# The 5D Mark III Fix



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 2, 2012)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/05/the-5d-mark-iii-fix/"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/05/the-5d-mark-iii-fix/" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/05/the-5d-mark-iii-fix/"></a></div>
<strong>From LensRentals.com


</strong>LensRentals.com has received their first shipment of fixed 5D Mark III bodies. They did what any of us would have done, they disassembled one to see what the fix was. It turns out the fix is two pieces of black tape. I actually joked with a friend that the fix would be “some kind of tape job”. This sort of thing is pretty normal inside electronics, so don’t be worried about tape coming off and that sort of thing. I have seen entire modules held in place by tape inside cameras.</p>
<div id="attachment_9797" class="wp-caption aligncenter" style="width: 585px"><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/5d3original.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-9797" title="5d3original" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/5d3original-575x297.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="297" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">5D Mark III Before the "Fix"</p></div>
<p> </p>
<div id="attachment_9796" class="wp-caption aligncenter" style="width: 585px"><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/5d3new.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-9796" title="5d3new" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/5d3new-575x334.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="334" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">5D Mark III After the "Fix"</p></div>
<p>If the fix works, who cares how they did it. :)</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/05/the-fix-is-in" target="_blank">LensRentals.com</a></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## max (May 2, 2012)




----------



## bdarfler (May 2, 2012)

So is this what they will do if I send my camera back? It might be worth sending it back.


----------



## Nrbelex (May 2, 2012)

Is this the "fix" to early cameras which were sent back, or is this how new cameras landing in stores are arriving? I'm assuming the latter, since I haven't heard anything about the program to send affected cameras back to Canon yet.


----------



## cezargalang (May 2, 2012)

Just wondering, wouldn't this have a problem in the long run?


----------



## zhap03 (May 2, 2012)

Can the tape adhesive withstand increasing temperatures, both internally and externally? I'm just worried about the tape coming off (short term/long term), and then having to pay another $100CAD to courier my 5D3 body back to Canon Canada every time the tape comes off. Is this solution long-lasting enough for owners who plan to keep using their 5D3 bodies 5-10 years from now?


----------



## cezargalang (May 2, 2012)

zhap03 said:


> Can the tape adhesive withstand increasing temperatures, both internally and externally? I'm just worried about the tape coming off (short term/long term), and then having to pay another $100CAD to courier my 5D3 body back to Canon Canada every time the tape comes off. Is this solution long-lasting enough for owners who plan to keep using their 5D3 bodies 5-10 years from now?



+1 this is more detailed than my question


----------



## pdirestajr (May 2, 2012)

Don't worry all it's "L" series pro-grade tape.


----------



## DanielG. (May 2, 2012)

Roger Cicala from the LensRentals blog says:


> Canon has this very cool black tape they used to cover circuit boards […] and I figured they’d just slap another piece over […] the top LCD light. Which is exactly what they did.



So everything should be fine.


----------



## WoodyWindy (May 2, 2012)

The tape isn't doing anything "structural". The adhesive has to hold the tape in place long enough for the top to be mounted to the body. Thereafter, the "tape" is functionally a "light mask", for which it does not need adhesion - just presence. I suspect the proximity of rest of the components inside the body will be more than adequate to hold the tape in place long term if the adhesive fails.


----------



## maccanonguy (May 2, 2012)

My Mark 5DIII is in the mail on the way and you are telling me that I also get two FREE pieces of tape with IT!!! I so have to get ready for this.


----------



## timkbryant (May 2, 2012)

I have to say, that's a hilariously simple solution. And as CR Guy says, "If the fix works, who cares how they did it. "


----------



## FLOYD (May 2, 2012)

And what about the long term as the glue from the tape begins to dissolve and to spill at the electronics? The repair is short-term, but in the the warranty period should not be anything wrong with that, and after the warranty is no longer a problem of the manufacturer, but a buyer. 

Sorry for my poor English


----------



## preppyak (May 2, 2012)

maccanonguy said:


> My Mark 5DIII is in the mail on the way and you are telling me that I also get two FREE pieces of tape with IT!!! I so have to get ready for this.


They've actually raised the price to 3499.99 to offset the price




FLOYD said:


> And what about the long term as the glue from the tape begins to dissolve and to spill at the electronics? The repair is short-term, but in the the warranty period should not be anything wrong with that, and after the warranty is no longer a problem of the manufacturer, but a buyer.


You do realize that this tape already exists in other parts of your camera. And that the computer or phone you typed this message on also has a similar type of tape. Especially if it's a Mac. God help you if you try to take apart the newer ones, they have tape everywhere. Oh, and your house/apt. That thing has tape ALL over its wires.

LensRental took about a D7000. Multiple times they mention tape, including parts where the tape shields things

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/04/d7000-dissection


----------



## vlad (May 2, 2012)

I can see it on the used market now - "I'm the original owner, 10K shutter clicks, tape fix applied..."


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 2, 2012)

vlad said:


> I can see it on the used market now - "I'm the original owner, 10K shutter clicks, tape fix applied..."



What, you had one of the defective original units? You'll have to knock $300 off the price if you expect me to buy it from you...


----------



## steven63 (May 2, 2012)

preppyak said:


> maccanonguy said:
> 
> 
> > My Mark 5DIII is in the mail on the way and you are telling me that I also get two FREE pieces of tape with IT!!! I so have to get ready for this.
> ...



My phone might have the same type of tape inside of it, but my phone is only designed to last a couple years or so. And while it might already be in my camera, I'd dare say it's to tape together wires that are already shielded. Same with my house - tape isn't not applied directly to exposed electrical connections, but to shielded wires or such.

I too would be worried about the long term affects of the glue on the exposed electrical connections. Cameras are exposed to heat, humidity, cold...all of which speed up the degrading of the tape. Tape is not designed to last 10 years...or 5 years in such conditions and I've witnessed electrical tape 'disintegrate' into 'goo' after just a few short months in the heat.


----------



## FLOYD (May 2, 2012)

steven63 said:


> preppyak said:
> 
> 
> > maccanonguy said:
> ...


Canon have the technology to create something better in the camera for $ 3500 to resolve this problem.


----------



## Fotofanten (May 2, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> vlad said:
> 
> 
> > I can see it on the used market now - "I'm the original owner, 10K shutter clicks, tape fix applied..."
> ...



Don't worry, it's actually the limited red tape edition and it will cost you $300 _more _than the regular 5D3, but only 10000 red tape units will ever be manufactured, and each one has an individual number, so it's definitely totally worth it.


----------



## armando (May 2, 2012)

Oh wow that's just hilarious! So now its serials competition between the 5d MKIII owners

"Hey is your 5d mkiii Pre-Tape or Post-Taped?"

so one day when I need google a shop

5dmkiii (No-tape) $3499
5dmkIII (tape) $3499

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!


----------



## Radiating (May 2, 2012)

steven63 said:


> preppyak said:
> 
> 
> > maccanonguy said:
> ...



As an engineer I have to say that your response is mind numbingly idiotic. Adhesive used around electronics doesn't disolve and magically find electrical contacts to disrupt - in fact adhesive designed for electronics like the type they likely used doesn't even conduct electricity. Furthermore electronics adhesive is insanely durable. There are different sorts of electronics adhesive but in many designs they actually use the adhesive to hold the parts together in favor of metal screws. Read that again, they use the adhesive instead of screws made of hardened metal because it is more durable. The life expectancy of most electronics adhesive is 20-50 years... when directly exposed to the elements 24/7. 

So for a non-structural peice already held by friction, and weather sealed from the elements you can expect the electronics adhesive to outlast the camera 10 times over.


----------



## bp (May 2, 2012)

steven63 said:


> I too would be worried about the long term affects of the glue on the exposed electrical connections. Cameras are exposed to heat, humidity, cold...all of which speed up the degrading of the tape. Tape is not designed to last 10 years...or 5 years in such conditions and I've witnessed electrical tape 'disintegrate' into 'goo' after just a few short months in the heat.



Holy crap on a stick people... calm the eff down - open up a laptop. They're chok-full of this sort of adhesive shielding, and they get 10 times hotter than your camera ever will. They're not using electrical tape from Ace hardware.


----------



## jcns (May 2, 2012)

there will be those gear snobs who will have a stroke over this simple solution. Because it's not becoming of pro level camera and that it's plastic and etc etc.
Do you know your car door has plastic to keep things dry? And it stays put for decades. So you say it does not go through heat cycles.
If you bought a car in the last 10 years, your engine bay has tons of plastic that goes through thousands of heat cycles and much broader temp range. Guess what, that plastic is still there.
Solutions need not be complex nor expensive.
Ever heard of US Space program developing a zero gravity pen that ended up costing $$$$$$$$$. The Russians used a pencil.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 2, 2012)

Tape FTW! 8)


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 2, 2012)

Radiating said:


> Furthermore electronics adhesive is insanely durable.





bp said:


> They're not using electrical tape from Ace hardware.



Damn. And here I though they paid some poor worker to take small pieces of 3M Scotch® Magic Tape and blacken it with a Sharpie®, who would hand it to a second worker to blow on it until the ink was dry, who would hand it to a third worker who would then hand-carry it to the service engineer to slap on the underside of an LCD. Go figure.


----------



## ttmphotography (May 2, 2012)

I thought the problem was only on some models with certain serial numbers. 

If that is true, were there other camaras manufactured without tape that did not have a light leak (and if so, how not)?

It's not like some cameras had the tape and some didn't before the problem was reported.


----------



## mws (May 2, 2012)

pdirestajr said:


> Don't worry all it's "L" series pro-grade tape.



They should have used red tape......


I wouldn't worry about the long term durability of the tape. I've taken apart plenty of 30-40 year old range finders and there is tape holding all sorts of stuff together.


----------



## Otter (May 2, 2012)

Question : 

Does this tape prevent it from taking pictures? NO
Does it fix the problem? YES

For all those still complaing, it's time to get over it and move on. Judging by a few of the posts thus far, you have no idea what you are talking about in regards to electrical tap in electronics. No matter what solution Canon comes up with, short of giving you your money back and letting you keep your camera, you're not going to be happy. Canon doesn't owe you anymore more then what they have done. So go ENJOY your camera.


----------



## V8Beast (May 2, 2012)

Can't I just put gaffer's tape on the outside of the LCD screen? Oh wait, I can just meter through the viewfinder or using the rear 3.2" LCD screen in those rare instances where the light leak affects exposure. 

I admit that it's amusing that so many people got pissed off over a "problem" that was fixed with a piece of tape.


----------



## V8Beast (May 2, 2012)

Radiating said:


> As an engineer I have to say that your response is mind numbingly idiotic. Adhesive used around electronics doesn't disolve and magically find electrical contacts to disrupt - in fact adhesive designed for electronics like the type they likely used doesn't even conduct electricity. Furthermore electronics adhesive is insanely durable. There are different sorts of electronics adhesive but in many designs they actually use the adhesive to hold the parts together in favor of metal screws. Read that again, they use the adhesive instead of screws made of hardened metal because it is more durable.



