# Canon Responds to Rebel T6i/T6s Sensor Issue With Service Advisory



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 8, 2015)

```
This notice is to proactively inform our customers of the phenomenon described below along with Canon’s support actions. We value the trust our customers have placed in us, and we are dedicated to continuously improving product quality as well as delivering industry-leading service and support. We offer our sincerest apologies to any customer who may be inconvenienced.</p>
<p><strong>Phenomenon</strong>

In some units of the models listed below, the following phenomenon may occur due to irregularities on an optical layer located in front of the image sensor:</p>
<p>White spots may exist on the optical layer which may result in the appearance of dark circular patterns on the captured image under certain shooting conditions.</p>
<p><strong>Affected Products</strong>

The phenomenon described above may occur in cameras whose first and second digits of the serial number are as set forth below.</p>
<blockquote><p><em>Identification Procedure:</em>

Serial Number: [XXnnnnnnnnnn]

EOS Rebel T6s: If “XX” is “01” or “02”, the phenomenon described above may occur.

EOS Rebel T6i: If “XX” is “01” or “02”, the phenomenon described above may occur.

“n” represents any digit.</p></blockquote>
<p>NOTE: If the battery cover contains the marking illustrated below, the camera is NOT affected by the phenomenon described above even if the first and second digits of the serial number are of the numbers mentioned above.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/T6i-mark.jpg"><img class="alignnone wp-image-20253 size-full" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/T6i-mark.jpg" alt="T6i-mark" width="571" height="188" /></a></p>
<p><strong>Support</strong>

Potentially affected cameras will be inspected and affected units will be repaired free of charge.

We are developing a solution and will inform you as soon as it is available.</p>
<p>Canon EOS Rebel T6s: tbd

Canon EOS Rebel T6i: tbd</p>
<p>This information is for residents of the United States and Puerto Rico only. If you do not reside in the USA or Puerto Rico, please contact the Canon Customer Support Center in your region.

If you have not already done so, please register your Canon EOS Rebel T6s or your Canon EOS Rebel T6i. By registering, we will be able to notify you via email about future announcements.</p>
```


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 8, 2015)

*Re: Canon Japan Responds to Rebel T6i/T6s Sensor Issue*

Thumbs nose at those who suggested Canon would deny and obfuscate on this issue.


----------



## danski0224 (May 8, 2015)

No product announcement for a T610i/T610s?

Oh, wrong manufacturer...

 ;D


----------



## Tugela (May 9, 2015)

*Re: Canon Japan Responds to Rebel T6i/T6s Sensor Issue*



neuroanatomist said:


> Thumbs nose at those who suggested Canon would deny and obfuscate on this issue.



No one suggested that except you, lol


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 9, 2015)

Tugela said:


> ...it might take some time before we hear from them on the issue.



Lol, indeed. It took four whole days.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 9, 2015)

Good job canon.


----------



## zlatko (May 9, 2015)

*Re: Canon Japan Responds to Rebel T6i/T6s Sensor Issue*



Tugela said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Thumbs nose at those who suggested Canon would deny and obfuscate on this issue.
> ...



On April 30th a Leica fan site wrote: "Knowing Canon as we do, we'd be surprised if they publicly acknowledge the issue."

Today they were "pleasantly surprised" that Canon issued a service advisory on this. 

I'm not surprised.


----------



## nutcaser (May 9, 2015)

It reminds me of the olds days of buying an automobile. It was never a smart idea to buy the the first issues of a new model. Good to wait a year or so to work out the bugs. Automobiles have progressed to where those concerns are minimal. Looks like cameras are going backwards.


----------



## Luds34 (May 9, 2015)

nutcaser said:


> It reminds me of the olds days of buying an automobile. It was never a smart idea to buy the the first issues of a new model. Good to wait a year or so to work out the bugs. Automobiles have progressed to where those concerns are minimal. Looks like cameras are going backwards.



I don't know, I'd argue it is still true today. Probably not major issues like anything with the powertrain, but minor annoyances or features that were not always well thought out. One example, over thinking the heated seats and tying it into the climate control. Well guess what, some people like to use the heated seats even in the summer... sore back. 

