Jon_Doh wrote in post #4073204
You miss the point. I can't recall this many complaints on a new release as there have been with the Mark III and 40D, which leads one to reasonably conclude there are quality control problems.
I really don't miss the point.
Others have said it already, so I'm just reiterating what has been said already, but many (most) cameras go through this - the internet gives anyone with a complaint to make/axe to grind an instant voice - and very often the "problem" they're facing turns out to be a non-issue.
That said, there are sure to be rogue samples that sneak out which front focus or back focus, meter inaccurately, or what have you - but that's true of any product and nothing to base conclusions of poor QC on.
In my (fairly limited) experience though, Canon wil generally do right by its customers: one of my 30Ds started showing classic sympoms of a failing shutter after only 3,000 shutter actuations. Canon (quite rightly) accepted that the camera wasn't right and replaced the shutter in a few days.
A couple of months later, a brand new 30D I'd bought as a second body showed the exact same problem no more than 100 actuations in. Again, it was sorted without fuss (this time I was given a new body).
(You'll note that the problem with my first 30D didn't put me off buying a second one...)
Does this prove that all 30D shutters are crap and that they will blow up at the drop of a hat?
Nope - I was unlucky, that's all. My repaired/replacement bodies are absolutely fine.
Compare that with my experience of the appalling Nikon D200.
I had two of those before I finally gave Nikon the finger, and both had (in no particular order):
- banding;
- appalling noise even at lower ISOs (400 ISO was essentially unusable except in great light);
- complete loss of any semblance of detail - a smeared, watercolour look to many pictures (for the record, I shot in RAW, had in-camera NR turned off, converted in Nikon Capture - and was careful about exposure);
- inaccurate AF (believe me, the 40D problems I've been reading about are nothing compared to the behaviour of my D200s);
- Unpredictable metering;
- dismal battery life.
Nikon flatly refused to acknowledge any of these issues, even though I had a wealth of proof in the form of my own and other people's pictures and links to/copies of many, many similar complaints by D200 users on DPR/Nikonians/Nikon Cafe.
The difference here was that - certainly as far as the D200's sensor was concerned - the problem was unarguably a systemic design issue: the simple fact is that Nikon could not afford to admit that the fundemental design of the Sony-produced sensor was the problem.
I had to threaten Nikon UK with legal action before I was given my money back on the second of the cameras.
And here's the thing: you can take my word for it or not, but the problems I had with the D200 are still being raised by other "victims" on the Nikon forums
right now: the worst thing people say abut the 30D these days is that it is just an upgraded 20D.
If what we're currently reading about the 40D and Mk III is still coming up 18 months from now, you might have a point.For me, much as I appreciate the 30D, my 40D is in another league, and I agree with those here who believe that the OP made an error of judgement.