To add to this, with the increasing focus on improving fuel economy in cars, many body panels these days are plastic, and those plastic panels are often held by adhesives, not screws or bolts. In a hot and humid environment where I live (Texas), I can only imagine how many heat cycles that poor adhesive goes through, and how hot it gets in the baking sun with black paint making the situation even worse. 

Like someone else said, it's L-series tape, you know the good stuff, so let's relax  In DxO's lab testing, I think that stuff held up a 20 pound bowling ball for 20 minutes before finally giving up ;D


----------



## Razor2012 (May 2, 2012)

ttmphotography said:


> I thought the problem was only on some models with certain serial numbers.
> 
> If that is true, were there other camaras manufactured without tape that did not have a light leak (and if so, how not)?
> 
> It's not like some cameras had the tape and some didn't before the problem was reported.



That's what I thought also. Wasn't it the 6th digit with a 1 or 2 in it?


----------



## jalbfb (May 2, 2012)

All the "newer" 5D3's will probably come with the tape already inside


----------



## DzPhotography (May 2, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> vlad said:
> 
> 
> > I can see it on the used market now - "I'm the original owner, 10K shutter clicks, tape fix applied..."
> ...


No, you have to pay more, those are already collector's items :


----------



## bkorcel (May 2, 2012)

And in the end, the fix is essentially "damage control" to keep sales going. In reality the light leak has no affect on any shots I've taken. I wont be sending mine back in. My time with the camera in hand is far more valuable than two pieces of tape, shipping, insurance, and perhaps a week or two at Canon.


----------



## steven63 (May 2, 2012)

Radiating said:


> steven63 said:
> 
> 
> > preppyak said:
> ...



I sure hope your right about the quality of the tape - I'd hate to come back here in 15 years and demand that you seek a refund for your electrical engineering degree. :-[


----------



## t.linn (May 2, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Radiating said:
> 
> 
> > Furthermore electronics adhesive is insanely durable.
> ...



;D ;D ;D


----------



## Tusker (May 2, 2012)

This is a little off topic on tape but more on Canon’s ethics, I am not overly confident with Canon’s business ethics or even confident that all the people that work there know what they are talking about or have experience. Maybe saying Canon as a whole is wrong, maybe I should say some people at Canon.

I have had troubles with my 60D and lens 15-85. It is all fixed now, but only after contacting someone and then ask to speak to their supervisor and then had to ask to speak to their supervisor. 

I took my camera directly to Canon and showed them both issues and they said that is normal their all like that! Rubber was peeling off the grip and said it was from overuse, I am just a hobbyist, and sometimes a month will go by before I take out my camera. Had it for under a year, 5000 photos maybe. 

Then the lens 15-85 they originally fixed, when they put it back together the focus ring had 5-6 millimetre of play either way before it would start to focus. Once again they showed me a lens that was just like mine with 5-6 millimetre of play. 

They tried to trick me into thinking this was normal so I would go away. Usually I am go with the flow and accept what people say as correct, but I did not think this was the case. I just don’t like they showed me other broken items and say that is normal, so I would go away. I guess I just don’t want anyone that is passive, be to be turned away. I persisted and now all the issues are fixed.


----------



## Righteye (May 2, 2012)

I guess thats one way of using up all the old Fuji Velvia, do they need some i've still got some in my fridge


----------



## plutonium10 (May 2, 2012)

I bet Canon Canada fixes them with duct tape, eh?


----------



## AJ (May 2, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> In DxO's lab testing, I think that stuff held up a 20 pound bowling ball for 20 minutes before finally giving up ;D


Suppose DXO finds that Canon's L-tape tape has a light transmission coefficient of 1%, and they give the tape a score of 86%. Then Nikon invents a piece of piece with a transmission coefficient of 0.95%, and they get a score of 96%. Imagine the howls...


----------



## plutonium10 (May 2, 2012)

AJ said:


> V8Beast said:
> 
> 
> > In DxO's lab testing, I think that stuff held up a 20 pound bowling ball for 20 minutes before finally giving up ;D
> ...



I was going to buy a 5D mk III but Im wondering now if I should wait because they'll probably release EF Black Tape L USM II soon and I don't fancy the resale value of the MK III's current kit tape: the EF Black Tape L USM I. And I heard a rumor they might release EF Slightly Blacker Tape L USM in June.

Note: USM in this case stands for Ultra Sticky Material


----------



## digitalninja (May 2, 2012)

As an engineer I have to say that your response is mind numbingly idiotic. Adhesive used around electronics doesn't disolve and magically find electrical contacts to disrupt - in fact adhesive designed for electronics like the type they likely used doesn't even conduct electricity. Furthermore electronics adhesive is insanely durable. There are different sorts of electronics adhesive but in many designs they actually use the adhesive to hold the parts together in favor of metal screws. Read that again, they use the adhesive instead of screws made of hardened metal because it is more durable. The life expectancy of most electronics adhesive is 20-50 years... when directly exposed to the elements 24/7. 

So for a non-structural peice already held by friction, and weather sealed from the elements you can expect the electronics adhesive to outlast the camera 10 times over.
[/quote]

Thanks Radiating. Very true. Its used all the time. Don't panic people.


----------



## nikkito (May 2, 2012)

so this is why the 1D x is delayed!! they run out of black tape.


----------



## iaind (May 2, 2012)

Black tape fix is interim measure. Canon engineers have miniature black hole under development but will appear as standard in 5dIV


----------



## devman (May 2, 2012)

Well that explains why the 1DX is so delayed... tape shortage from the 5D Mk III fix!!

;D


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 2, 2012)

FLOYD said:


> And what about the long term as the glue from the tape begins to dissolve and to spill at the electronics? The repair is short-term, but in the the warranty period should not be anything wrong with that, and after the warranty is no longer a problem of the manufacturer, but a buyer.
> 
> Sorry for my poor English



It was all a plot by that Korean camera club to drive up prices of the original pre-fix model's long term resale value. Three years from now people will pay huge premiums for used copies without the fix. ;D ;D ;D


----------



## stevenrrmanir (May 2, 2012)

wow - I have no words to describe this... so this is what a $3500 camera looks like?


----------



## plutonium10 (May 3, 2012)

stevenrrmanir said:


> wow - I have no words to describe this... so this is what a $3500 camera looks like?



Or a $7000 camera for that matter. Or an airplane. Black tape and circuitry are best friends.


----------



## revup67 (May 3, 2012)

Called a local Canon reseller and asked if they had stock on the Canon 5D Mark iii, he said "no, but we just got in the Canon 5D Mark iii T."


----------



## Hill Benson (May 3, 2012)

For me, this shows how insignificant the problem was in the first place.


----------



## april (May 3, 2012)

those are not ordinary tapes they are anti-static insulating materials only used by semi-con indstries making high-end  electronic stuffs.


----------



## cayenne (May 3, 2012)

Razor2012 said:


> ttmphotography said:
> 
> 
> > I thought the problem was only on some models with certain serial numbers.
> ...



Yeah...I'd be curious as to what the 6th digit on *this* camera they took apart with the tape in it was....was it a 1,2 or maybe a 'new' 3 model?

cayenne


----------



## GDub (May 3, 2012)

I just ordered my 5DIII because of the fix! Brilliant!!

[Actually I ordered one because, according to CR, they're coming back in-stock very soon--I hope!]


----------



## V8Beast (May 3, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> It was all a plot by that Korean camera club to drive up prices of the original pre-fix model's long term resale value. Three years from now people will pay huge premiums for used copies without the fix. ;D ;D ;D



Yes, it is a big Korean conspiracy, but not for the reason you suggest. The Koreans and Japanese hate each other already, and the people in that camera club are actually Samsung execs trying to ruin Canon's reputation. You see, Samsung is working on a new line of DSLRs with proprietary Sexmor sensors that promise 17 stops of DR and instant wood for camera geeks everywhere ;D It's rumored that the new Samsung SLRs will come with a gift certificate redeemable at your local Korean BBQ restaurant as well.


----------



## Tracy Pinto (May 3, 2012)

This forum is prone to sometimes get hysterical like a class of tween girls. This was a tiny problem (I have one of the early models and have not bothered to do anything) and the addition of tape as a final resolution proves it. Electrical equipment manufacturers commonly use this type of special tape for various reasons. Simple problem - simple fix. Let us let this rest. 

Now for those seeking a more proper $3,500 type solution to this tiny problem, I am curious what might that look like? Full re-engineering of the camera to also produce 36.3 MP? 

For a little taste of schadenfreude here is the link to D800 issues: http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=5517


----------



## takoman46 (May 3, 2012)

AJ said:


> Suppose DXO finds that Canon's L-tape tape has a light transmission coefficient of 1%, and they give the tape a score of 86%. Then Nikon invents a piece of piece with a transmission coefficient of 0.95%, and they get a score of 96%. Imagine the howls...



Impossible! Nikon may have produced a DSLR that has scored higher than any Canon DSLR according to the DxO tests... But there is absolutely no way that Nikon is capable of producing a tape that is better than "L" grade Canon tape.


----------



## Wideopen (May 3, 2012)

Wow now my lens cap macro pictures will be shot at their correct exposure! Yeay. :


----------



## nitsujwalker (May 3, 2012)

Wideopen said:


> Wow now my lens cap macro pictures will be shot at their correct exposure! Yeay. :



HAHAHA!!! Yes... and the inside of my closet with the lights off and the blinds closed...


----------



## nitsujwalker (May 3, 2012)

Tracy Pinto said:


> This forum is prone to sometimes get hysterical like a class of tween girls. This was a tiny problem (I have one of the early models and have not bothered to do anything) and the addition of tape as a final resolution proves it. Electrical equipment manufacturers commonly use this type of special tape for various reasons. Simple problem - simple fix. Let us let this rest.
> 
> Now for those seeking a more proper $3,500 type solution to this tiny problem, I am curious what might that look like? Full re-engineering of the camera to also produce 36.3 MP?
> 
> For a little taste of schadenfreude here is the link to D800 issues: http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=5517



Holy crap! That thread reports more issues than i've read here in a month (and there have been many complaints here!)


----------



## roumin (May 3, 2012)

They fixed the light leak, but metering is still wrong for times when you want to shoot with lens cap on. It's pitch black for heaven's sake, so how is the light sensor coming up with any exposure setting? What is the right exposure setting for pitch black?


----------



## dr croubie (May 3, 2012)

As an experienced electronics designer and (former) head of Service & Maintenance (elsewhere, not at canon), all I can say to anyone who doesn't like this as a fix:

If you're shocked by this, don't ever, ever, buy any electrical or electronic device ever again. Go live in a cave and kill your own rabbits with a pointed stick. My industry runs on fixes (and yes, sometimes even designs) like this.


