[Question] Expected life of body?

Mark Vuleta wrote in post #6401239
Sorry for the lateness in catching this thread. I agree, sounds & looks like turd.
Shutter switch assy is separate assy to the main PCB, connected electrically only.
I've had service issues with Canon NZ previously.
Keep all contact with Canon on paper/email so that nothing can be mis-interpreted.
I would be tempted to ask them to explain how a faulty shutter switch can effect the main PCB to such an extent that it must be replaced and if this is a design fault?
Don't take any rubbish from them. They will try to BS you at the best of times.
Ask them to provide you with an accurate shutter count, hopefully they will be able to despite the damaged PCB.
Are you able to retrieve the camera from Canon without paying any costs and without the repair being done? If so, take it and its shutter count to your retailer and ask for a replacement under the CGA, they will ask to have time to repair it. Give them 15 working days to have it back in your hands, if it isn't, get a replacement from them or see them in court.

Hi Mark Vuleta, yes I've been keeping all the paper/email from them. Thats what I thought too how the shutter switch affecting and deterioting main PCB. I also curious what is PCB C and D.
Unfortunately, when I brought the camera to Canon. I need to deposit $135 in advance, so even if I retrieve it I will lost $135. I'm actually interested in the shutter count as well although I never change CF card or get the counter reset, reason is when I bought the camera I find it quite weird the person bring out the camera from the back room with the box on one hand and camera on the other hand although he also filled the warranty card but I'm expecting the camera will get unboxed right infront of me.

Flickster wrote in post #6401246
As mentioned already mate it sounds like BS. Get the shop into it as they are the people you purchased the camera from, they should take care of the problem for you, your their direct customer. Let the store manager fight it out with Canon, I would imagine they have a Canon account manager that can maybe pull a little more weight.

Hi Flickster, yeah I would actually bring the camera to the store if only I knew about CGA beforehand since I'm directly customer to them. When the camera broke I thought its out of warranty and it shouldn't be a major problem since its only 1.5 years old.

manipula wrote in post #6401270
Small words, a little late.
I suspect in order to use the consumer act thingy against a store when the camera's 1.5yrs old, you're going to have a hell of a fight on your hands. Essentially, although it may not be the case with your item, it is easily possible to give a camera utter death inside 1.5yrs, and on that basis, any camera shop I've ever worked in or dealt with will likely to tell you to jog on.
Secondly. When getting repair work done through a store, it's common practice for the store themselves to receive more information than is handed over to the customer about what work is done, often on the store's actual invoices. This is not the rule bu not unheard of.
Thirdly, although the words above are issued with all good intent, I suspect some are offered with no real appreciation of the inner workings of the camera trade industry. You're highly unlikely to be able to use a Canon account manager, or anyone elses for that matter to pull strings unless you're either God, Vincent Laforet or a CPS member.
Fourthly, an offer of the work being done, to replace a shutter release, and two PCB's was it, for under $400NZ should be snapped up, as I'd take a wild guess a store would normally be charged way more than that, and that's before they stick their slice of profit on the repair.
I realise that Canon NZ and their service department has a bad rep in NZ, but in my own six months of dealing with them, they're actually one of the easier and more reliable companies to deal with, and have never really given any issues. It's fairly unlikely that you're getting conned, and if in doubt, ask if you can be spoken to by the head dude there, as he's a totally sound guy. I should point out, I don't in any way work for Canon, just deal with the daily.
My own words would be tough break, but tear their arms off for under $400.
BTW, AE86trueno = Keysuiki from the 86 forums?

Hi Manipula, yeah I was expecting this is not going to be easy at all. When I went to the shop last Saturday the person mention about CGA too and Canon should fix it for me. I guess I will try to get in touch with the person again and ask him to help me on this issue. The cost of fixing will still be more than $400($526.65 to be exact). The other thing I'm scared also, this does not guarantee the life after the fix. I'll be quite annoyed if after few months away and it broke again due to one fault affect/deteriorate other part again.
Which 86Forums? I know 86 driving club, garage dori, 86 factory, club4ag.

