What have Sigma done to my camera???

Sent my 60d along with 2 Sigma lenses to Sigma to get them calibrated. Both lenses, previously badly f/b focusing came back spot on. Interesting thing has happened to the camera though. Instead of producing clicking sound while performing automatic sensor cleaning as it used to do before, now it makes clicking+ prominent squeaking sound. I do know that both sounds are normal for sensor cleaning mechanism, but I also know, that if previously there was no sound at all, or it changes from clicking to squeaking, it's usually the result of updating camera firmware. Now I am just curious what have Sigma done to my camera, as I was sure, they would only adjust the lens and would not interfere with other manufacturer's camera. Any thoughts?

They don't interfere with the camera, they only ask you to send the camera in so that they can calibrate the lenses specifically to that camera. It might have gotten damaged in shipping or during handling at the service centre. I would contact them about it, and I hope you had it shipped with insurance.
Then again, I've never heard of any squeaking sounds when the sensor cleaning mech is engaged, so perhaps yours had a problem all along since you say you know its normal?

It depends on how the specific camera model cleans the sensor. Some only run the sensor shake mechanism, but some also exercise the shutter/mirror mechanism, to increase the probability that the dust is removed.

Sirrith wrote in post #16071517
I've never heard of any squeaking sounds when the sensor cleaning mech is engaged, so perhaps yours had a problem all along since you say you know its normal?

This is not that unusual and it's normal. What worries me a bit is why it suddenly changed from one sound to another after this trip to Sigma. I have to say that the way they've packed my gear to post it back was rather careless and it wouldn't suprise me if something got messed up in postage.

I can never understand why people fall for the 'send your body with your lenses' for calibration by third-party lens makers.
The whole idea of interchangable lens cameras is that all lenses work on all bodies.
Note the ALL bit there!
If (for eg.) Sigma calibrate a lens to a particular body then the odds are that it will not work properly with a different body - Sigma should calibrate the lens to be within specification and if the body is out of specification then Sigma will not be able to adjust it anyway.
If the body is out of specification then it should go to Canon - who would not ask for your Sigma lenses to be sent in at the same time............

PaulB wrote in post #16072166
I can never understand why people fall for the 'send your body with your lenses' for calibration by third-party lens makers.
The whole idea of interchangable lens cameras is that all lenses work on all bodies.
Note the ALL bit there!
If (for eg.) Sigma calibrate a lens to a particular body then the odds are that it will not work properly with a different body - Sigma should calibrate the lens to be within specification and if the body is out of specification then Sigma will not be able to adjust it anyway.
If the body is out of specification then it should go to Canon - who would not ask for your Sigma lenses to be sent in at the same time............

That's true, except tolerances are not very strict. There are tolerance ranges at Canon for example. You send in body, they determine that it is within tolerance, but just barely, let's say -3 in MFA terms. Since it is within their tolerance, they won't touch it. Then you couple that body with another "just within tolerance" lens, having the same -3 MFA issue, then you have problems of the body + lens combo now being off by 6 units, which is noticeable. So, you have a within-tolerance body and a within-tolerance lens and you still have problems.

Where did you get the idea a firmware change can initiate squeaking in the sensor cleaning operation?

PaulB, you don't understand tolerancing and the effect of tolerance stackup which occurs when multiple devices, each with a tolerance, are "married" together and the stackup of the two individual tolerances affect the outcome. In the case of a camera/lens combination each has a tolerance. Lets just refer to the tolerances for sake of simplicity as a (+) plus and (-) minus situation and each device can have a plus or minus 5 units tolerance and still be within manufacturer's tolerance. Further (+) and (-) will refer to the same type (front or back focus) of tolerance in both the camera and lens. So to the specifics; Canon assembles a camera and the tolerance in the lens mount falls at +4. It is acceptable by their standards since the specification is some quantity ±5 units. Sigma assembles a lens and puts it on the test fixture and finds it is at -4 units, again within the specs of ±5 so it is deemed acceptable. That body/lens combination is essentially a perfect match since a +4 units and a -4 units cancel out. You can pixel peep and be very happy with that combination, so happy that you go out an buy another Sigma lens. The bad thing is that when that 2nd lens was assembled, it tested out at +4 units. Sigma is happy with the lens which meets the ±5 unit specification. However when that lens is married up to the +4 Canon body, the combination is now out +8 units. The +8 represents the tolerance stackup which is out of the ±5 unit spec. Pixel peep on that combination and you might not be happy. The important thing here is each device, the camera body and the lens, separately meet their respective specification but the combination can fail.