----------



## pakosouthpark (May 3, 2012)

im sure nikon, sony, olympus and some other big medium brands are having a big laugh at this....

cr guy says: If the fix works, who cares how they did it.
yeah but for how long? people are giving away a lot of money for this camera.. we are in times of technology that shouldn't have this kind of failures..!!

just my 2 pence


----------



## plutonium10 (May 3, 2012)

pakosouthpark said:


> im sure nikon, sony, olympus and some other big medium brands are having a big laugh at this....
> 
> cr guy says: If the fix works, who cares how they did it.
> yeah but for how long? people are giving away a lot of money for this camera.. we are in times of technology that shouldn't have this kind of failures..!!
> ...



Well let's see... open up any camera you want and you'll probably find tape holding together a bunch of wires or covering a circuit board. It's just standard practice. So what do you expect to see inside the 5D mk III? The interior of Westminster Abbey? 

Yes, we ARE in times of advanced technology. You're 100% right about that. But with more complexity comes the potential for more errors, and as errors go, this "light leak" is quite insignificant.


----------



## Gcon (May 3, 2012)

Now I know why they didn't call it the 5DX - it was missing that black-tape X-factor. People should be thankful that they are getting this 5DX upgrade for free!


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 3, 2012)

plutonium10 said:


> Well let's see... open up any camera you want and you'll probably find tape holding together a bunch of wires or covering a circuit board. It's just standard practice. So what do you expect to see inside the 5D mk III? The interior of Westminster Abbey?
> 
> Yes, we ARE in times of advanced technology. You're 100% right about that. But with more complexity comes the potential for more errors, and as errors go, this "light leak" is quite insignificant.



Indeed. My PC has tape and cable holders and cables pushed all around.

People more and more these days seem to want the world around them to be neat, tidy and perfect.. "and if anyone dares to be any less I'll have them up in court" :

The last 20 years have been good in some ways but quite bad in others.


----------



## expatinasia (May 3, 2012)

I notice they also changed the colour of some of the screws on the right from silver to black. That can only help the issue surely. Maybe this is also why the 1D X is delayed. They ran out of tape while trying to fix the 5D MK III.</end sarcasm>

It is standard behaviour in electronics to use tape, but when I woke up this morning and read the tech headlines, I just knew it was going to create a storm, and I can understand why some people that have the current 5D MK III are a bit miffed, albeit a possibly knee jerk reaction.

I think Canon handled the PR very badly in this case.


----------



## dam1an (May 3, 2012)

I am wondering if the risk of opening up the camera and affecting the original weather sealing is worth it, for a problem which in truth doesn't alter exposure on 99.99% of the images I am ever likely to take.


----------



## FunPhotons (May 3, 2012)

> As an engineer I have to say that your response is mind numbingly idiotic. Adhesive used around electronics doesn't disolve and magically find electrical contacts to disrupt - in fact adhesive designed for electronics like the type they likely used doesn't even conduct electricity. Furthermore electronics adhesive is insanely durable. There are different sorts of electronics adhesive but in many designs they actually use the adhesive to hold the parts together in favor of metal screws. Read that again, they use the adhesive instead of screws made of hardened metal because it is more durable. The life expectancy of most electronics adhesive is 20-50 years... when directly exposed to the elements 24/7.



As an engineer I agree, that stuff is crazy tough. Additionally, I happen to have rolls of *Red* engineering electrical tape. Notice that folks, *RED* - nicely color coordinated with your L lenses. 

I'll take replacement tape orders, only $499 per body, prepaid. 

(I can already hear it now "but won't that throw off your white balance?")


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 3, 2012)

expatinasia said:


> Maybe this is also why the 1D X is delayed. They ran out of tape while trying to fix the 5D MK III.</end sarcasm>


Haha!!!


----------



## zim (May 3, 2012)

I heard that Nikon tape has better DR :'(


----------



## steven63 (May 3, 2012)

Ya know I'm getting a bit fed up with all the "engineers" touting that this fix is standard throughout the electronics industry and that we, as consumers, should just deal with it. Well to you I say "stick it where the sun doesn't shine."

Yes I understand you have spent a lot of money and time and sweat on your education and I'm just a poor blue-collar shmuck. I know you have a pretty plaque on the wall that 'says' you know what you are doing. You might even have a sticker on your drivers license to help you convince the cops you are smart. So what.

Don't come on here and try to convince us mere mortals that this is sufficient and 'don't open your computers' because there is tape all inside it. You know what? I have opened my computer...I build my own computers and THERE ISN'T A STITCH OF TAPE ANYWHERE INSIDE IT. Not one small piece.

What you guys are trying to do is, convince the consumer that your way of doing things is sufficient and that our wee-bit of knowlege on the matter is laughable. Shall we revisit your way of doing things? 1. Do it cheaply. 2. Do is sufficiently 3. Do it 'just enough' to make it work. 4. Hope the customer doesn't find out that your company charges a premium for such a mickey mouse fix. 5. Collect a paycheck and straighten the plaque on the wall.

Well I got news for you guys. It's the consumer that decides whether it's good enough. WE decide with our pocketbooks. YOU get to go redesign it if WE tell you it isn't. 

I work with engineers everyday. Not in the electronics field, but the manufacturing field. And I'm here to tell you, you guys [email protected]#* stuff up more than you help. Constant rework and on the fly fixes by the guy without the degree while the guy with the degree looks down smugly over his glasses and his CATIA program; never actually putting things together. 

Tape. That's the fix for a $3500.00 camera light leak issue. Personally I'm disgusted and as consumers we shouldn't have to settle for it.

They couldn't design it correctly to begin with, so they hot patched it. And you engineer types claim we should be thrilled. 

Just one question: If you engineer types are so smart why the heck does the camera need to be fixed with tape to correct how it was engineered?


----------



## sandymandy (May 3, 2012)

Sounds like u regret not getting a better education or something...


----------



## jalbfb (May 3, 2012)

steven63 said:


> Ya know I'm getting a bit fed up with all the "engineers" touting that this fix is standard throughout the electronics industry and that we, as consumers, should just deal with it. Well to you I say "stick it where the sun doesn't shine."
> 
> Yes I understand you have spent a lot of money and time and sweat on your education and I'm just a poor blue-collar shmuck. I know you have a pretty plaque on the wall that 'says' you know what you are doing. You might even have a sticker on your drivers license to help you convince the cops you are smart. So what.
> 
> ...



Nice rant. Hope you feel better. I for one feel that this light leak is a non-issue. I can never remember taking a photo with the lens cap on in the dark with the top LCD lit. So the fix that Canon did does not bother me in the least and I for one am reassured by the engineers who have chimed in. I am willing to bet that the next generation of 5D3 cameras off of their production line will probably have this same tape in place. I do not plan on sending my camera in for this fix, but should I have to in the future for whatever reason, then I'll ask for the tape job as well. If this issue bothers you so much and you've purchased a 5D3 then return it for a refund. If you are thinking about buying now and this upsets you then do not. As for the majority of us, I do not see either the light leak or the fix as an issue. I think the real issue is the base price that Canon chose and that is what is raising the ire anytime any issue is raised on this particular camera. I'm curious to see whether this issue is present in the 1DX whenever it is released or if it has the tape job present already in place upon release.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 3, 2012)

steven63 said:


> Just one question: If you engineer types are so smart why the heck does the camera need to be fixed with tape to correct how it was engineered?



Because a bunch of internet whiners, most of whom don't even own the camera in question, clamored loudly about a 'light leak' when most have no knowledge of the actual consequences of the leak (almost everyone seems to think the leaked light directly affects the recorded image), fail to realize this is not a problem for 99.9% of people who actually have the camera and use it to take pictures of things other than the lens cap, and generally blew this whole issue way, way out of proportion.

Canon should use tape to fix the _real_ problem here...


----------



## EvilTed (May 3, 2012)

So when we send our defective units in to Canon are they going to slap the tape in there when they inspect it and call it done or just send it back?

I want my bit of tape too, thank you!

ET


----------



## steven63 (May 3, 2012)

I've been around long enough to remember the 1dmIII focus issues. As I recall very few if any, photographers would have been affected by that. Yet, it became an issue and trying to sell the camera required that you list the serial # to show whether or not it was an affected unit.

Now we have this.

I have little doubt the camera will perform flawlessly with the tape. And I have less doubt anybody would have ever been affected by the issue had it never been discovered. However, I 100% certain Canon will NOT incorporate the tape as a permanent solution and keep it in the next generation camera. 

It is an engineering design flaw. Period. Deny that would you?

The problem here is, I KNOW about the tape. Had I never known about the tape I wouldn't care. But now I KNOW. Ignorance is bliss, I guess. And I am not interested in plunking down $3500 for a piece of equipment with a design flaw fixed by tape. Thank you very much.


----------



## plutonium10 (May 3, 2012)

steven63 said:


> Don't come on here and try to convince us mere mortals that this is sufficient and 'don't open your computers' because there is tape all inside it. You know what? I have opened my computer...I build my own computers and THERE ISN'T A STITCH OF TAPE ANYWHERE INSIDE IT. Not one small piece.



The reason why there's no tape in your computer is because a desktop computer is a modular system designed to be put together with interchangable plug-and-play parts. I've taken apart laptops and found (the horror!) tape inside, because these are designed to be compact and lightweight, sometimes using soldered or integrated connections in locations where a desktop tower would instead use a user-friendly but more bulky multi-pin connector.

The 5D mk III is meant to be a sealed unit with no parts interchangeability, so the circuitry and wiring is assembled a little differently, including the use of tape.

Edit: Ya, you're 100% right about the "ignorance is bliss" factor. After I calculated how much strain is put on the pistons and rods of a car engine, I spent weeks expecting to see a piston come flying through the hood as I drove along.


----------



## steven63 (May 3, 2012)

sandymandy said:


> Sounds like u regret not getting a better education or something...



My level of education, while beyond the average, is not the issue here. The psychology blog is on another site. Would you like to contribute something more substantial to the debate about cameras?


----------



## shockwave1111 (May 3, 2012)

steven63 said:


> I've been around long enough to remember the 1dmIII focus issues. As I recall very few if any, photographers would have been affected by that. Yet, it became an issue and trying to sell the camera required that you list the serial # to show whether or not it was an affected unit.
> 
> Now we have this.
> 
> ...



I think your expectation is not inline with the price you are paying. Although I get your point that you want great engineering for the product for $3500, you are expecting *perfect * engineering beyond the expected use of the product. To achieve that, you won't be paying $3500 but more like $7000 (or beyond) to have all the test cases, even situation the camera isn't intend to do like taking pictures with the lens cap on, addressed.

What is next? Do we need a solution for taking pictures of the sun without filters? Or does it work in zero vacuum environment? Do we reasonably expect the product to perform outside of the specification?


----------



## daniel_charms (May 3, 2012)

steven63 said:


> The problem here is, I KNOW about the tape. Had I never known about the tape I wouldn't care. But now I KNOW. Ignorance is bliss, I guess. And I am not interested in plunking down $3500 for a piece of equipment with a design flaw fixed by tape. Thank you very much.