For what it's worth, if our electric jug ("One year is a reasonable expectation of life Sir.") is deemed to have a reasonable expected life of 5 years according to 'Consumer', I'd feel on pretty safe ground expecting my camera mechanism to operate beyond 1.5 years. My wife and I are a thorn in the side of many manufacturers/retailer​s from dishwashers, automobiles (two new cars replaced), banks, toasters, cheese, bread, muesli, yoghurt etc. etc. simply because there is no way in Hades that we will accept a wrought. We (the nation) are far too accepting of failure or poor quality. If it's not up to standard, we complain. Full stop. And yes, we have even taken a roofing company to Small Claims, and won, and regarding another roof, had them concede failure to comply with contract and compensate us out of court. Take nothing lying down. The Consumer Guarantees Act was passed quite simply to protect the consumer from the flannel (aka B.S) the dealers would have us accept. 1.5 years on such a limited shutter count and no sign of impact damage is clearly not 'reasonable'. Spend your $50 on a claim and go for it. Check out consumer.org for what a reasonable life of a camera is. I suspect an electric jug has a harder life.

Isn't it ironic that there are so many film bodies around that are 20-30 years old, and they still work perfectly?

Good luck with your dealings with Canon. I know nothing about their reputation in NZ, but it's pretty difficult to get them to do things here as well. Any of you who have followed the 1D Mk III debacle know that it took CDS one year and 5 returns to service before they gave him any satisfaction on his problems.

The explanation abut the shutter button/circuit board sounds a little bogus. It sounds like they're suggesting that half-depressing the shutter button will shorten the lives of our cameras. I don't like the sound of that.

Well NO-ONE sharfts me

So you have to choices

#1 take the offer get it fixed and get back to shooting ....sh!t happens
#2 Fight to have it fixed, repaired, replaced BUT be expecting a lot of fights, and a long wait. Dont expect a camera for 2 months.

I agree 1.5 yrs is stupid. However these things happen.

Ive just come out of a 6 week fight with an insurance company. It took its toll with stress but I refused to give in.
PS dont let emotions get in the way of logic and always ask for peoples names and their bosses name.

I expect my 20d to last considerably beyond the point where i have bought another camera.

I do NOT expect it to break or wear out.

So far, I have been lucky...:p

IainB wrote in post #6401392
For what it's worth, if our electric jug ("One year is a reasonable expectation of life Sir.") is deemed to have a reasonable expected life of 5 years according to 'Consumer', I'd feel on pretty safe ground expecting my camera mechanism to operate beyond 1.5 years. My wife and I are a thorn in the side of many manufacturers/retailer​s from dishwashers, automobiles (two new cars replaced), banks, toasters, cheese, bread, muesli, yoghurt etc. etc. simply because there is no way in Hades that we will accept a wrought. We (the nation) are far too accepting of failure or poor quality. If it's not up to standard, we complain. Full stop. And yes, we have even taken a roofing company to Small Claims, and won, and regarding another roof, had them concede failure to comply with contract and compensate us out of court. Take nothing lying down. The Consumer Guarantees Act was passed quite simply to protect the consumer from the flannel (aka B.S) the dealers would have us accept. 1.5 years on such a limited shutter count and no sign of impact damage is clearly not 'reasonable'. Spend your $50 on a claim and go for it. Check out consumer.org for what a reasonable life of a camera is. I suspect an electric jug has a harder life.

Hi IainB, yep thats what I thought too. Camera shouldn't just break in 1.5 years. I agree while sht does happen, but it shouldn't be the consumer who suffer for a faulty goods.

belmondo wrote in post #6402475
Isn't it ironic that there are so many film bodies around that are 20-30 years old, and they still work perfectly?

Good luck with your dealings with Canon. I know nothing about their reputation in NZ, but it's pretty difficult to get them to do things here as well. Any of you who have followed the 1D Mk III debacle know that it took CDS one year and 5 returns to service before they gave him any satisfaction on his problems.

