Jump to content

25% failure rate with 5DMk2's in Antarctica


stephen_asprey2

Recommended Posts

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>I just picked up a Canon 5D Mark II, after having owned a Mark III for 18 months. I also use the D300 and D700. I will say this for the 5D Mark II:</p>

<p>(1) overall image quality is great - except when you have to raise the exposure of shadow areas (in an overall properly exposed image). Then the shadows become noisy.</p>

<p>(2) Body construction is so-so - but should be much better. Of the four cameras mentioned above, the 5D Mark II has the "leanest" construction. It reminds me of the old Nikon D70.</p>

<p>(3) The omission of bracketing exposures by +/- 2 stops in one stop increments is awful for a camera that is apparently designed for landscape use. Even with the D300, I can quickly snap off 5 exposures in one stop increments - very very helpful in HDR photography.</p>

<p>If the Mark II were priced at about $2K that might be a fair list price...Overall I think the price of these digital bodies is way too high - the F5 and EOS IV were sub- $2K bodies...and that was just a few years back.</p>

<p>Just my dos pessos,</p>

<p>rdc/nyc</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 150
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<blockquote>

<p>"the F5 and EOS IV were sub- $2K bodies...and that was just a few years back."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Robert, I am afraid that your memory is not very accurate. When Nikon introduced the F5 back in 1996, the initial price was $2850. When I finally bought mine in late 1997, it had just dropped to $2300. The F5 didn't drop below $2000 until much later in its product cycle.<br /><br />The 5D Mark II is still very early in its product cycle and it has far more electronics than a Nikon F5. If you would like better construction quality and better AF while having 20+MP, there are the Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III and Nikon D3X, at roughly $6500 and $8000 respectively.<br>

The 5D II is fairly affordable 20MP camera, but it has its limitations. Otherwise, who is going to pay $6500 or more?</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Someone on another forum (non-photography) went on this trip and also stated that 20-25% of MK2's failed.<br /> He has a MK2 or another Canon body.<br>

His words: <strong><br /> BY THE WAY, 6 out of 25 Canon 5D MkII's FAILED on this trip... Just a note. * </strong><br>

http://forums.clubsi.com/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/3424350</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Just my 2 cents: I was in Cuba, shooting huge waves which hit the shore and both, lens & body end up being fully salted. I was using Nikon D300 + 18-200 VR, and I had no problem. I am also using it outside here Northern Finland ( up to -20c) without any problems. It seems to be able to survive in quite a weather.<br>

I cannot compare it to canons, as I havent shoot with them but that 6 out of 26 sound quite high.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>trying not to test my luck here, but my rebel xt and 70-200 were fully doused in salt water about 2months ago when a i was shooting sailboats (boat was alongside talking to the coach when its bow slapped a wave). The camera and lens took a direct hit. I quickly popped out the battery and started wiping the water off. I turned it back on about 2hrs later. As far as i can tell the camera and lens are 100% ok. And thats just a cheap rebel... no sealing at all.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Brandt, here's an entry from this guy that pretty much says it all, I think: "This was the landing where the first 5D MkII's fell victim to water/condensation damage. Mine was and still is fine tho because over the entire trip, I was very aware of the water and was always careful to let the camera warm up and dry off before opening any of the doors or removing any lenses. In my opinion, the failures were *mostly* due to operator error by over estimating the conditions the non weather sealed Canon cameras can endure."<br /></p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>"Didn't luminous-landscape run a similar article a year or two back on 5Ds that was similarly statistically and logically flawed...."<br>

I just wanted to chime in to say 26 cameras (the number of 5DIIs present) is actually a reasonbaly large sample size.<br>

If one was to make the claim that that the probability of failure of any 5D II in Anatarctic conditions is 25 per cent, based on test sample of 26 with 6 failing, the standard error around such a claim is probably about plus or minus 2. <br>

This suggests that we can be confident that the true probability of failure lies somewhere between about 5 per cent and 50 per cent. Now leaving aside the 50 per cent upper error band, I would say that a probability of 5 per cent or higher failure of a $2600 camera in not particularly demanding weather conditions is a pretty sad indictment on Canon's part. Especially if you consider $500 plastic cameras such as the Pentax K200D are touted, with no weasel words, by their manufacturer as being weather sealed.<br>

A stats experts should be able to do the exact calculations, but I wanted to dispel the notion that somehow 26 randomly selected 5DII is too small a sample to draw any inferences.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p><em>Just my 2 cents: I was in Cuba, shooting huge waves which hit the shore and both, lens & body end up being fully salted. I was using Nikon D300 + 18-200 VR, and I had no problem.</em></p>

