPS was that it was there to service full-time working photographers. Think full-time photo-journalists working for a paper or magazine(one example and maybe a poor one today). And I think most people realize and know what the true intention was(is). Some play devil's advocate. And some just want to try to find a loophole that justifies them being able to join.

And before someone takes it there, I'm in no way trying to infer that "amateurs" aren't as talented or skilled as "professionals". There are tons of amateurs that are incredibly talented and skilled, and even more-so than many "professionals".


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 23, 2018)

RunAndGun said:


> Not really. That's pretty black & white, especially using your example of percentage of income earned from photography.
> 
> The spirit and intent of the original requirements for CPS was that it was there to service full-time working photographers. Think full-time photo-journalists working for a paper or magazine(one example and maybe a poor one today). And I think most people realize and know what the true intention was(is). Some play devil's advocate. And some just want to try to find a loophole that justifies them being able to join.
> 
> And before someone takes it there, I'm in no way trying to infer that "amateurs" aren't as talented or skilled as "professionals". There are tons of amateurs that are incredibly talented and skilled, and even more-so than many "professionals".



But the dentist is probably spending more hours per week shooting and editing for their side business than the PJ who is limited to 40 hours/week so the paper doesn't have to pay overtime. Are you saying if the PJ is a trust fund baby and makes more from the stock market than the news business they should not get the preferential turnaround time either?

And anyone who thinks turnaround time is not _critical_ for someone charging $3000+ to shoot a wedding three out of every four weekends from May to October needs to have their head examined.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 23, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> But the dentist is probably spending more hours per week shooting and editing for their side business than the PJ who is limited to 40 hours/week so the paper doesn't have to pay overtime. Are you saying if the PJ is a trust fund baby and makes more from the stock market than the news business they should not get the preferential turnaround time either?


The requirement doesn't specify fraction of _time_, it specifies fraction of _income_. Are you saying the dentist derives a majority of his income from photography? Obviously not, since the numbers in your example show the contrary. Your trust-fund PJ has a better claim, as a card-carrying pro. 

It's all academic anyway. Canon USA never gave a damn about the 'pro' requirement, they were happy to take money from anyone who owned some gear and (more importantly) paid the fee. Now, they're merely making it official.


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 23, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> There's a lot of wiggle room between "amateur" and "full time professional, the majority of whose income is derived from producing images."



You miss quote the requirement.
(a) *that are full time self-employed, or an employee of a professional imaging business, who plays a direct role in the creation of moving or still images for third parties on a professional basis*, 

There is no dollar value assigned. It does not say "the majority of".

A Dentist (self employed) and makes still images to evaluate his patients would qualify.
The patient is the third party and there is no dollar value assigned in the requirement.


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 23, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> The requirement doesn't specify fraction of _time_, it specifies fraction of _income_. Are you saying the dentist derives a majority of his income from photography? Obviously not, since the numbers in your example show the contrary. Your trust-fund PJ has a better claim, as a card-carrying pro.
> 
> It's all academic anyway. Canon USA never gave a damn about the 'pro' requirement, they were happy to take money from anyone who owned some gear and (more importantly) paid the fee. Now, they're merely making it official.



I went back and read the thread. What are they making official?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 23, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> I went back and read the thread. What are they making official?


Canon USA eliminated the requirement for members to be professional photographers (as defined in your bolded section above). Now, you just need enough qualifying gear and to pay the fee.


----------



## lux (Aug 23, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Canon USA eliminated the requirement for members to be professional photographers (as defined in your bolded section above). Now, you just need enough qualifying gear and to pay the fee.



I just looked at the website. I don't see a change.
I've always wanted to join. For me the opportunity for cleaning seemed pretty great


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 23, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Canon USA eliminated the requirement for members to be professional photographers (as defined in your bolded section above). Now, you just need enough qualifying gear and to pay the fee.



Maybe I am confused by your response. The bold I posted is the exact cut from CPS website this week. In fact while I was there getting the clip I went ahead and renewed my silver membership. In older it had the same requirement 4 years ago. Maybe the professional photographer requirement was before that.

It seems like this topic never goes away. Always the same outcome and I think you will agree, regardless of what the terms and conditions say Canon just doesn't care.

For anyone wanting the correct terms and conditions go to this link. Click on on the link "More About CPS Silver Membership:
http://cps.usa.canon.com/about_cps/silverMembership.shtml


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 23, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> Maybe I am confused by your response. The bold I posted is the exact cut from CPS website this week. In fact while I was there getting the clip I went ahead and renewed my silver membership. In older it had the same requirement 4 years ago. Maybe the professional photographer requirement was before that.
> 
> It seems like this topic never goes away. Always the same outcome and I think you will agree, regardless of what the terms and conditions say Canon just doesn't care.
> 
> ...


It seems I’ve been propagating false information, my apologies. I was basing my statements on the commentary from Richard (CanonNewsGuy), where he stated:


> Canon USA has released a new video discussing the features and benefits of CPS (Canon Professional Services). Unlike other programs, the only qualification needed is how much eligible Canon gear you have. You don’t have to have professional credentials unlike both Sony and Nikon services, anyone can take advantage of CPS.


In the first part of the video, they do state that anyone with a certain level of professional equipment can join and I think that may have led to some confusion. Later in the video, they state that CPS is for people making a living using Canon equipment.

