Why am I so loyal (venting...)

[fntzlnd]

Why is it that when I buy a Canon lens it requires calibration? I had to bring in my 17-40L to Irvine, and now I bought a 100-400L and that lens needs calibration too.

Come on. This is "L" quality here. Needless to say, I am getting more and more dissapointed. And... I just got off the phone with the service center in Irvine, telling them I have a wedding to shoot this weekend, with this new lens (actually, I am not the 'hired' photographer, but the lady on the phone didn't know that) the lady on the phone said "Sorry sir, 10-12 busineess days. There is nothing more I can do for you."

I understand that good photography equipment is expensive, but I guess buying a $1500.00 lens doesn't amount to squat.

Aaargh!

[fntzlnd]

Oh, and i understand that four days is a short amount of time, but I live locally, and I can drop it off and pick it up at the counter.

[roanjohn]

...........sorry to hear that...........

I think Nikon is just as bad.........

Ro1

[DeeplyDigital]

Murphy's Law?

J.
-

[Agaric]

Just curious but how do you figure it needs calibration, and is that something you can test before you take it home from the store? unless of course you ordered it from somewhere not local.

[fntzlnd]

I have not gone through any extensive focus charts with this lens. I went through way too much of that the last time. What I know is, for this lens, I am not getting sharp images. Images that I have seen this lens produce, and images I would expect from such a lens.

Rather than go down the focus chart path, I would rather just give it to the service center for calibration and be done with it.

I am seeing the same soft, 'not exactly focused' images I had with my 17-40L before I sent it in.

[robertwgross]

The symptoms that you describe do not indict the lens as having a calibration problem.

Some parts of the focus system are in the lens, and other parts are in the camera body. The problem can be in where the two fit together. If I had a camera body and thought that I had two lenses with a focus problem, I would sure as hell want to have the camera body checked.

You can match the lens to the body, or you can match the body to the lens.

Canon can match your body to their standard lens, and that would make your body right. Then they can match your lens to their standard body, and that would make your lens right. Then, when you put the lens and body together, they will be virtually perfect.

---Bob Gross---

[ssim]

Quick turnaround times are only provided to CPS members.

It took me a short period of time before I was getting images out of my cameras with the 100-400 that I thought were acceptable. It wasn't the camera or the lens or me entirely it was a combination of learning it and having the right camera settings.

Why am I so loyal to Canon, because I have yet to experience any difficulties with my equipment and when I have taken it to Canon service (I dropped the lens) I had it back in two days. I believe that alot of the service you get anywhere from large corporations is largely based on the local management and workers.

BTW, you are the first person that I have heard of that is going to use the 100-400 to shoot a wedding. :!:

[robertwgross]

BTW, you are the first person that I have heard of that is going to use the 100-400 to shoot a wedding. :!:

I will admit to using that lens for a wedding, but only for two or three shots from the very back of the church.

---Bob Gross---

[DocFrankenstein]

BTW, you are the first person that I have heard of that is going to use the 100-400 to shoot a wedding. :!:
It's a celebrity thing... you wouldn't understand.

[DocFrankenstein]

Kinda explains the fact that he's not the hired photographer.

[fntzlnd]

screw you Doc!

I was going to try some long distance candids. Schmuck. There is more to taking wedding photography that happens outside the church.

[Persian-Rice]

Murphy's Law?

J.
-

You mean Doyle's Law.............hahaha, You prolly wont get it.

[mjordan]

I think the comment by Doc was a bit rude as well. I use to use a 300mm lens to take some of the pictures at weddings... that's 300mm on a RB67. And I WAS the hired shooter. There are a lot more ways to use our equipment than some people think.

fntzlnd, I would have to wonder about my camera body too if I had one, let alone two lenses that I thought needed calibration... either that or I'd consider where I bought them. Maybe they are a little rough with the boxes. I've had excellent images right out of the box with my 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8L IS, 100-400 4.5/5.6L and 70-200 4.0L lenses. The only softness out of focus shots were caused by me.

Hopefully you will get it back a lot quicker than they said.

Mike

[edsarkiss]

i thought the paparazzi comment was funny.

y'alls need to lighten up. it's just text on a screen. tough to guage intent from just a few words and maybe a generic emoticon. no facial expressions, body language, or vocal intonation to help out. best to imagine the "best" given limited input, or your blood will boil for no real reason.