The explanation abut the shutter button/circuit board sounds a little bogus. It sounds like they're suggesting that half-depressing the shutter button will shorten the lives of our cameras. I don't like the sound of that.

Hi Belmondo, woaa one year.. ? Canon should replace new 1D mk3 for him in my opinion. Yeah, I don't like the explanation also about the shutter. "I would first like to ask how you have received this information with regards to the shutter button playing up after 2500 – 3000 shots, as we have never divulged this information to you." This reply from the Canon, I actually didn't expect this. I was reporting this problem to them and from the sound of this reply its like they find issue with the shutter button but didn't clearly read the problem I told them

weka2000 wrote in post #6404022
Well NO-ONE sharfts me

So you have to choices

#1 take the offer get it fixed and get back to shooting ....sh!t happens
#2 Fight to have it fixed, repaired, replaced BUT be expecting a lot of fights, and a long wait. Dont expect a camera for 2 months.

I agree 1.5 yrs is stupid. However these things happen.

Ive just come out of a 6 week fight with an insurance company. It took its toll with stress but I refused to give in.
PS dont let emotions get in the way of logic and always ask for peoples names and their bosses name.

Hi Weka2000, yeah sht happens. Although I appreciate they reduce the cost but it still on high side.

steved110 wrote in post #6404531
I expect my 20d to last considerably beyond the point where i have bought another camera.

I do NOT expect it to break or wear out.

So far, I have been lucky...

I was expecting this too. I know somewhere down the track, it will need repair but not when its only 1.5 years and less than 5000 shots.

manipula wrote in post #6401270
I suspect in order to use the consumer act thingy against a store when the camera's 1.5yrs old, you're going to have a hell of a fight on your hands. Essentially, although it may not be the case with your item, it is easily possible to give a camera utter death inside 1.5yrs, and on that basis, any camera shop I've ever worked in or dealt with will likely to tell you to jog on.

CGA states a product must last a reasonable amount of time, and it's clear that having taken under 4000 clicks this has not been abused. What is therefore clear is that this camera has NOT lasted a reasonable amount of time.

manipula wrote in post #6401270
Fourthly, an offer of the work being done, to replace a shutter release, and two PCB's was it, for under $400NZ should be snapped up, as I'd take a wild guess a store would normally be charged way more than that, and that's before they stick their slice of profit on the repair.

BOLLOX. What that offer is is an admission of guilt, and an attempt to buy him off.

manipula wrote in post #6401270
I realise that Canon NZ and their service department has a bad rep in NZ, but in my own six months of dealing with them, they're actually one of the easier and more reliable companies to deal with, and have never really given any issues. It's fairly unlikely that you're getting conned, and if in doubt, ask if you can be spoken to by the head dude there, as he's a totally sound guy. I should point out, I don't in any way work for Canon, just deal with the daily.

Nothing to do with their rep. This has everything to do with the CGA.

CGA?

just remember that not everyone is from NZ and understands what that is.

theflyingkiwi wrote in post #6407607
CGA?

just remember that not everyone is from NZ and understands what that is.

I had to look it up. Sounds like consumerism run wild.

belmondo wrote in post #6407635
I had to look it up. Sounds like consumerism run wild.

in fact it's protection for consumerism

ae86trueno wrote in post #6401336
Which 86Forums? I know 86 driving club, garage dori, 86 factory, club4ag.

AEU86 and the Aussie one, HR? May be another chap...

momentz wrote in post #6407563
CGA states a product must last a reasonable amount of time, and it's clear that having taken under 4000 clicks this has not been abused. What is therefore clear is that this camera has NOT lasted a reasonable amount of time.


BOLLOX. What that offer is is an admission of guilt, and an attempt to buy him off.


Nothing to do with their rep. This has everything to do with the CGA.

To be fair man, I didn't need that. All I've offered is a bit of insight in terms of how this sort of thing is dealt with literally day in day out, and I've done similar in the past when I was in the UK. By doing so, believe it or not, I risk a genuine dressing down at work, or worse (and it's happened in the past for the sake of these forums), and do so in good will, believing that trying to lift the cloak of mystery that surrounds the camera industry can't be a bad thing, particularly if it helps see things as they are.