If we call this apparent non-issue a "design flaw", we might just as well call the piece of tape something else as well. Something more sophisticated, like "anti-static photon-blocker". That is to say, Canon fixed the design flaw by adding an anti-static photon-blocker to the design of the top LCD.


----------



## steven63 (May 3, 2012)

shockwave1111 said:


> steven63 said:
> 
> 
> > I've been around long enough to remember the 1dmIII focus issues. As I recall very few if any, photographers would have been affected by that. Yet, it became an issue and trying to sell the camera required that you list the serial # to show whether or not it was an affected unit.
> ...



I have to disagree. $3500 for a camera is a lot of money. And correct me if I am wrong, but did the 5dmii have a light leak issue? That camera cost less when it was introduced.

I do agree with you on the point that our expectations, in some cases, are beyond the norm. BUT, that is the way of the consumer world and competition allows such high expectations: If Canon doesn't build it better someone else will, and eventually Canon with either have to raise its standards or go out of business. 

Again, I think the original issue is small. I think the fix is appalling (as a consumer). I also think my expectations are high - but it's my money and I can be that way. I don't like somebody (engineer or otherwise) telling me to get over it/get passed it. Sorry, I'd rather have the company rise to the expectation of the customer and make the product worth the money they are asking for it.

In the case of the 5dmiii, I'll wait until either they resolve the tape issue (I see it as a temporary solution) and engineer the product so it doesn't require tape to keep light out, or I'll look elsewhere. It really is that simple for me.


----------



## Razor2012 (May 3, 2012)

I'm just curious now. Let's say the 'black tape' was always there, and in a few instances the tape was left out. Now would people still look at the tape as being 'cheap' or take it as just being missed in the assembly line and think nothing of it?


----------



## Invertalon (May 3, 2012)

steven63 said:


> Ya know I'm getting a bit fed up with all the "engineers" touting that this fix is standard throughout the electronics industry and that we, as consumers, should just deal with it. Well to you I say "stick it where the sun doesn't shine."
> 
> Yes I understand you have spent a lot of money and time and sweat on your education and I'm just a poor blue-collar shmuck. I know you have a pretty plaque on the wall that 'says' you know what you are doing. You might even have a sticker on your drivers license to help you convince the cops you are smart. So what.
> 
> ...



U MAD BRO?

Wow, somebody is extremely bitter about something... Having worked on the largest aluminum forging presses in the world to working on military and commercial airfoils all the way to high precision medical CT, MRI and PET equipment, you would be surprised how much stuff gets "overlooked" and requires simple repairs you will never see. You are complaining about some tape in a camera to simply act as a light shield? Seriously?

Get over yourself.


----------



## steven63 (May 3, 2012)

Invertalon said:


> steven63 said:
> 
> 
> > Ya know I'm getting a bit fed up with all the "engineers" touting that this fix is standard throughout the electronics industry and that we, as consumers, should just deal with it. Well to you I say "stick it where the sun doesn't shine."
> ...



Why is it everyone who thinks they are somebody has to start out by listing their credentials? Got an e-peen issue?

I am, at the very least, fed up with people who consider themselves 'experts' in the matter, espousing their displeasure with anyone else who finds the issue to be a substandard solution. Especially when it's my dollars that they are attempting to win. They can go jump off a cliff. 

You? Well you can put your headphones back on and log onto WoW and type 'U MAD BRO' like all the other 12 year olds, to your hearts content.


----------



## llcanon (May 3, 2012)

steven63 said:


> In the case of the 5dmiii, I'll wait until either they resolve the tape issue (I see it as a temporary solution) and engineer the product so it doesn't require tape to keep light out, or I'll look elsewhere. It really is that simple for me.



I don't think you will ever be able to find out what's in *your* camera unless you open it up. Canon may use something else later as the "fix" (probably even cheaper) but I don't think they will tell you. And I doubt our wonderful LensRental guys would open up one for each batch of 5D3's received from Canon just to find out what the fix is. So your only choice to look elsewhere - maybe D800??

Poor Canon.


----------



## thepancakeman (May 3, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Canon should use tape to fix the _real_ problem here...



Now the engineer that can design and patent THAT fix will be a wealthy individual!


----------



## bp (May 3, 2012)

Steven, good god - sell all you gear and buy a nikon. Just don't EVER open it up because they use the same kind of shielding in several places as well. This was already pointed out. Great, you build computers, congrats - do you frequently take apart laptops? Apparently not. I have ZERO credentials to spout, I'm not an engineer, but I am a dumb tinkerer, and this is not surprising to me in the least. I do, however, own a 5D Mark III, and I'm not in the least bit bothered by this fix. I DID shell out $3500. According to your signature, you don't even own a 5d3, so what the hell are you so worked up about?


----------



## thepancakeman (May 3, 2012)

steven63 said:


> Ignorance is bliss, I guess.



Pretty sure if that were true there would be a lot more blissful people out there. :


----------



## shockwave1111 (May 3, 2012)

steven63 said:


> shockwave1111 said:
> 
> 
> > steven63 said:
> ...



So the question should be if the product is worth the money they are asking for. I guess you can also think of it this way. If you can get the D4 or 1DX for $3500, do you think that is cheap? If you get the D4 with a tape fix, is it unacceptable because you paid $3500 (which is a lot of money for a camera)?

I think most people will take the D4/1DX with the tape because the product is worth more then what they are pay for even with the tape solution. Your issue is only a relative because you think a high price product should be free of any significant and insignificant flaws. But for the price point of the 5DIII, it should be reasonable.


----------



## hhelmbold (May 3, 2012)

dam1an said:


> I am wondering if the risk of opening up the camera and affecting the original weather sealing is worth it, for a problem which in truth doesn't alter exposure on 99.99% of the images I am ever likely to take.



I have to agree with this... there is just something "different" about a brand new camera once it is opened up for surgery and in this case, cosmetic surgery. The issue is a result of someone trying to find fault with a perfect camera.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 3, 2012)

steven63 said:


> The problem here is, I KNOW about the tape. Had I never known about the tape I wouldn't care. But now I KNOW. Ignorance is bliss, I guess. And I am not interested in plunking down $3500 for a piece of equipment with a design flaw fixed by tape. Thank you very much.



But if you didn't know, then you'd happily plunk down your cash? Interesting. I wonder how many other expensive products you've bought that have some kludgy fix in them? My guess is you've got a few of them. 



bp said:


> According to your signature, you don't even own a 5d3, so what the hell are you so worked up about?



And that's the bulk of the problem, right there. People bitching about something in which they have no stake. How many people now, like steven63, _won't_ buy the 5DIII becuase of 'tape-gate'? Of those, I'd wager that >99% of them weren't going to buy one anyway.


----------



## steven63 (May 3, 2012)

llcanon said:


> steven63 said:
> 
> 
> > In the case of the 5dmiii, I'll wait until either they resolve the tape issue (I see it as a temporary solution) and engineer the product so it doesn't require tape to keep light out, or I'll look elsewhere. It really is that simple for me.
> ...



This is exactly my point. As I said in an earlier post 'ignorance is bliss.' Had I never known or seen the fix the world would be fine. But I saw it. And I don't like it. What's so bad about that? Everyone on here seems to think that because I have an opionion different than theirs, and I outlined WHY I have that opinion, somehow I should be pounced on. 

In my view, Canon has a credibility issue. You may not agree with that. Fine. Spend your money the way you want, let me spend mine the way I want. Fair enough?


----------



## steven63 (May 3, 2012)

bp said:


> Steven, good god - sell all you gear and buy a nikon. Just don't EVER open it up because they use the same kind of shielding in several places as well. This was already pointed out. Great, you build computers, congrats - do you frequently take apart laptops? Apparently not. I have ZERO credentials to spout, I'm not an engineer, but I am a dumb tinkerer, and this is not surprising to me in the least. I do, however, own a 5D Mark III, and I'm not in the least bit bothered by this fix. I DID shell out $3500. According to your signature, you don't even own a 5d3, so what the hell are you so worked up about?



Apparently you are bothered by someone who has a difference of opinion abou the fix than I do. You don't see me getting defensive, do you? So why are you? Are you a Canon Rep? Jeez I have an opinion and that opinion happens to not jive with your opinion. No, I don't own a 5d3 and no I won't be buying one for the reasons I outlined. I know there are some Canon FanBoys on this site, but they should get used to the idea that other people aren't as easily parted with their money.

Again....AGAIN....had I never seen the fix I wouldn't have cared. But I saw it and I don't like it. Simple stuff, really.


----------



## steven63 (May 3, 2012)

shockwave1111 said:


> steven63 said:
> 
> 
> > shockwave1111 said:
> ...



I can't argue anything you said. For me, it really comes down to perception and value. I thought the 5d3 was overpriced already and now for this issue to raise it's ugly head AND for me to know the fix is something I find deplorable I won't be buying. Really simple stuff but some people are taking it way out of context. All I was trying to do is outline my reasoning for my thoughts, which are really real-life experiences with engineers, and apparently there are a few on this site that take exception to an opinionated camera buyer.

That's fine. I see them with the issue not me.


----------



## hhelmbold (May 3, 2012)

steven63 said:


> The problem here is, I KNOW about the tape. Had I never known about the tape I wouldn't care. But now I KNOW. Ignorance is bliss, I guess. And I am not interested in plunking down $3500 for a piece of equipment with a design flaw fixed by tape. Thank you very much.



Tape is used EVERYWHERE and the only ignorance is turning a blind eye to see that it is the solution. MacBook Pro's use tape to keep cables and connectors in place. (sorry - hope you're not using a MacBook steven63)

The point is that the camera isn't FIXED by tape, it is IMPROVED. People bought the camera and realized that it doesn't take AMAZING pictures all by itself and they still had to do it manually, so they were hoping for a quick and easy refund, but Canon taped that hole closed and now they're upset


----------



## steven63 (May 3, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> steven63 said:
> 
> 
> > The problem here is, I KNOW about the tape. Had I never known about the tape I wouldn't care. But now I KNOW. Ignorance is bliss, I guess. And I am not interested in plunking down $3500 for a piece of equipment with a design flaw fixed by tape. Thank you very much.
> ...



No. I would not have happily plunked down the cash for it. I thought it was overpriced already but WAS considering buying until 'The fix,' - which as I see it, is not acceptable. I posted my opinion of why I thought it was not acceptable - with a few choice jabs at the engineering field in general because that is my real life experience with them. Apparently that bent a few people. Their problem, not mine. 

And just because I don't own one doesn't mean I should not have input regarding my perceptions of the camera's build/design quality. 

Does everyone realize they are complaining about my decisions and perceptions about this camera and my opinions about why? To me that wreaks of Canon FanBoy-ism.

It's my money. You people can buy the camera if you want. I promise I won't beat you up for it.


----------



## LanceF (May 3, 2012)

My honor has been called in to question and I must defend my opinions to the death because my opinions matter on this subject and must be heard at all costs!

They see me trollin', they hatin!


