Canon CPS - How to Join

[tim_r4]

<p>What's the latest from Canon regarding joing their CPS? (canon Professional Service?) I know the program was on-hold and they were not taking new members back in Jan-Feb '09. That must have changed by now, but they've not sent me any info. Do any Photo.net memebrs belong to this service? What's the cost to join now,and where do I find a link for it?</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>You have to own the right gear now. There are various "qualifying" pieces of equipment. There are 3 levels of membership, free, $100 and $500.<br>

<br /><a href="http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=StandardDisplayAct&fcategoryid=111&keycode=CPS">http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=StandardDisplayAct&fcategoryid=111&keycode=CPS</a></p>

<p>You no longer have to prove your professional status (proof of publication not required).</p>

[fmueller]

<p>OK, my Rebel XT doesn't cut it, but I have the lenses! So I'd just need to get two beat up 20D - from around $300 at KEH - and I'd be in business. This is a hoot!</p>

[chrisjb]

<p>Here in Oz the gear has to be purchased from an authorised Canon dealer ( to prove loyalty I guess ) and be a member of a Canon approved professional association as part of the criteria, Is that the same in US? :)</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>Nope. Here is the US you simply have to have the right gear. No other qualifications are required. Not everyone is happy about that. If you're a full time working pro, can prove it but you don't have the right number of items from the "approved gear" list, you don't qualify.</p>

<p>If you don't have the latest version of some lenses, you don't qualify. If you happen to own the 200/1.8L instead of the new 200/2L, it doesn't count. If you own the EF 200/2.8L rather than the EF 200/2.8L II, it doesn't count either. If you own any of the non-IS telephotos, none of them count. The only film camera that counts is the EOS-1v.</p>

[tim_r4]

<p>Bob, thanks for the link to Canon CPS page. They do make it hard to find! After reading your email, and briefly scanning their requirements, I'm sure glad I have up to date equipment.<br>

Tougher requirements than the last program, but it makes sense for Canon to impose them. It wouldn't really br PROFESSIONAL service if everyone photog wannabe with a Rebel qualified. For those that truly depend on their equipment (as their primary tools that generates income) and willing to pay a fee, the new policy makes a lot of sense. I had a horrible experience with a defective 1DsMkIII and it took two attempts by CPS to get it right. Some photo.net members might remember the issue I had, the lubricant exploding and then spreading across the sensor filter after just 300 shots. In the end, after months of nastiness, they finally caved and sent a new camera. Consequenlty, I'm not anxious to send a body in for sensor filter cleaning or anything else unless it's affecting performance.</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>I'd far rather see a program in which participants were required to demonstrate their professional status, no matter what equipment they owned. CPS could still have a list of current gear that they could offer preferred service on, but rejecting qualified working professionals on the basis that they don't own the right cameras and lenses seems like a backwards step.</p>

<p>No doubt it's a cost saving measure. They don't need anyone to check credentials. All they need is a database to check on serial numbers and an online account you can pay money into!</p>

[claytontullos]

<p>Having two "recent" bodies seems to be a good requirement.</p>

<p>How many amatures have two bodies and would take the time to register / pay money? Very few.</p>

<p> </p>

[markonestudios]

Bob, I totally agree. Basing membership PURELY on gear, to be brutally honest, makes a nonsense of the term 'professional.' It's almost like saying that since I own a Porsche 911 GT3 I'm a professional race driver. Proof of professional status is a much fairer and frankly more important criterion. After reading the listed criteria, I lost just about all desire to join.

<p>And what about professional film SLR shooters? They still exist...

[KenPapai]

<p>"And what about professional film SLR shooters? They still exist..."</p>

<p>Not in numbers they don't. I'd wager 95% or more of Canon pro SLR shooters are primarily digital. However, an EOS-3 should also be a qualifying film SLR. Owning two 20D's or better is a very generous minimum requirement. That's why the "semi-pro" or "prosumer" label is attached to the XXD cameras.</p>

<p>Plus, the CPS is mostly marketing anyway -- ancient film cameras or toy beginner cameras shouldn't be part of anyone's current marketing program aimed at the upper tier of photogs; so that is understandable at least.</p>

[peter_wang6]

<p>Another consideration to make is that because CPS is in no small part geared toward the servicing and repair of equipment, it makes sense for Canon to limit such service to their more recent products. Is it "right?" Maybe not. But is it cost-effective? Absolutely. What kind of staffing, training, and replacement copies or parts inventory is required to handle repairs on an old EOS 3, or a legacy lens, compared to a product that is only a few years old?</p>

<p>In so far as eligibility requirements and "professional" status verification--I argue that (1) not all photographers for whom their photo work is not their primary income are any less deserving of the basic benefits of CPS--fine art photographers and double-income photographers come to mind (as opposed to hobbyists); and (2) such verification is itself subject to manipulation. We don't live in an ideal world. People will always find ways to game the system. Ownership of certain equipment is a reasonable proxy that partially addresses both of the above issues. Your auto insurer in theory should use miles driven per policy period to determine your premium, but it is not practical to do so, so they use car-years.</p>

<p>The revisions to CPS are about efficiency and cost savings. Whether these changes retain sufficient value for its members remains to be seen, but it is entirely Canon's prerogative to modify the program as they see fit. </p>

[zml]

<p>For those who don't like the idea - don't join.<br>

For those who want/need and qualify, that "gold" or "paltinum" sticker on the package does miracles in terms of repair/service turnaround, so join.<br>

For the malcontents, drop the word "professional" (which seems to be stirring the wrong emotions) from the name. OK now..?</p>

[john_bellenis]

<p>I think Michael is right - it's basically a pay to join program that provides certain benefits in return for your fees. Personally I see no particular reason it should be limited to professionals - if someone has the qualifying gear and wants to pay for the expedited service plan, why not? Canon has the right to manage it's programs as it sees fit, in a way that is profitable for them and offers a service to it's customers. I genuinely think they should drop the "professional" tag on this program (and offer an alternate purely professional program) because excluding their wealthy amateur base wouldn't seem to be a sensible thing to be doing right now.</p>