<p>That's nothing. I have an old 10D that has been in similar situations so many times I lost count. I've watched in horror as a wave splashed off a rock and soaked the entire rig on a tripod (splashed me pretty good to). I wasn't afraid of the water so much as I was afraid it would knock everything over. That was a year ago, and everything is still ticking. I did wipe it off right away, but I would have done the same with any camera not in a water proof diving enclosure.</p>

<p>I shoot around beaches, coves, tide pools, and waves so much and in such crazy weather that I just retired a tripod due to sticky, rusted leg locks.I didn't bother buying a nice, expensive one because I'll ruin it. I got a cheap but sturdy tripod that I know I'll replace in a year.</p>

<p>Maybe if I ever go to Antarctica I should leave all my new equipment and just take that 10D + 17-40L ;-)</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Sarah,</p>

<p><em>Brandt, here's an entry from this guy that pretty much says it all, I think: "This was the landing where the first 5D MkII's fell victim to water/condensation damage. Mine was and still is fine tho because over the entire trip, I was very aware of the water and was always careful to let the camera warm up and dry off before opening any of the doors or removing any lenses. In my opinion, the failures were *mostly* due to operator error by over estimating the conditions the non weather sealed Canon cameras can endur</em> e."</p>

<p>So it finally comes out...</p>

<p>Not letting a camera adjust to temperature/humidity changes, or not drying it off before opening doors/changing lenses, is operator error regardless of the level of weather sealing. I don't care what brand you have or what the manufacturer claimed, you'll ruin a camera by making those mistakes. Even a Nikonos will die if you do something that stupid.</p>

<p>Canon doesn't need to work on build quality, they need to add a chapter to their manual: "Using your camera in extreme weather situations."</p>

<p>Unfortunately Reichmann's headline will overwhelm this guy's comment. Watch, his quote won't even slow down this thread. The "failure rate of Canon 5D II's" will be a forum topic of legend for the next year or so. Reichmann should not make statements like this without the full details. And people should know better before taking expensive equipment to Antarctica. I have an old, beat up copy of the Kodak Pocket Guide to 35mm photography which has a chapter that could have saved all six 5D II's. Maybe I should rewrite the chapter and sell $20 PDF's: "Secrets to protecting your equipment in the wild!" I bet I would get sales.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p><em>Not letting a camera adjust to temperature/humidity changes, or not drying it off before opening doors/changing lenses, is operator error regardless of the level of weather sealing. I don't care what brand you have or what the manufacturer claimed, you'll ruin a camera by making those mistakes. Even a Nikonos will die if you do something that stupid.</em><br>

I guess that means that everyone using a Nikon on the boat knew what they were doing in these weather situations. :P<br>

I could care less either way. I've owned Nikons since my wife bought me my first one and I have nothing against Canon's. I would use them except I began purchasing lenses and a flash for the Nikon.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Unless we know a lot more details about how each one of those 26 DSLRs were used and handled during the trip, those 23%, 25% could be totally meaningless numbers. For example, if most of those cameras that didn't have any problems were mainly backups that never left the ship's cabin while the owners were using the main 1D/1Ds cameras, the actual failure rate could be much higher. Or on the other hand, if 5 out of the 6 that failed were due to some totally unexpected downpour so that the reason for their failure is clearly explainable, the reality may not look nearly as bad.</p>

<p>I suggest we all avoid all sensational discussion. If those who went on this trip can provide more deails, maybe we can learn something. Otherwise, throwing those "statistics" around is a largely meaningless exercise. I seriously doubt that all 26 cameras in question were used in an identical fashion throughout the trip.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Oh good grief. Bla bla bla canons are so unreliable bla bla bla.<br /> <br /> I live in Calgary, where it regularly gets to -20C during the winter. I take my rebel XT (defintely not weather sealed) on my winter mountaineering trips, and have never had a single problem. I also have taken my 40D, 5dmk2 in nasty conditions without any problems.<br /> <br /> Sounds like either these guys are stupid and don't know how to take care of their equipment, or maybe the fact that most people had canon's accounts for the unbalance.<br /> <br /> If you want a camera you can drop in the ocean in antarctica, just go buy a D700. Apparently they are the cat's ass.<br /> And puppy face... studio and 'gentlemanly plaything' ? Are you purposely trolling, or are you actually that ignorant? Either way it makes you sound like a prick.</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>A picture from one trip. This was taken on day 4 after 3 days of -25C, 100km/h winds and complete whiteout conditions up on the icefields. Not a single problem with my "gentleman amateur" camera doing "gentleman amateur" activities.</p>