As to the 1st part of your statement "If (for eg.) Sigma calibrate a lens to a particular body then the odds are that it will not work properly with a different body". That part is fundamentally true but Mag-1981 is happy with the combination, should that individual chose to pixel peep.

To the 2nd part of your statement, "Sigma should calibrate the lens to be within specification and if the body is out of specification then Sigma will not be able to adjust it anyway". Sigma won't adjust the body but may, note I said may, adjust the lens to match the body and still be within the lens specification. In our example the body was at +4 units; the lens upon initial examination by Sigma was found to also be at +4 units, so they adjust the lens to -4 units. The lens is in spec as is the body and a perfect match is the result.

How loud was the click before? My camera only makes the slightest of sounds when sensor cleaning, you really have to listen for it.

The 60D does not cycle the shutter and mirror when cleaning, it just sends ultrasonic waves and vibrates the filter over the sensor plate.

I never heard a click when my sensor is getting cleaned in-camera. I'll have to listen closer, I guess.

electronic squeaking? yea, that's perfectly normal.

try finding another 60d to compare. maybe goto bestbuy sunday morning when it's quiet.


frankly, I think it's your mind playing tricks on you. You never bothered to scrutinize the sound carefully before and now you are since somebody else has been using the camera.

caoko wrote in post #16072810
electronic squeaking? yea, that's perfectly normal.

try finding another 60d to compare. maybe goto bestbuy sunday morning when it's quiet.

frankly, I think it's your mind playing tricks on you. You never bothered to scrutinize the sound carefully before and now you are since somebody else has been using the camera.

I think this is quite probable. i'm quite anal myself and i'm even more anal when I get things back that have been touched by others.

also, I don't have a 60d but I do remember that one of my bodies was really loud. I think it was the 40d. however, my 5d is really quiet--can barely hear it when it turns on. so, just fyi, different cameras (models?) have different sounds and some are louder than others.

I would say that if they fixed your problems and your camera focuses correctly, nothing significant got messed up.

My 600D just vibrates a little @ sensor cleaning. Can you turn it off and see if the camera squeaks on shutdown. If it does then it could be transit damage.

John from PA wrote in post #16072320
Where did you get the idea a firmware change can initiate squeaking in the sensor cleaning operation?

PaulB, you don't understand tolerancing and the effect of tolerance stackup which occurs when multiple devices, each with a tolerance, are "married" together and the stackup of the two individual tolerances affect the ...............
.

Oh yes I do.
Who are you to decide what I do, or do not, understand?

You imply that Sigma can and will measure the tolerances of a Canon body and then 'fit' their lenses to it.
Is this really what you mean and believe?

From what I understand Sigma will test the lens at different + and - values on the specific body you send in and leave the lens at the value that best fits that body.
It may not be best for another body though so I agree that I would prefer that all bodies go to 0 and all lenses go to 0 but that may be a near impossibility.

John from PA wrote in post #16072320
Where did you get the idea a firmware change can initiate squeaking in the sensor cleaning operation?

I've searched some other threads on various sites on this topic and this is what some other people experienced.

"try finding another 60d to compare. maybe goto bestbuy sunday morning when it's quiet."

From what I've read. that is very common, not only for the 60d but for all DSLRs


"frankly, I think it's your mind playing tricks on you. You never bothered to scrutinize the sound carefully before and now you are since somebody else has been using the camera."

Possible, sure, but very unlikely.

"How loud was the click before? My camera only makes the slightest of sounds when sensor cleaning, you really have to listen for it."

The 'clicks' are hardly audible and so they were before, but now is that+squeaking. It literally sounds as if when you're polishing the glass with a damp cloth. And this on it's own does not bother me at all, as I know it's so common. What I wanted to find out, was, what does it take to cause this sound if it wasn't there before.

Thank you for all your replies. As I can see, it developed into discussion on the sense of calibrating lens to the specific body. Well, yes, I know that my lenses will now probably misfocus on a different body, but the 60d is my only one, and when I get another camera, I will just get them recalibrated again.