----------



## bp (May 3, 2012)

steven63 said:


> I promise I won't beat you up for it.



Whew! That's a relief

I apologize. I didn't mean to harsh your high after honestly venting about the camera you haven't purchased. You're right, it's your money you won't be spending, so you have every right to hold onto questionable expectations about the insides of compact electronics, and none of us should attempt to shatter them

So yes, in that spirit, you're 100% right: tape-like shielding is never used in high quality electronics
high priced restaurants never have messy kitchens
supermodels don't ever poop


----------



## steven63 (May 3, 2012)

bp said:


> steven63 said:
> 
> 
> > I promise I won't beat you up for it.
> ...



...and idiots don't have access to computers. Would you like to add anything constructive to the thread other than sarcasm?


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 3, 2012)

steven63 said:


> No. I would not have happily plunked down the cash for it. I thought it was overpriced already but WAS considering buying until 'The fix,' -



It's overpriced. It has tape inside. The chrome lettering on the front isn't shiny enough. Whatever.

Hey, I'm thinking of buying a new house. In the kitchen, one of the curtains doesn't quite close all the way, and some light gets in. It really bothers me. I mean, I don't plan to sleep in the kitchen, I won't develop B&W film there, it's not like I need it to be dark, but it's a problem and it bothers me. I contacted the owner, and he offered to re-hang the curtain rod. That's total BS. It's a bandaid and a substandard fix to the problem. I demanded that he tear out that wall, rebuild it from scratch with a copletely light-tight curtain - that's the only acceptable, truly high quality engineering fix. 

I think that anyone who would not buy the 5DIII over this issue wasn't SERIOUSLY considering buying it anyway. Considering? Sure - just like I have _considered_ buying a Ferrari or Lamborghini. 

The bottom line is that this 'problem' isn't one that affects anything approaching a significant proportion of users, or even a tiny proportion of users, it got blown out of proportion, Canon responded even though there was no real need, and now people find that response inadequate despite the fact that it's a perfectly simple and functional solution.

I do think you're making the right choice, and I support you 100% - don't buy a 5DIII. I'm not going to buy that house with the light leak in the kitchen, either.


----------



## Razor2012 (May 3, 2012)

I've seen it called black foil. It looks ok to me, I don't have a problem with it. Didn't stop me from buying one (should be picking it up tomorrow).


----------



## steven63 (May 3, 2012)

hhelmbold said:


> steven63 said:
> 
> 
> > The problem here is, I KNOW about the tape. Had I never known about the tape I wouldn't care. But now I KNOW. Ignorance is bliss, I guess. And I am not interested in plunking down $3500 for a piece of equipment with a design flaw fixed by tape. Thank you very much.
> ...



I have no doubt tape is used in the example you've given. But from my perspective it is because that is the way they are engineered. The tape is 'worked into' the original design for a specific purpose. In the case of the 5dmiii the tape is not part of the original design. It's simply a fix (and I think a temporary one) to a problem that, while very small to begin with, Canon felt it needed to be addressed. Personally, I think the fix is simply a bandaid to the issue - it was never designed to be that way. Canon will, I am sure, engineer the proper solution eventually. Until then, I'm not a buyer.


----------



## thepancakeman (May 3, 2012)

Steven63: You're avatar statement is "Always learning" but I don't see much of that happening in this thread. You seem a whole lot more interested in trying to convince everyone else that you're opinion on the matter is well thought out. You don't want the camera because it has tape in it, that's fine: don't buy it. You think it's overpriced, that's fine: don't buy it.

Buy whatever you like, and go take some pictures with it. But don't drive a car to get to the pictures (cars have lots of tape in them--some of it even to fix recall notices) and please stop trying to justify your decision to the rest of us--we heard you, we get it.


----------



## steven63 (May 3, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> steven63 said:
> 
> 
> > No. I would not have happily plunked down the cash for it. I thought it was overpriced already but WAS considering buying until 'The fix,' -
> ...



Wow, that is one heck of a kitchen you expected to be built. I was unaware that they could design them to be light-proof. Same with Canon cameras, I guess.

Way beneath even you, Neuro. 


Regardless.

YOU GUYS WIN.

I SURRENDER.

HERE IS ME, FALLING ON MY SWORD:

1. CANON HAS ENGINEERED THE BEST CAMERA IN THE WORLD.
2. CANONRUMORS ISN'T FULL OF FANBOYS.
3. NO ONE ON THIS SITE EVERY FLAMES FOR OPINIONS DETRIMENTAL TO CANON, AS ALTERNATE OPINIONS AND PERCEPTIONS ARE ALWAYS WELCOME.

Signed,

you can all go to hell.

C'ya...or not.


----------



## Z (May 3, 2012)

I have a 5D mark III on pre-order, stock expected "some time" this month (UK). Personally, I hope I get one with tape. I don't want them adding some other fix that will add to the camera's weight :.


----------



## jalbfb (May 3, 2012)

steven63 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > steven63 said:
> ...



My such anger. Most of the people responding were trying to state the obvious, that this light leak is really a non-issue.


----------



## thepancakeman (May 3, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sure - just like I have _considered_ buying a Ferrari or Lamborghini.



Decided to just stick with the Bentley, huh?


----------



## hhelmbold (May 3, 2012)

steven63 said:


> hhelmbold said:
> 
> 
> > steven63 said:
> ...



In which way is this a temporary fix? Canon did not feel the need to address it, they did it because they care. There was nothing wrong, but Canon gave a solution to the cries about a non-issue. The US spent thousands of dollars on developing a pen that can write in space and the Russians simply took a pencil... Expensive stuff isn't always better - something that works and gets the job done is all that is needed.


----------



## jalbfb (May 3, 2012)

hhelmbold said:


> steven63 said:
> 
> 
> > hhelmbold said:
> ...



Amen


----------



## Dylan (May 3, 2012)

I happen to agree with Steven, and feel that you all were too harsh on him for having a sensible opinion. I think it's a shame that Canon can charge $500 more than the D800 and expect a simple tape job to make everyone happy. It's a flaw in the design of the camera, period. I would be bummed grabbing my 5D3 and thinking about a tape job fix inside the camera every time I did a shoot. It's more about principal and not about functionality. How would you feel if you bought a Lexus with a headlight issue and they fixed it with tape and assured you that you it is as good as new and will never give you a problem? Most would say that as long as Lexus would honor any problems then they would be good with it, but you also would drive around every single day thinking about that stupid tape.


----------



## Jaszek (May 3, 2012)

Dylan said:


> I happen to agree with Steven, and feel that you all were too harsh on him for having a sensible opinion. I think it's a shame that Canon can charge $500 more than the D800 and expect a simple tape job to make everyone happy. It's a flaw in the design of the camera, period. I would be bummed grabbing my 5D3 and thinking about a tape job fix inside the camera every time I did a shoot. It's more about principal and not about functionality. How would you feel if you bought a Lexus with a headlight issue and they fixed it with tape and assured you that you it is as good as new and will never give you a problem? Most would say that as long as Lexus would honor any problems then they would be good with it, but you also would drive around every single day thinking about that stupid tape.



In the year 2000, Audi releaser their Audi TT car. There was one problem. When going at fast speeds the car would lift off and flip, due to it's shape resembling an airplane wing. Audi had to think of a fix. They took your car back if you wanted, and put a spoiler on it. After a while it was costing too much to take all the cars back so they sent out the repair kits. It consisted of a spoiler and two (2) pieces of 3M double sided tape. There were no more problems with the car lifting off, and the spoiler never glued off. And I'm pretty sure it was exposed to the elements as well as heat and cold.


----------



## hhelmbold (May 3, 2012)

Dylan said:


> I happen to agree with Steven, and feel that you all were too harsh on him for having a sensible opinion. I think it's a shame that Canon can charge $500 more than the D800 and expect a simple tape job to make everyone happy. It's a flaw in the design of the camera, period. I would be bummed grabbing my 5D3 and thinking about a tape job fix inside the camera every time I did a shoot. It's more about principal and not about functionality. How would you feel if you bought a Lexus with a headlight issue and they fixed it with tape and assured you that you it is as good as new and will never give you a problem? Most would say that as long as Lexus would honor any problems then they would be good with it, but you also would drive around every single day thinking about that stupid tape.



Sure - if the lens fell off the 5DIII constantly and they stuck it on with tape there would be an issue. But the point is that the "light leak" is not an issue. The 5DIII is also not a D800... it is a 5DIII worth more than a D800. I completely agree that you would constantly think of the tape and that is why I said before - I wouldn't bother having it applied. If it is already applied... bonus.


----------



## plutonium10 (May 3, 2012)

Dylan said:


> How would you feel if you bought a Lexus with a headlight issue and they fixed it with tape and assured you that you it is as good as new and will never give you a problem? Most would say that as long as Lexus would honor any problems then they would be good with it, but you also would drive around every single day thinking about that stupid tape.



If the headlight issue had anything to do with the wiring, I think tape would be a perfectly acceptable fix.


----------



## llcanon (May 3, 2012)

As Roger showed in this article, the black tape is used extensively in 5D3. 
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/04/5d-iii-strip-tease

The tape is now part of the design to solve the light leak issue. Had Canon put this tape in at the beginning, the discussions we are having now would have been more meaningful. People are attacking each other over such a trivial thing. You are not becoming a better photographer because you are using a camera without the black tape.


----------



## hhelmbold (May 3, 2012)

llcanon said:


> You are not becoming a better photographer because you are using a camera without the black tape.



... or a worse one without the tape


----------



## Cptn Rigo (May 3, 2012)

Do you think that this "light leak" is an issue???

check this out 
http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=5517


----------



## plutonium10 (May 3, 2012)

Cptn Rigo said:


> Do you think that this "light leak" is an issue???
> 
> check this out
> http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=5517



This might make me a bad person, but as a Canon fan, that thread makes me happy in all kinds of ways.


----------



## jalbfb (May 3, 2012)

llcanon said:


> As Roger showed in this article, the black tape is used extensively in 5D3.
> http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/04/5d-iii-strip-tease
> 
> The tape is now part of the design to solve the light leak issue. Had Canon put this tape in at the beginning, the discussions we are having now would have been more meaningful. People are attacking each other over such a trivial thing. You are not becoming a better photographer because you are using a camera without the black tape.



Wow, very nice link. Gives more reassurances that the camera is well put together and had significant forethought, "light leak" (non)issue aside


----------



## V8Beast (May 3, 2012)

Dylan said:


> I happen to agree with Steven, and feel that you all were too harsh on him for having a sensible opinion. I think it's a shame that Canon can charge $500 more than the D800 and expect a simple tape job to make everyone happy. It's a flaw in the design of the camera, period. I would be bummed grabbing my 5D3 and thinking about a tape job fix inside the camera every time I did a shoot. It's more about principal and not about functionality. How would you feel if you bought a Lexus with a headlight issue and they fixed it with tape and assured you that you it is as good as new and will never give you a problem? Most would say that as long as Lexus would honor any problems then they would be good with it, but you also would drive around every single day thinking about that stupid tape.