<p>Why do people act like children on this forum? It's just a piece of glass metal and plastic. Who cares? Just enjoy it.</p><div>00SOJN-108900584.jpg.9e194d451383981c0b116385d503ba17.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Ok, last note...<br /> <br /> Did anyone notice that the 'majority' or 4 of the failures (6 total failures) were due to battery grips? which are not the least bit sealed? One had a cracked LCD (dropped or something possibly?), and another had a jambed on lens due to a loose screw... which could happen to any camera.<br>

sensationalism anyone?</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>At this point all we are discussing at this point is whether cameras failed , which cameras failed, and how many of which models failed and as there are multiple witnesses than all we can do is accept the facts as they are currently stated: out of this X number of cameras, Y number of cameras failed.There were several well known "Canon Explorers of Light" on this trip: Jeff Schewe, Seth Resnick, John Paul Caponigro, along with Adobe's Thomas Knoll according to</p>

<p>http://photoshopnews.com/2009/01/05/on-the-road-to-antarctica%E2%80%93trip-3/</p>

<p>so there was definite plenty of very hard shooting, technically adept, problem solving Canon expertise in the group.</p>

<p>everything else, including the exaggerated extrapolation that EOS-5D Mark 2's are failure prone, is mere armchair speculation from a great distance.</p>

<p>I suggest people untwist their knickers for awhile.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>A point that is perhaps missed is that one of the compromises of any digital camera is that it is much weaker than an old mechanical model. For starters the body has four weak areas - namely the screen, top plate LCD, cable connections and card slot. A Canon F1N or Nikon F3 had none of these weaknesses. In addition electonics is more prone to water damage and corrosion than mechanics. If you really want to get a reliable camera buy one of these - my two F1N's have taken huge abuse over 25 years and still work well. Indeed in very severe weather (e.g -40C) the F1N is still my camera of choice as neither one has yet failed. I am sure Leica users can say similar things about the M4 - M7 which also appear to be fairly bullet proof. In my mind there is a difference in construction between the D3 / D3X and 1D bodies and the 5D / D300 / D700 - and these are better built than cheaper models. If you want to abuse a camera but oine to shoot digital get a 1D / D3 body as they are the best designed for abuse - however you pay the price. I am not sure that the difference in relaiability when exposed to sea water between a 5DII and a D700 is enough to make me treat either body differently. Perhaps the D700 is slightly better when exposed to sea water than the 5D II - the question is "do I really want to test it?" With the low tech mechanical Nikon / Canon film bodies there was less to go wrong - hence I remember Pop photo testing the F1N by evidently holding it under the shower for 20 minutes - who would do that to their $2700 digital body?</p>

<p>Digital has lots of pros and cons but in my mind one of the cons for digital is that it is less sturdy and reliable than film. I was nervous of the T90 and EOS1 series bodies as they looked more fragile, more complex and were totally reliant on batteries. The Digital bodies are just a further evolution of that trend. Electronics offers lots of convenience and cheap functionality but it needs power and lots more weatherproofing. By it's very design the DSLR is almost impossible to seal so you will have a climate risk. Thus if you expect extreme weather buy the sturdies body you can. What I found interesting about the article was that the P45+ and P65+ evidently did fine. Was this because they are better sealed than the 5DII or perhaps that the users took more care of them. I suspect that it is the latter.</p>

<p>By the way Stephen battery charging (at least in Canada) is not an issue. While we may go outside in -25C (or colder) we tend to heat our buildings which is where we charge batteries. I have never tried to use an outdoor car plug in (in winter!) to charge any electronics. I feel that Canon (and Nikon) are safe in assuming that most people will not charge batteries in extreme cold - take it from me when it is -40C you don't want to hang around outside waiting for a battery to charge.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I think we all need to let Canon respond and see what happens.<br>

On a sadder note, our country of few people lost 128 dead so far over the weekend, in the worst bushfires in our history. My friend who is a Herald photographer reports no gear failures, Canon or Nikon, in heat measured up to 55C...yes folks, 131F! near the fire...the hottest place on earth this weekend.<br>

Our ANZAC comrades from NZ came to help (pic) and we are grateful.<br>

Kia Ora to you all.</p><div>00SOOC-108907984.jpg.202ae55662d40d09d867858a5d5b2e47.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The manual for the 5D MKII clearly states that the camera should not be used in conditions of salt water spray. In case that happens, you should immediately clean the camera with a damp (fresh water) cloth. So it seems that this is clearly a case of user abuse of the cameras.<br>