On topic it is nice to see Canon acknowledging and dealing with the issue. It seems fairly wide spread and serious so I don't know why anyone is surprised. Probably would have looked far far worse to ignore.


----------



## 3kramd5 (May 9, 2015)

Do they put marks like these as a matter of course to easily distinguish between production runs? Or is it an indicator they add to cameras produced after a known manufacturing issue has been corrected?


----------



## zlatko (May 9, 2015)

3kramd5 said:


> Do they put marks like these as a matter of course to easily distinguish between production runs? Or is it an indicator they add to cameras produced after a known manufacturing issue has been corrected?



It's the latter. The mark is only for an affected camera that's been corrected. For production runs they distinguish them with serial numbers.


----------



## 3kramd5 (May 9, 2015)

zlatko said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > Do they put marks like these as a matter of course to easily distinguish between production runs? Or is it an indicator they add to cameras produced after a known manufacturing issue has been corrected?
> ...



ah, so it means the camera has had post-production rework? That makes sense. Thanks.


----------



## zlatko (May 9, 2015)

3kramd5 said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > 3kramd5 said:
> ...



Yes, but I'm pretty sure it's only for a camera that a customer has sent in for repair. The mark later helps the customer in case they decide to resell the camera. It means the camera won't have to be sent in for that particular service because it's already been done.

At the factory, a different production run gets a different batch of serial numbers. This way they can identify the affected vs. non-affected cameras in the service advisory. At least that's how it's been in the past.


----------



## mb66energy (May 9, 2015)

zlatko said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > zlatko said:
> ...



Perhaps Canon has informed dealers not to sell potentially affected cameras and send them back to a Canon service in larger badges to make it easier to repair the cameras instead disappointing customers with potentially buggy cameras?


----------



## captainkanji (May 9, 2015)

That's a pretty fast reply. They could have wait a year without acknowledging any problems and released a new model to fix it. ;D


----------



## Ebrahim Saadawi (May 9, 2015)

Well that was fast...


----------



## YuengLinger (May 9, 2015)

zlatko said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > Do they put marks like these as a matter of course to easily distinguish between production runs? Or is it an indicator they add to cameras produced after a known manufacturing issue has been corrected?
> ...



Alternatively, the mark could be put on cameras that had zero issues but had those production numbers. The marked cameras may not have been "affected" at all. For "affected" marked cameras to be already out in the wild, that would be some very fast sensor swapping, so I think inspected and cleared is more likely.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 9, 2015)

YuengLinger said:


> For "affected" marked cameras to be already out in the wild, that would be some very fast sensor swapping, so I think inspected and cleared is more likely.



Or...Canon knew about the problem for a while before it became publicly/commonly known.


----------



## YuengLinger (May 9, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > For "affected" marked cameras to be already out in the wild, that would be some very fast sensor swapping, so I think inspected and cleared is more likely.
> ...



Inescapable logic--as always, n.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 9, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> NOTE: If the battery cover contains the marking illustrated below, the camera is NOT affected by the phenomenon described above even if the first and second digits of the serial number are of the numbers mentioned above.



Interesting - so it seems they already have some way set up to marked fixed product batches, as if they knew something has to go wrong sooner or later with the new Rebels (no such marker pits on my 6d) :->


----------



## 3kramd5 (May 9, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > For "affected" marked cameras to be already out in the wild, that would be some very fast sensor swapping, so I think inspected and cleared is more likely.
> ...



That's pretty much what my suspicion was, but I asked to question before accusing them of shipping product they knew was bad or sitting on in hoping nobody would notice.


----------



## zlatko (May 10, 2015)

YuengLinger said:


> For "affected" marked cameras to be already out in the wild, that would be some very fast sensor swapping, so I think inspected and cleared is more likely.