The D800 is hardly without flaws. The list of current complaints include:

1) Oil spots on the sensor
2) Fine scratches on the mirror
3) Soft focusing on the left side of the frame with certain lenses while the right side of the frame is tack sharp
4) Weird green tint on the LCD screen

Are any of these serious issue? Nope, but they'd annoy me a heck of a lot more than a light leak that won't actually affect any of my photos. Interestingly, the Nikon guys seem to be good sports about this, and there isn't nearly the same amount of whining as there is on CR.


----------



## Cptn Rigo (May 3, 2012)

plutonium10 said:


> Cptn Rigo said:
> 
> 
> > Do you think that this "light leak" is an issue???
> ...



I know the feeling


----------



## vlad (May 3, 2012)

llcanon said:


> As Roger showed in this article, the black tape is used extensively in 5D3.
> http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/04/5d-iii-strip-tease



Oh my God, it's even worse than we thought!! It seems that Canon, convinced by "users" that they can longer make a capable SLR, are focusing on making a camera made entirely out of tape!


----------



## Dylan (May 3, 2012)

"In the year 2000, Audi releaser their Audi TT car. There was one problem. When going at fast speeds the car would lift off and flip, due to it's shape resembling an airplane wing. Audi had to think of a fix. They took your car back if you wanted, and put a spoiler on it. After a while it was costing too much to take all the cars back so they sent out the repair kits. It consisted of a spoiler and two (2) pieces of 3M double sided tape. There were no more problems with the car lifting off, and the spoiler never glued off. And I'm pretty sure it was exposed to the elements as well as heat and cold"


And you would be ok with someone sending out a repair kit to you to fix an issue that could kill someone? This is a pretty extreme comparison, but I appreciate your response. I know that a headlight isn't a wiring problem and tape is commonly used in circuitry. My point is that a Mickey Mouse job like this is a letdown to me as a consumer and what I pay for. So, I shall fall on my sword also.


----------



## llcanon (May 3, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> Interestingly, the Nikon guys seem to be good sports about this, and there isn't nearly the same amount of whining as there is on CR.



That's because flaws are expected for Nikon cameras while we the Canon users have been spoiled by the high quality products Canon has been producing. Just like Microsoft product, there is so much crap and you quit complaining about it. Accept it and move on. Let's just hope more 5D3's can be shipped out ASAP.


----------



## jalbfb (May 3, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> The D800 is hardly without flaws. The list of current complaints include:
> 
> 1) Oil spots on the sensor
> 2) Fine scratches on the mirror
> ...



Just curious, but has anyone read where a picture taken with the lens cap on, in the dark with the LCD light on reacts the same way in the D800 as the 5D3??? Not that it matters, but I have to agree scratched mirrors. oil spots, soft focusing with certain lenses is much more of a problem than this, IMO, silly light leak non issue.


----------



## Cptn Rigo (May 3, 2012)

Dylan said:


> I know that a headlight isn't a wiring problem and tape is commonly used in circuitry. My point is that a Mickey Mouse job like this is a letdown to me as a consumer and what I pay for.



They should have sprayed a coat of unobtanium on it!!! right?? :

Just kidding man, but think about it, A complete assembly line with custom built parts made to perfectly fit inside this camera, so... which could be a "Non mickey mouse" solution for the light leak "issue"?


----------



## sovietdoc (May 3, 2012)

I've been shooting with my 5D III for a month and light leak or not, this cam is absolutely fantastic. I've tried measuring exposure in very bright light as seen on some youtube vids and it stays the same. 

And measuring exposure with lens cap on? Well, that's useless. Plus there is always exposure comp and AE lock. Durr.


Honestly, I do think $3500 is overpriced for what it is considering Nikon has put out one for 2 grand. But having already spent that money, I don't regret a cent. I think Canon has raised that price because they'll be releasing another FF body this year for around 2-3 grand but lower than 5D3


----------



## swampler (May 4, 2012)

I guess we shouldn't buy cars that use Styrofoam for sound deadening material either!


----------



## Dylan (May 4, 2012)

A non Mickey Mouse fix would be a new design that you would send in your camera (free of cost) and replace the housing (for the select few that actually care to have it fixed) . Canon doesn't sit around a table developing a new camera and determine that their might be an issue with light leaking in and one person interjecting "we can throw some tape over it" and they would simply move on. But I also get that it's really not that big of a deal and "we complainers" are just complaining. Canon gouged everyone with this Camera and the "fix" you get is an insult. Yes, gouged. I don't see how the 5D3 is more expensive to manufacture than the D800 and $500 will almost get you the new 600EX-RT + $100


----------



## jalbfb (May 4, 2012)

Dylan said:


> A non Mickey Mouse fix would be a new design that you would send in your camera (free of cost) and replace the housing (for the select few that actually care to have it fixed) . Canon doesn't sit around a table developing a new camera and determine that their might be an issue with light leaking in and one person interjecting "we can throw some tape over it" and they would simply move on. But I also get that it's really not that big of a deal and "we complainers" are just complaining. Canon gouged everyone with this Camera and the "fix" you get is an insult. Yes, gouged. I don't see how the 5D3 is more expensive to manufacture than the D800 and $500 will almost get you the new 600EX-RT + $100



Let the buyer beware. If those want to pay (I did) for the camera, they do so. No one is holding a gun to our heads and saying you've got to buy one. Is it over-priced? Maybe/probably. But the consumer market drives the cost and if enough people pay, then Canon will keep the cost as it is. Apple set the bar higher for all of their computers as compared to PCs and now they're the largest company in the world. Canon is just I following the "if you build it they will come" philosophy. I'm not saying it's right or wrong or gouging or immoral. It's capitalism. Right now the market is bearing in their favor. I realize this is a significant amount of money to pay for a camera period and that the $500 difference between this and the D800 is a lot to some people. But when you figure in the extra cost for file storage for the larger MPs of the D800 that some will eventually have to pay a year or two down the road, then the $500 difference shrinks somewhat. Did I wish the camera came in at 3K or less? YOU BET! But it didn't. And I and many others made the decision, "Do I want it or do I need it" and forked out the dough (I happen to have sold my 5D2 so the cost was cut in half). For me it was worth the cost and at the risk of repeating myself, I am totally satisfied with their response and fix of the "light-leak-non-issue." I think the problem was that they called the camera the "5d Mark III" when in fact it is an entirely new camera and should, in retrospect, probably been called something different. would it still have been worth the 3500K?? Who know? See "what the market will bear."


----------



## TotoEC (May 4, 2012)

Me too! I want one with tape . . . . and should be a BLACK TAPE!


----------



## davidson (May 4, 2012)

Dylan said:


> , gouged. I don't see how the 5D3 is more expensive to manufacture than the D800




i'm pretty so no one on this forum actually knows what it cost for canon or nikon to manufacture their products, but everyone just assumes that because nikon set their PRICE at $3000 that their COST must be lower than that. unless we see the books of both companies this is all speculation because we do not know the cost structure of either product. i suspect (and this is speculation as well but i will not treat it as fact) that nikon is actually losing money on the D800 (meaning it cost more to manufacture than what they are selling it for) in an effort to gain market share, and make back money on lenses etc. canon may have raised the price to make room for another full frame model OR they may be trying to increase revenue to offset the damage done by the disasters they suffered last year. business strategies are a little more complex than what the average joe thinks of. its not _always_ "make product X for $1000 and add an exorbitant profit becasue we can). my 2c


----------



## prestonpalmer (May 4, 2012)

vlad said:


> llcanon said:
> 
> 
> > As Roger showed in this article, the black tape is used extensively in 5D3.
> ...



TAPE, In electronic equipment?! YOU CANT BE SERIOUS!!!! Lol. Grow up guys. The tape is a great way to fix the apparent "LIGHT LEAK" that you are all crying so much about. The engineers are just trying to keep you guys happy when there wasn't even a problem to begin with!


----------



## GDub (May 4, 2012)

CR most certainly increased ad revenue on his site with this non-issue. Good on ya mate!


----------



## Danack (May 4, 2012)

TotoEC said:


> I want one with tape . . . . and should be a BLACK TAPE!



I hear that if the tape has a red line across it, the camera takes better pictures.


----------



## Dylan (May 4, 2012)

Is Canon holding a gun to my head and forcing me to purchase? I can see how if a Canon user is heavily invested and wants to keep up with the latest technology, then you are pretty much forced to pay or jump ship to a competitor that has a better price. Now I can see why Canon is capitalizing on that, but for those who are just entering photography and want to get a DSLR camera, who do you think they will choose with the craze over the D800 and if they are on a budget. In the long run, they will be losing out on long term customers because their pricing is higher. No matter what, Nikon is making money off the D800 individually and A LOT in the large quantities being sold. I'm with Canon and hope to stay that way. I have the new 24-70 on pre-order and I hope it's optically better than the new Tamron for the extra 1k.


----------



## stringfellow1946 (May 4, 2012)

The two photos don't look like the same body/model to me, The PCB Broad in the middle looks totally different to me.


----------



## aprotosimaki (May 4, 2012)

In my view, the fundamental question is whether the tape fix actually blocks the light from leaking. Has anyone tested this?


----------



## rhommel (May 4, 2012)

I wonder if Nikonians are the same right now... 

http://fstoppers.com/news-nikon-d800-has-confirmed-focusview-finder-issues

i think this one is a REAL issue...

I also heard there are some AF issues that actually needs fixing.


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 4, 2012)

rhommel said:


> I wonder if Nikonians are the same right now...
> 
> http://fstoppers.com/news-nikon-d800-has-confirmed-focusview-finder-issues
> 
> ...



My friends d4 viewfinder was strangely OOF if you looked through one corner of it...


----------



## rhommel (May 4, 2012)

PhilDrinkwater said:


> rhommel said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder if Nikonians are the same right now...
> ...



yeah, so do you think they also whine on the internet about it?


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 4, 2012)

rhommel said:


> PhilDrinkwater said:
> 
> 
> > rhommel said:
> ...



My friend hasn't whined about anything. He only got it two days ago. 

Not sure why you quoted me about this - I was just replying to the previous post


----------



## Tracy Pinto (May 4, 2012)

Check out the lensrental.com dissection of a Nikon D7000 and see how this camera is routinely manufactured using tape. Yes tape just like that tape people are still howling about here.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/04/d7000-dissection


----------



## rhommel (May 4, 2012)

PhilDrinkwater said:


> yeah, so do you think they also whine on the internet about it?
> 
> My friend hasn't whined about anything. He only got it two days ago.
> 
> Not sure why you quoted me about this - I was just replying to the previous post



thank you, i am just pointing out that nikon also has problems but you don't really see them whine online as much as canon users... canon users on the other hand... is making a big deal out of this light leak situation (sorry, i can't say it's an issue)


----------



## Razor2012 (May 4, 2012)

rhommel said:


> PhilDrinkwater said:
> 
> 
> > yeah, so do you think they also whine on the internet about it?
> ...