Or, maybe Richard is not suggesting that anything has changed, but merely stating declaratively what is practically true (and I agree with your post above) – Canon doesn’t care if you’re a pro, they only care if you have the gear and pay the fee, despite the requirement listed on their website.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 24, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> You miss quote the requirement.
> (a) *that are full time self-employed, or an employee of a professional imaging business, who plays a direct role in the creation of moving or still images for third parties on a professional basis*,
> 
> There is no dollar value assigned. It does not say "the majority of".
> ...



The last time I renewed my CPS membership there was still language relating to "majority" of income in the registration process.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 24, 2018)

Perhaps the biggest misunderstanding is what the initial post actually says as compared to what many seem to think it is implying:

*"You don’t have to have professional credentials unlike both Sony and Nikon services... "*

*Saying that is not the same thing as saying, "You don't have to be a professional."*

There are many freelancers and sole proprietors who are professional photographers that do not have credentials issued from a major press organization such as the AP (Associated Press) or Reuters, a local media company such as a newspaper, or a major professional organization such as ASMP (American Society of Media Photographers).

*Admittedly, Canon does not really enforce it at all, but they do still require one to declare:*

Discipline: The choices are 'Photography', 'Video/Cinema', or 'All'

Professional Status: The choices are 'Freelance', 'Owner', or 'Staff'

Primary Industry/Media Outlet: There are 27 choices including five different 'Film & TV' categories (Documentary, Episodic, Narrative, News/Weather, and Studio Production), four 'Government' categories (Federal, Military. Law Enforcement, and Local Government), two 'Corporate' categories (Large or Small/Medium), two 'Education' categories (K-12 or Higher), two for Portrait (High Volume or Studio/Location), and others such as 'Security/Surveillance', 'Wedding/Event', 'Sports', 'House of Worship', 'Magazine/Editorial/Fashion', etc.

Primary Specialty: There are 33 choices ranging from 'Annual Reports' to 'Wildlife' including things such as 'Sports', 'Wedding', 'Student/Equipment Manager', 'Paparazzi' (yes, that is an actual category in the menu!), 'Medical', 'Editorial', 'Catalogue', etc.

Secondary Specialty: The choices are the same as for Primary Specialty


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 25, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> The last time I renewed my CPS membership there was still language relating to "majority" of income in the registration process.



It would have had to been before 2014. The requirement read that way that far back.

But I have been reading the 51% statements and the majority statements for years when this topic pops up. It hasn't been that way in years.


----------



## michi (Aug 29, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> Probably because I don't consider a 20% or 30% discount on a several hundred dollars repair to be "slight."



Fair enough, it's still not a "extended warranty" because if it was, it would be free. A $1000 repair is still $800/$700 with the discount. It's not THAT big of a deal. Those $200 you saved, you probably paid in CPS fees. If you're a pro who constantly ends up with damaged equipment, then yes, it would be worth it.


----------



## RGF (Aug 29, 2018)

Skyscraperfan said:


> If that is not the norm at Sony or Nikon, that really is something that would stop me from buying there products.
> 
> The only complain I had about CPS in the past, is that you needed TWO professional bodies to qualify. I hope they changed that. If Canon is really confident with the quality of their lenses, a single camera should be enough for most photographers unless they need wide and long lenses at the same time. Instead of wasting the money on two cameras, I would rather buy more lenses.
> 
> I also hated that after a while a camera did not longer qualify.



A large format (24" and wide) does not count but the 13" and 17" printer do. Go figure


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 29, 2018)

michi said:


> Fair enough, it's still not a "extended warranty" because if it was, it would be free. A $1000 repair is still $800/$700 with the discount. It's not THAT big of a deal. Those $200 you saved, you probably paid in CPS fees. If you're a pro who constantly ends up with damaged equipment, then yes, it would be worth it.



I've never said it was an extended warranty.

Gold costs $100 per year. Silver is free. I usually maintain a Silver membership and have only upgraded to Gold immediately before I needed a repair. Canon has never questioned that. Including the free overnight return shipping valued at $27 on the invoice, one only needs a single $365 repair to break even on the $100 cost to upgrade from Silver to Gold. If one then needs another repair over the next calendar year, or a single repair costs more than $365, a one-time Gold membership for $100 more than pays for itself. And that's without even considering the five clean & checks per year included in the Gold level membership.


----------



## RGF (Aug 30, 2018)

michi said:


> Fair enough, it's still not a "extended warranty" because if it was, it would be free. A $1000 repair is still $800/$700 with the discount. It's not THAT big of a deal. Those $200 you saved, you probably paid in CPS fees. If you're a pro who constantly ends up with damaged equipment, then yes, it would be worth it.



Not only repair savings, faster turn around (not always important but can be essential at times), I can use the Itasca service center (not sure if non-CPS members can use it). Itasca is 45 minute drive for me. Savings the cost of shipping equipment for cleaning. I can either pick up my equipment or have Canon ship it to me (only downside of shipping is I need to sign for it).

Since we travel a lot (dusty areas) I need to use all my cleanings. That is worth the CPS membership.


----------



## Zeidora (Aug 30, 2018)

Has anybody been denied CPS membership? What counts towards "majority of income": just pressing the shutter, or also pre-prep and post production? Does it mean majority of income with Canon gear, or imaging with all sorts of gear, including Canon? No need to answer, just demonstrate that the conditions are very rubbery and can be interpreted with much latitude.

I'd relax a bit about the whole thing, and think this is more for Canon internal justification of the program rather than true gate-keeping. i just keep Ag, though would qualify for Pt, and that even with only bare minimum of Canon gear. Mostly Zeiss and even more esoteric stuff (Coastal Optics). Much of my professional/academic imaging does not use a single piece of Canon gear.


----------