I deal with Canon, literally daily, and they've never given any indication at all that they are in the service game with the express intention of messing people about. You get the odd bit where admin mixes things up and complicates procedures where you get stressed out about it, but they generally do what they do, well, and pretty quickly. Particularly if you light a fire under them.

Frankly though if it's gonna get me sworn at, then grind your own axes.

manipula wrote in post #6407740
To be fair man, I didn't need that. All I've offered is a bit of insight in terms of how this sort of thing is dealt with literally day in day out, and I've done similar in the past when I was in the UK. By doing so, believe it or not, I risk a genuine dressing down at work, or worse (and it's happened in the past for the sake of these forums), and do so in good will, believing that trying to lift the cloak of mystery that surrounds the camera industry can't be a bad thing, particularly if it helps see things as they are.

I deal with Canon, literally daily, and they've never given any indication at all that they are in the service game with the express intention of messing people about. You get the odd bit where admin mixes things up and complicates procedures where you get stressed out about it, but they generally do what they do, well, and pretty quickly. Particularly if you light a fire under them.

Frankly though if it's gonna get me sworn at, then grind your own axes.

What you've done, is put the retailer/manufacturer gloss over the situation, when in fact the CGA is here in NZ to protect individuals against exactly that. You're right about how it's dealt with, but what happens in reality and what should happen are two different things.

I wasn't having a go at you whatsoever, I was merely backing up the consumer's rights which retailers always seem to do their best to gloss over, even if it's not intentional. This is due largely in part to consumerism, and lack of consumer knowledge/assumption the retailer/manufacturer is always right because they're bigger.

Put yourself in the manu's place. Once word gets out they'll repair/replace things which are out of warranty for nada then they're screwed. Every tom dick and harry with a 10 year old broken camera will come knocking expecting freebies. So they offer a reduced rate service which keeps the customer only slighly disgruntled, which is far better than pissed off, and far better than so happy they tell everyone they can get stuff for naught.

You're right, light a fire under them and they will probably do the right thing by the law, but by making it as difficult as possible they're mitigating the risk of too many others trying it on.

momentz wrote in post #6407852
You're right, light a fire under them and they will probably do the right thing by the law, but by making it as difficult as possible they're mitigating the risk of too many others trying it on.

That pretty well sums it up.

The CGA is a very powerful law/tool. When used correctly, and with the correct approach, there is no way around it.

If the OP has provided the correct & true information, he just needs to stick to his guns and the law will be on his side.

Retailers & manufactures will try all means to try & get around it but if you know your rights under the CGA & are prepared to enforce them, it will provide a suitable outcome.

manipula wrote in post #6407740
All I've offered is a bit of insight in terms of how this sort of thing is dealt with literally day in day out, ...............

I deal with Canon, literally daily, and they've never given any indication at all that they are in the service game with the express intention of messing people about...............

Abridged Quote (sorry Dave):

If all of what the OP states is true, it should be remedied immediately by the retailer under the CGA. However, they will try to wriggle their way out of it.

Dealing with Canon through a camera shop & on a multitude of times daily is certainly different to dealing with Canon once in a blue moon & fronting up at their service reception.

Believe me, Canon NZ do try to put it across you.

OP's best option is to deal with (to) the retailer, be confident, forceful and do not relent.

At the moment my camera is with Canon Service Center.
At this point, Canon Service Center waiting for my reply with the reduced cost to repair.
I've emailed the store manager to help me contact Canon Service Center. Also emailed Consumer.org.nz to ask for advice. Both no reply yet. Hopefully the store manager reply me as soon as possible.
I agree, not many people know about CGA. When I read through it, it does make sense to protect consumers. While shop owner etc. might not like it but if the goods is proven to be defect then it just make sense the service center/ shop owner to give solution to the consumers. I won't be pushing this if the camera broke down in reasonable time and worth the money I spent