There are probably trolls also. When you're at the top someone always wants to take you down.


----------



## V8Beast (May 4, 2012)

rhommel said:


> I wonder if Nikonians are the same right now...
> 
> http://fstoppers.com/news-nikon-d800-has-confirmed-focusview-finder-issues
> 
> ...



Now that's a serious problem. Unlike a silly light leak, a blurry viewfinder affects every single shot you take, and renders a camera useless unless you use live view for every shot. I'm sure Nikon will get all these issues with the D800 sorted out eventually, but perhaps it's $500 cheaper than the 5DIII due to inferior quality control? I don't think low ISO DR is all that important if you can't take an sharp image due to a blurry viewfinder.


----------



## sjn009 (May 4, 2012)

After studying the two images, it would appear that the case is completely different in shape and structure and also that the internals are quite different.

Is the author suggesting that these two images are both 5D MK III's ?


----------



## plutonium10 (May 4, 2012)

Despite any quality control issues with the D800, it still poses a MASSIVE problem for Canon. Even if Canon could produce a profitable sensor with DR, resolution and ISO performance comparable to the D800 (and that seems a big if), how could they sell it at a competitive price without blitzing the sales of the already-more-expensive 5D mk III? I've been a lifelong Canon fan, and would still buy a 5D mk III, but for customers with little or no prior brand loyalty... 

Canon's marketing AND tech departments must be sweating bullets, unless something big is on the way. This reminds me of the ever-raging war between video card manufacturers AMD and Nvidia. Sometimes when one company starts lagging behind, it's a sign that they're working on something really revolutionary.


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (May 5, 2012)

As good as the D800 is, it doesn't help Nikon if they can't get them into people's hands. Now, Nikon always had a more problematic supply issue compared to Canon and the latest crop of problems are probably not helping much.


----------



## eeek (May 5, 2012)

sjn009 said:


> After studying the two images, it would appear that the case is completely different in shape and structure and also that the internals are quite different.
> 
> Is the author suggesting that these two images are both 5D MK III's ?



Are you serious? I mean really? One is taken in poor light, one is in studio light and at a diffrent angle.


----------



## plutonium10 (May 5, 2012)

DavidRiesenberg said:


> As good as the D800 is, it doesn't help Nikon if they can't get them into people's hands. Now, Nikon always had a more problematic supply issue compared to Canon and the latest crop of problems are probably not helping much.



Agreed. But If Canon doesn't step up their game on DR and ISO, I might actually do the unthinkable and buy a Nikon at some point in the future. I shoot landscape and DR is the single most important thing to me even though I prefer the feel, ergonomics and just plain "Canonosity" of Canon cameras. I wonder if Canon has considered buying Sony sensor tech and if Sony would/could even sell it to them given their relation with Nikon.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2012)

plutonium10 said:


> Despite any quality control issues with the D800, it still poses a MASSIVE problem for Canon.
> Canon's marketing AND tech departments must be sweating bullets, unless something big is on the way.



Lol. Really?!? So, you've seen the sales figures? By what margin is the D800 outselling the 5DIII? Please...share all of your hard evidence. 

In fact, I have yet to see anything even remotely convincing that anyone outside of the few but very vocal minority of DR-obsessed posters on forums like this even give a crap about this 'massive problem'. As I've pointed out elsewhere, from 2007 to 2010, Nikon soundly beat Canon for sensor DR and ISO performance, and during the same period, Canon gained market share while Nikon lost over 10% of the market. So...it seems like Nikon has the 'massive problem' - and the fact that the D800 has 36 MP, with no meaningful boost in DR over the predecessor, and a reduction in high ISO performance, is a good indication that Nikon realized they were coming out the losers, and are now trying Canon's 'more MP are better' approach. 

Regardless, you're assertions are clearly unfounded, and I suspect at this time next year, the sales figures will show that Canon is still #1 in dSLR sales, as they have been for the past several years (despite their 'massive' yet somehow nonexistent 'problem'). It's ok, though - most likely by then you and the rest of the minority will have tired of bashing the 5DIII's DR on Internet forums. I sincerely hope you'll be out taking pictures with some camera - even if it's not the 5DIII that most of this DR-bashing minority never had any intention of buying. But realistically, I bet you'll still be here, bashing the DR or ISO noise or some other perceived 'problem' with the 1D X, T4i/650D, or whatever. Whine on........


----------



## plutonium10 (May 5, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> plutonium10 said:
> 
> 
> > Despite any quality control issues with the D800, it still poses a MASSIVE problem for Canon.
> ...



Ok, look. The 5D III is a great camera, as was the MK II. It has been selling like hotcakes while Nikon has trouble getting the D800 out the door. That is true and I will freely admit that. But I can't help feeling that Nikon is really pushing the performance with this new Sony sensor tech and that this could cause Canon a lot of headaches.

I'm not so much trying to bash the MK III but rather playing devil's advocate as a somewhat concerned Canon fan.


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (May 5, 2012)

plutonium10 said:


> I wonder if Canon has considered buying Sony sensor tech and if Sony would/could even sell it to them given their relation with Nikon.



I don't think for a second that Canon do not have the capability of producing a sensor that does everything the Sony sensor can do or better. 
The decision to spec the 5DIII the way it is was a pure marketing decision. And not a surprising one based on their position as market leaders in the segment. Could this decision backfire on them? Sure, but that only time will tell.
Now, on the same token, the decision to spec the D800 the way it is, is also a marketing decision. And that cannot be stressed enough. Nikon has no extra place in their hearts for photography and engineering anymore than Canon has. The decision to come out with a very big, headline grabbing product at a reasonable price is simply what they had to do in order to try to sway some Canon sales their way. 
So basically each of them made the logical decision based on their market position. Who will come on top is yet to be determined, but personally I do hope it is Nikon. This way I win twice. Once because I am very happy with the 5D3 and twice when that means the 5D4 will be much better than otherwise.

Oh and another thing about Sony that hasn't been discussed enough IMO, is that financially they are in the shitter. I do wonder if and how this will affect the future of their business model. I don't have any data but they have been pushing very hard in the camera market at what I think is a substantial hit to their profitability . How long they can keep on doing it is a big question mark.


----------



## plutonium10 (May 5, 2012)

Thank you for that actually. True words and it gives me a lot more faith in my future of investment in Canon glass.


----------



## Razor2012 (May 5, 2012)

plutonium10 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > plutonium10 said:
> ...



Agree with the first half but honestly, I don't think it's going to cause Canon alot of headaches. Both cameras are great, one leans towards group A, the other B. It's been back and forth for a while now, this won't be any different. Canon will counter, then Nikon.


----------



## briansquibb (May 5, 2012)

plutonium10 said:


> DavidRiesenberg said:
> 
> 
> > As good as the D800 is, it doesn't help Nikon if they can't get them into people's hands. Now, Nikon always had a more problematic supply issue compared to Canon and the latest crop of problems are probably not helping much.
> ...



Back to the same old rubbish of DR and ISO knocking. Give it a rest - it seems to be in every thread - what percentage can actually say they regularly take pictures with a DR of 10 or more. I struggle with the 1DS3 to get to 10 so how many actually hit 14 (if the D800 can in real life do that)


----------



## plutonium10 (May 5, 2012)

Am I not correct in thinking that the 1Ds3 has better DR than the 5D III? In any case I stand corrected, but still a little perplexed. On paper, my 7D (despite it's not-impressive ISO performance) has the same DR as the mk III (or so says DxO). In practice is this not the case?


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2012)

plutonium10 said:


> Ok, look. The 5D III is a great camera, as was the MK II. It has been selling like hotcakes while Nikon has trouble getting the D800 out the door. That is true and I will freely admit that.



Ok, then, so how exactly does Canon have a 'MASSIVE problem' (your words and emphasis)? My turn to be perplexed...


----------



## plutonium10 (May 5, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> plutonium10 said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, look. The 5D III is a great camera, as was the MK II. It has been selling like hotcakes while Nikon has trouble getting the D800 out the door. That is true and I will freely admit that.
> ...



Once the D800 does reach widespread availability, how will the sales figures look compared to the mk III? Hard to say, I guess. But that's not exactly to the point because I'm looking at this more from a technology point of view than a sales point of view. THAT's where I see the problem.


----------



## plutonium10 (May 5, 2012)

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/04/19/dxomark-verdict-nikon-d800-95-canon-5d-mark-iii-81.aspx/

This is the article that got me worried BTW.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2012)

plutonium10 said:


> http://nikonrumors.com/2012/04/19/dxomark-verdict-nikon-d800-95-canon-5d-mark-iii-81.aspx/
> 
> This is the article that got me worried BTW.



Right. DxO scores the sensor. So, which is a better computer - a Core i7 with 2 GB of RAM, a 40 GB HDD and a floppy drive, or a Core i5 with 16 GB of RAM, a 512 GB SSD and a Blu-Ray optical drive? I know which I'd pick to convert my RAW files. See how looking at only one feature is misleading?

The technology point of view isn't really relevant, except in the realm of esoteric comparisons. Ok, Sony's sensors may be technologically better. Guess what? Betamax was a technologically superior format compared to VHS. What ever happened to Betamax, anyway?


----------



## plutonium10 (May 5, 2012)

I'll admit that you make a convincing point. My main concern is wether or not I should continue investing in Canon glass with the eventual plan of buying a 5D III when for the first time a Nikon camera has made me question my loyalty to the EOS system. Despite the fact that I still see the D800 as a more advanced camera (the Ivy Bridge to Canon's Sandy Bridge, to continue your computer analogy), I've heard enough today to be reassured.


----------



## Razor2012 (May 5, 2012)

plutonium10 said:


> I'll admit that you make a convincing point. My main concern is wether or not I should continue investing in Canon glass with the eventual plan of buying a 5D III when for the first time a Nikon camera has made me question my loyalty to the EOS system. Despite the fact that I still see the D800 as a more advanced camera (the Ivy Bridge to Canon's Sandy Bridge, to continue your computer analogy), I've heard enough today to be reassured.



Hmmm I don't know, would you leave your wife for another pretty face that came along?


----------



## plutonium10 (May 5, 2012)

Razor2012 said:


> plutonium10 said:
> 
> 
> > I'll admit that you make a convincing point. My main concern is wether or not I should continue investing in Canon glass with the eventual plan of buying a 5D III when for the first time a Nikon camera has made me question my loyalty to the EOS system. Despite the fact that I still see the D800 as a more advanced camera (the Ivy Bridge to Canon's Sandy Bridge, to continue your computer analogy), I've heard enough today to be reassured.
> ...



It's a practial question of investing in a system of lenses or not. I don't see the problem wth that.


----------



## Razor2012 (May 5, 2012)

plutonium10 said:


> Razor2012 said:
> 
> 
> > plutonium10 said:
> ...



Well I guess you could sell all of your glass and start over. Then what happens if Canon's next camera makes you question your loyalty again?