It doesn't mean that marked cameras are already out in the wild. The service advisory is meant to be read now and in several months, and next year and the year after that, etc., until the camera ceases to exist. Service advisories stay online for many years. As time goes by, there will indeed be marked cameras in the wild, on the used market, etc. The service advisory isn't specifically telling you there are marked cameras available now, although that's possible too. Canon services cameras pretty quickly. So a camera sent in 10 days ago could already be back to its owner, repaired and marked. 

The idea that Canon would be "shipping product they knew was bad or sitting on in hoping nobody would notice" is beyond absurd. They are in the imaging business and know these spots are VERY visible and VERY problematic in a number of ways. And they know that word gets around on the Internet very quickly.


----------



## 3kramd5 (May 10, 2015)

zlatko said:


> The service advisory isn't specifically telling you there are marked cameras available now...



Fair enough.


----------



## bertzie (May 10, 2015)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the T6i/T6s use a Sony sensor?


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (May 10, 2015)

bertzie said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the T6i/T6s use a Sony sensor?


The CMOS sensor T6i and also T6s is manufactured by Canon.

Up to this moment Canon used Sony sensor only in some of its compact cameras Powershot.


----------



## bertzie (May 10, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> bertzie said:
> 
> 
> > Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the T6i/T6s use a Sony sensor?
> ...



Why did they introduce a new sensor in the Rebel series of cameras? Why not just use the same 20.2MP APS-C sensor they use in the 7dmk2 and 70d?


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (May 10, 2015)

bertzie said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > bertzie said:
> ...


A good question.

According to Masaya Maeda, Managing Director of Canon, the Dual Pixel AF sensor has a downside: High cost of manufacturing.

I'm sure the knowledgeable photographers would prefer that new T6i, T6s, M3 had the same 70D sensor. But the average buyer does not research on specialized sites like we do, and he is impressed by more megapixel.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 10, 2015)

bertzie said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the T6i/T6s use a Sony sensor?



Can't you tell by the (lack of) low iso dynamic range :-> ?



bertzie said:


> Why did they introduce a new sensor in the Rebel series of cameras? Why not just use the same 20.2MP APS-C sensor they use in the 7dmk2 and 70d?



In this segment, specs matter a lot with people comparing online in two colums or side-by-side in a shop. And the metapixie count still is one of the deciding factors, 24 (Rebel) has to be better than 18 (1dx), right :->?

It's unfortunate as few beginners really calculate how much resolution they need for which purpose, and if their glass is up to the task yadayadayada, but there you are. That being said, I'd take a 24mp aps-c sensor for macro shooting anytime over my 20mp ff 6d in good light.


----------



## Busted Knuckles (May 11, 2015)

there is clearly a QC issue. Honestly, they don't electronically inspect the finished product? For crying out loud this is an imaging company and the can't take a picture w/ or of the sensor prior to assembly and make sure all the parts are right. 

Further which part was bulk manufactured w/ a defect, should have caught it there- outbound to the next step.

Lastly inbound inspection of the parts.

There are at least 3 spots in the manufacturing process that should have caught this LONG before the units made it out the door.

Is that the faint aroma of garlic, lemon and a little fanny frying I smell?


----------



## YuengLinger (May 11, 2015)

Any word on which factory this happened in?


----------



## Tugela (May 11, 2015)

bertzie said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > bertzie said:
> ...



Because the Rebel sensors don't have DPAF and presumably are cheaper.


----------



## Tugela (May 11, 2015)

Busted Knuckles said:


> there is clearly a QC issue. Honestly, they don't electronically inspect the finished product? For crying out loud this is an imaging company and the can't take a picture w/ or of the sensor prior to assembly and make sure all the parts are right.
> 
> Further which part was bulk manufactured w/ a defect, should have caught it there- outbound to the next step.
> 
> ...



I doubt the problem was there initially, it most likely manifested itself over time so it was not there when the cameras were produced. 

You can get all sorts of things happening in materials used for precision coatings, such as phase separation and crystallization, that happen slowly. I suspect that was the problem with this particular batch of sensors, where one of the coatings applied to the sensor surface was either improperly applied, cured or was contaminated, and over time the flecks appeared as the sensor aged. This sort of thing happens all the time in high tech gadgets but obviously is not intended, and it is very difficult to pick up in QC because it is not immediately apparent.