That said, the fact is that the other cameras from other brands used in the trip did not have the same failures as the 5D MKII. But I would say that that is expected, after all Nikon makes more rugged mid-class cameras, while Canon reserves the truly rugged build quality for their pro-series cameras.<br>

Even in the film days, you just had to compare the F5/F100 pair, to the 1N/5 pair. Nikon does not save in construction quality for their nonpro cameras, Canon does save. It has awlays been like that. However, I think that Canon users should expect a bit more build quality from a USD$2700 camera. Especially when cameras are nothing more than computers with lots of electronics, and a lens attached!<br>

I have bought a 5D MKII, it is my first DSLR. I am used to the feel and build quality of the 1V, but I can not afford that in the Canon world. So the 5D will have to do, and to be honest, I have never had a Canon camera fail on me, either 1 series, or other series. However, the reason I stick with Canon is the lenses I already have, all L series. I have contemplated moving to Nikon or Sony, to maintain the 1V build quality at a cheaper price than Canon, but then I would have to buy the lenses as well.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I had a shoot where I was miserably cold here in Florida one March during Bike Week--blowing rain and such. I used two bodies and two lenses--a 20D, a 1D and a 20-35L and 28-70L. The 20D and the 28-70 was under a rain cover and the 1D and 20-35 managed quite well in the drizzle, even though I don't think the lens had a rubber seal.<br>

Working near the beach, you have to be aware of what salt air and humidity can do. When conditions are bad I carry a towel to keep wiping the equipment down. I've used Canon stuff for more than 30 years and the only failure I've ever had on the road was with a 5D while I was in Puerto Rico--the mirror came loose.<br>

After reading the report I have to agree with the fellow who thinks the battery handles may be the weak point. But I'm curious as to what the final analysis will be.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Charles, There is a recall on the 5D regarding the glue causing the main mirror to come loose. You may want to contact canon. They sent me an email sayin it was a free fix.<br /> <br /> <br /> Ellis is right... time to calm down. I don't care if people knock canon, just don't make overblown, sensationalized statements based on one lousy, non-scientific article.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>pennies have a 80% failure rate compared to nickels. just yesterday, i flipped 5 pennies. 4 out of 5 landed heads when clearly 2.5 would have been the expected number. such unreliable pieces of equipment. i am sure glad i brought my nickel with me, which i flipped once and it landed tails. 100% success there.<br>

when will the nikon vs canon crap ever end. ;(</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Here is just my 2 cents worth. First off it is a know fact that Nikon's cameras do have some better weather sealing in their prosumer cameras then Canon does, but even a D700 doesn't have same build quality as say a D3 or Canon 1Ds series camera. I presently own a 5DII as well and I would never think about exposing it to rainy wet weather especially salt water conditions of any kind. I think taking a $2700 camera out in those conditions that isn't totally weathered sealed is asking for trouble and not very bright on the owners part. Yes Canon claims they have weather sealing, which they do, but are not made for those kind of conditions. If you want to shoot in rain, salt water spray, windy conditions with sand and dust you need to get a 1Ds series camera if you are a Canon shooter. Seems Canon has chosen to use less build quality on their prosumer range then Nikon, but have added FF 21MP sensors, HD video and other things to their sub $3000 camera. If build quality is what you really need in your camera for a prosumer range then probably Nikon is better route to go, but your only going to get a 12MP camera in that price range. So it really comes down to what are your needs and features you want in a camera most. Both Nikon and Canon have different ideas on what the market wants and what will sell them the most cameras and you just need to decide which company provides the features that are most important to you.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>What is really water proof ! take a watch which ! a lot easer to seal but in the end they let water in i have had a few watche's in the past that has got water in them and some was water froof for several meters below the water surface ,is a camera seal rubber ,well rubber will perish after a time ,i would not use a camera in really bad weather if you have to put it under a brolly or cover with a plastic bag !</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p><strong><em>"The manual for the 5D MKII clearly states that the camera should not be used in conditions of salt water spray."</em> </strong></p>

<p>You are correct, this is a simply a matter abuse and nothing more. I think it pretty much sums up the intelligence of the users, they have obviously not read the manual fully and considering the cost of the cameras, they are morons.<br>

Now if anyone wants to have a grounded factual debate, perhaps you could discuss the differences in weathersealing between the D700 & 5DMKII.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...