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2012)

plutonium10 said:


> I'll admit that you make a convincing point. My main concern is wether or not I should continue investing in Canon glass with the eventual plan of buying a 5D III when for the first time a Nikon camera has made me question my loyalty to the EOS system. Despite the fact that I still see the D800 as a more advanced camera (the Ivy Bridge to Canon's Sandy Bridge, to continue your computer analogy), I've heard enough today to be reassured.



I agree that the D800 has a more advanced _sensor_ - but I'd argue that doesn't make it a more advanced camera. The 5DIII has 6 fps (vs. 4 fps, 6 fps is achieved only in DX mode and then only with buying the grip, AFAIK), and has 2 stops higher native and expanded ISO settings. The 5DIII has a better AF system, but less advanced metering system. Overall, I think the 5DIII is a better general purpose camera, while the D800 is better for still/studio work, provided you have top lenses to match the sensor (even the 14-24mm seems softer than I'd want in the corners on the D800 - the high pixel density is exposing a weakness in what is an otherwise excellent lens).

The cost of changing systems is pretty significant - a lot of lost $ on the same of your Canon lenses, compared to the cost of purchasing Nikon replacements (and most of the Nikon counterparts are more expensive - sometimes substantially more expensive). New flash(es), accessories like wireless triggers, etc. I do know at least one photographer whom I respect that did switch to Nikon for the D800, it really depends on how strongly you feel about it.


----------



## plutonium10 (May 5, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> The cost of changing systems is pretty significant



This is why I'm "flaming" the DR and ISO of the 5D III. I want to be sure that the system I invest in keeps up with the competion and this is why I've been playing devil's advocate lately. I really like my Canon system but I guess the grass is always greener on the other side.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2012)

plutonium10 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > The cost of changing systems is pretty significant
> ...



Canon has been lagging well behind Nikon in DR and ISO noise for years. Why haven't you switched yet, if wide DR and low noise are most important to you? Are they really most important?


----------



## plutonium10 (May 5, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> plutonium10 said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Good question. I've just been a Canon guy ever since I got my XSi in 2008 when I was 15. Great little camera. At the time I didn't know a lot about tech specs and I just grew to like the EOS system. It's only recently that I started paying attention to the D800 because people have been making such a big fuss about it.


----------



## briansquibb (May 5, 2012)

If you think you have achieved the maximum potential from your 7D then that is a good time to move on


----------



## plutonium10 (May 5, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> If you think you have achieved the maximum potential from your 7D then that is a good time to move on



DxO says the 7D's DR is 11.7 EVs, exactly the same as the 5D MK III's. The D800 meanwhile manages 14.4. In practice how does this translate?


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (May 5, 2012)

More information in the shadows and easier to contain high contrast scenes like landscapes. Now what this means in real life is that some shots will be a little easier to accomplish and it will be a bit easier to salvage badly exposed photos. Basically, it is a nice and useful feature but not game changing like some of the people around here make it to be. You just have to look at some of the many breath taking images that the 5D2 can produce to see that.


----------



## briansquibb (May 5, 2012)

Oh dear - we are back to using the DxO lab figures which I had thought we had agreed were open to mis interpretation - now we are back to choosing cameras based on them

I just wish people understood how difficult it is to reach 10ev in a picture, never mind 14. Only then will we get to understand how few people will use the enhanced DR never mind those that need it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2012)

plutonium10 said:


> DxO says ...The D800 meanwhile manages 14.4.



In practice, it's like saying the D800 has a DR of 50,000.....divided by zero. That's mathematically impossible, just like it's mathematically impossible for a camera with a 14-bit analog-to-digital converter to have more than 14 bits of DR. 

I find DxO's measurements (note: measurements, not the scores based on those measurements) to be useful...but it's very important to understand what those measurements are, and more importantly, what they are not.


----------



## plutonium10 (May 5, 2012)

DavidRiesenberg said:


> More information in the shadows and easier to contain high contrast scenes like landscapes. Now what this means in real life is that some shots will be a little easier to accomplish and it will be a bit easier to salvage badly exposed photos. Basically, it is a nice and useful feature but not game changing like some of the people around here make it to be. You just have to look at some of the many breath taking images that the 5D2 can produce to see that.



http://www.flickr.com/photos/plutonium10/6993973748/#sizes/c/in/photostream/
Yeah, that's what I thought. Here is an example of where I think I could benefit from higher DR, tell me if I'm wrong. This is an unedited exif-JPEG that I posted straight to Flickr. Slightly blown highlights in some of the glass detail and a few patches of blocked up black near the bottom of the frame (when reviewing the RAW file in DPP).


----------



## dr croubie (May 5, 2012)

plutonium10 said:


> It's only recently that I started paying attention to the D800 because people have been making such a big fuss about it.



Yep, in terms of numbers, it's a fact* that the D800's biggest internet advertising base is from whingers on this forum.



*as much of a fact as any other D800 or 5D3 sales figures you see quoted around here


----------



## V8Beast (May 5, 2012)

plutonium10 said:


> Good question. I've just been a Canon guy ever since I got my XSi in 2008 when I was 15. Great little camera. At the time I didn't know a lot about tech specs and I just grew to like the EOS system. It's only recently that I started paying attention to the D800 because people have been making such a big fuss about it.



I mentioned this in another thread, somewhat as joke, but if DR is the most important factor for someone's shooting needs, Nikon has several options that get you almost as much DR as the D800 for far less money. The D7000 has 13.9 stops of DR for $1,200, while the D5100 gets you 13.6 stops of DR for $700. Let's break it down: 

D800 = $208 per stop of DR
D7000 = $86 per stop of DR
D5100 = $51 per stop of DR

So why is everyone humping the D800 instead of the D5100, when the D5100 is clearly the better DR value ;D?


----------



## briansquibb (May 5, 2012)

plutonium10 said:


> DavidRiesenberg said:
> 
> 
> > More information in the shadows and easier to contain high contrast scenes like landscapes. Now what this means in real life is that some shots will be a little easier to accomplish and it will be a bit easier to salvage badly exposed photos. Basically, it is a nice and useful feature but not game changing like some of the people around here make it to be. You just have to look at some of the many breath taking images that the 5D2 can produce to see that.
> ...



The benefit would be having less shadows - there are many ways of achieving this - not just selective level adjustments. 

A tickle of flash would eliminate all the dark areas.


----------



## plutonium10 (May 6, 2012)

They are quite strict in regards to flash photography. Very few churches allow it. :-\


----------



## plutonium10 (May 6, 2012)

V8Beast said:


> plutonium10 said:
> 
> 
> > Good question. I've just been a Canon guy ever since I got my XSi in 2008 when I was 15. Great little camera. At the time I didn't know a lot about tech specs and I just grew to like the EOS system. It's only recently that I started paying attention to the D800 because people have been making such a big fuss about it.
> ...



Fair point.


----------



## zim (May 13, 2012)

Right so let me get this straight, lens rental guys took two 5D3s apart, one to let us see what an unfixed camera looks like and one that’s fixed and somewhere in between Canon decided to change the shape of the curve of the pentaprism housing at the front of the camera?

let the flaming begin LOL ;D ;D ;D ;D


----------



## Cineman (May 18, 2012)

*The 5D Mark III Refusal To Fix*

I have two 5D Mark III bodies from the first shipment that are effected by the light leak to the metering sensor and have been trying to get Canon to do something about it to no avail. I took one body to their service center in Irvine last week and was turned away saying that they had not yet announced the fix but that it would be soon. I called today and was told that they are “still investigating the problem”. It is now two months after I purchased the cameras and they are still not offering to open them and install black tape or black mylar or whatever. I was at a Canon event in Hollywood for the 1DC a few weeks ago and the rep. there said that Canon needs to be able to act upon their fix globally on the same day so they need to get everyone up to speed. I wonder how long it takes to ship rolls of black electrical tape to their repair facilities? Maybe they’re just hoping everyone forgets. To make matters worse, their much touted new service center in Hollywood is just down the street from me but won’t accept me as a customer because I’m not a C.P.S. Platinum member. I spend all my camera money on Canon but until I spend $500 a year on a membership they won’t open their doors to me. I need to continue using their repair facility in Irvine…a two hour round trip with no traffic. All I can say is W.T.F.?


----------



## briansquibb (May 18, 2012)

*Re: The 5D Mark III Refusal To Fix*



Cineman said:


> I have two 5D Mark III bodies from the first shipment that are effected by the light leak to the metering sensor and have been trying to get Canon to do something about it to no avail. I took one body to their service center in Irvine last week and was turned away saying that they had not yet announced the fix but that it would be soon. I called today and was told that they are “still investigating the problem”. It is now two months after I purchased the cameras and they are still not offering to open them and install black tape or black mylar or whatever. I was at a Canon event in Hollywood for the 1DC a few weeks ago and the rep. there said that Canon needs to be able to act upon their fix globally on the same day so they need to get everyone up to speed. I wonder how long it takes to ship rolls of black electrical tape to their repair facilities? Maybe they’re just hoping everyone forgets. To make matters worse, their much touted new service center in Hollywood is just down the street from me but won’t accept me as a customer because I’m not a C.P.S. Platinum member. I spend all my camera money on Canon but until I spend $500 a year on a membership they won’t open their doors to me. I need to continue using their repair facility in Irvine…a two hour round trip with no traffic. All I can say is W.T.F.?



Is your camera leaking to the point of spoiling the shooting or is it that you just want it fixed?


----------



## Razor2012 (May 18, 2012)

I was told by a Canon rep that you won't be able to send your 5DIII in until the middle of May. No biggie, I'm not really worried about it so far.


----------



## ippikiokami (May 19, 2012)

*Re: The 5D Mark III Refusal To Fix*



Cineman said:


> I have two 5D Mark III bodies from the first shipment that are effected by the light leak to the metering sensor and have been trying to get Canon to do something about it to no avail. I took one body to their service center in Irvine last week and was turned away saying that they had not yet announced the fix but that it would be soon. I called today and was told that they are “still investigating the problem”. It is now two months after I purchased the cameras and they are still not offering to open them and install black tape or black mylar or whatever. I was at a Canon event in Hollywood for the 1DC a few weeks ago and the rep. there said that Canon needs to be able to act upon their fix globally on the same day so they need to get everyone up to speed. I wonder how long it takes to ship rolls of black electrical tape to their repair facilities? Maybe they’re just hoping everyone forgets. To make matters worse, their much touted new service center in Hollywood is just down the street from me but won’t accept me as a customer because I’m not a C.P.S. Platinum member. I spend all my camera money on Canon but until I spend $500 a year on a membership they won’t open their doors to me. I need to continue using their repair facility in Irvine…a two hour round trip with no traffic. All I can say is W.T.F.?



Quite a sense of entitlement you have there. 
They had an announcement they will fix it. Hold your horses. And ? what the heck is wrong with making a facility cater to their best customers? Are they not allowed to do that?


----------