----------



## Tugela (May 11, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > ...it *might* take some time before we hear from them on the issue.
> ...



Bolded the part you chose to ignore. Reading comprehension is a dying art it seems.

You generally don't hear from manufacturers about these sorts of things until they have characterized the problem (in other words, know that it actually is a problem on their end) and have a solution for it.

They don't want to issue a general product recall because someone left a shipping box in the baking sun for two weeks, for example.

The "speed" of their response implies that they were well aware of the problem long before the Lens Rentals posting and already knew the likely cause because they were immediately replacing the units. They had probably been getting back reports from users as soon as they started shipping the camera. All the Lens Rentals article did was accelerate the process and make damage control neccessary, otherwise they most likely would have quietly replaced the bad batch as people made service returns.


----------



## Tugela (May 11, 2015)

*Re: Canon Japan Responds to Rebel T6i/T6s Sensor Issue*



zlatko said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



They had no choice after the Lens Rentals posting, if they did not publically respond to an issue with that sort of sample size, and individual users continued to post "defective images" it would have basically killed the camera. Without the Lens Rentals posting I'm not so sure it would have happened with quite the speed, since the IQ effects of the defect only become apparent in shooting conditions that most users of the camera would not use. So, there would have been sporadic public complaints, but as past experience has shown, those don't carry quite the same clout. Over time the defective units would have been quietly phased out of the market, and that certainly would be the preferred route for any manufacturer. Do things with the least fuss and bother, and above all avoid admitting fault until absolutely necessary.


----------



## 3kramd5 (May 11, 2015)

zlatko said:


> The idea that Canon would be "shipping product they knew was bad or sitting on in hoping nobody would notice" is beyond absurd. They are in the imaging business and know these spots are VERY visible and VERY problematic in a number of ways. And they know that word gets around on the Internet very quickly.



I don't put much weight in the "do the right thing" of major companies, and the "right thing" is relative to shareholder value.

One might think that a company would issue a recall due to a safety issue as a matter of course, but as GM has shown us, they're willing to sit back and pay settlements rather than undergo a relatively expensive (up front) fix. 

Even within the imaging industry, errors which are VERY visible and VERY problematic have been pushed aside until the largest nation on the planet outright banned sale of the problem product.


----------



## Busted Knuckles (May 11, 2015)

Tugela said:


> Busted Knuckles said:
> 
> 
> > there is clearly a QC issue. Honestly, they don't electronically inspect the finished product? For crying out loud this is an imaging company and the can't take a picture w/ or of the sensor prior to assembly and make sure all the parts are right.
> ...



Fair enough, 

There has been some recent "lack of aging" across the photo seen. T4i, the recent Nikon oil problems.

The key to this is the rapid cycle improvement and error correction - give Canon good marks on that. I still have an issue w/ lenses coming out the factory anything other than perfect, particularly Ls


----------



## zlatko (May 12, 2015)

*Re: Canon Japan Responds to Rebel T6i/T6s Sensor Issue*



Tugela said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > Tugela said:
> ...



You must be confusing Canon with another manufacturer when you talk about what "past experience" has shown. They have a list of service advisories on their web site, addressing a variety of problems. There isn't a public service advisory every time someone reports a problem with a new product, but they obviously do warranty service all of the time. If I send them a new lens with decentered optics, it comes back fixed within 10 days, and there's no public service advisory about it. 

Even without the Lens Rentals posting, it's likely that every affected camera would have been serviced or replaced under warranty. That dramatic pattern of spots all over the sensor is not the sort of thing that most users would miss. Anyone using P mode or Auto mode on a sunny day outdoors would have gotten some shots at f/11 or f/16 and seen them in the sky.

You're saying Canon had to act because of the Lens Rentals posting. And you're saying that sporadic public complaints would not have had much clout; so defective units could be "quietly phased out". But then you're saying that individual users posting defective images would have "basically killed the camera". Do you see the contradiction there?


----------

