Posted by Kosta Koeman on June 19, 2009 at 1:02 PM
I own 2 Canon DSL bodies, the Rebel XT and the 5D Mark II. All the lenses I own mount snuggly on the XT. I have a couple of lenses that are loose on my 5D Mark II, the worst one being a 300 mm L f/4 lens. I was advised by Canon to send in both the body and the lens, and they promptly sent the discontinued lens right back (wish they didn't tell me to ship it).
Now that I have my 5D Mark II body back, nothing has changed (otherwise I wouldn't be posting this obviously). The lenses that were loose on the body (the second one is a 70-200 2.8L with a weather seal, which has less wiggle, but still "too much") still are loose.
Has anyone experienced these sorts of problems? I'm a bit disappointed in the response from Canon. The fact remains, the lens mount on my XT is better than my 5D Mark II. That's just backwards.
I have not had any issues yet. . . My 17-40 stays on the camera the majority of the time however so lens changes are usually few and far between. The 70-200 goes on and fits nicely without any slop. Try taking the camera into a dealer in town and comparing it with one they have in the store. That may give you a base line to compare from. ( Hopefully they all arent sloppy but with the way manufacturers cut corners these days you never know )
Posted by Kosta Koeman on June 19, 2009 at 2:24 PM
Bryan,
Thanks. My 17-40, 24-105, 24 TSE, 45 TSE all fit snuggly on the 5D Mark II and the XT. There is just a difference between the 300 and 70-200. I'll go to Glazers tomorrow.
Yep, my 70-200/2.8 (non-IS) has play when mounted, more than I care for. It was the exact same way on my original 5D. When the lens is mounted o the tripod, I can wiggle the body, and it clicks back and forth. I know others with the same issue, one guy who has the same problem with a 5D and a 100-400mm. I just live with it, the images are unaffected. In contrast, just got a 16-35mm/2.8 last week and it's really tight.
Posted by Kosta Koeman on June 20, 2009 at 1:39 AM
Paul,
I have to disagree with just living with it. It is just sloppy manufacturing, and it looks like Canon's manufacturing is on the decline. I have NEVER heard of any issues like this with Nikon. I've been a loyal Canon guy since 1995, but my previous strong recommendation for Canon gear isn't so strong. When we spend $3K for a camera body, I expect a little more.
Edit: With regards to image quality, I believe the problem with my camera does affect it. Everytime I press the shutter, there is a noticable shift. This sort of defeats the purpose of having metal quick release plates, mounting on a tripod, etc.. Now if I'm using a cable release, than the image quality will be less affected, but that wasn't practical when photographing eagles in front of the Olympic mountains at Beef Creek.
LOL! OK, let me reword that... I pretty much have no choice in the matter so I resolved myself to just live with it. The 70-200mm is now out of warranty (not that it should matter, bad mount is a bad mount), so if I send it to Canon I'll probably be paying more than I want to for them to attempt to fix it. I KNOW they'll want the camera body too, but both my former 5D and my current 5D2 sits loose on that lens. My former 17-40mm was tight, as is my 50mm and 16-35mm. I'd like to try the 70-200mm on another Canon body... I'll have to inquire at work who may have one.
You know, I may call Canon and press them on this and just see what they say. I wonder if it's just a certain timeframe of lenses that have this problem, because Nancy and Bryan don't have the issue. FWIW, my date code on the lens shows it was manufactured at Canon's factory in Utsunomiya, Japan, in May 2007 (See Ken Rockwell's site if you want to know how to date your lenses).
One final thought: I have the 70-200mm non-IS which does NOT have the rubber gasket on the mount for weathersealing... does that gasket cut down the wiggle I wonder?
Posted by Kosta Koeman on June 21, 2009 at 5:37 PM
Paul,
I've resigned to wait for a friend of mine who used to be a camera tech to evaluate/fix it. He'll be up in August.
Discussion
7 repliesNow that I have my 5D Mark II body back, nothing has changed (otherwise I wouldn't be posting this obviously). The lenses that were loose on the body (the second one is a 70-200 2.8L with a weather seal, which has less wiggle, but still "too much") still are loose.
Has anyone experienced these sorts of problems? I'm a bit disappointed in the response from Canon. The fact remains, the lens mount on my XT is better than my 5D Mark II. That's just backwards.
Thanks. My 17-40, 24-105, 24 TSE, 45 TSE all fit snuggly on the 5D Mark II and the XT. There is just a difference between the 300 and 70-200. I'll go to Glazers tomorrow.
Haven't had any problems with any other lens.
Nancy
Yep, my 70-200/2.8 (non-IS) has play when mounted, more than I care for. It was the exact same way on my original 5D. When the lens is mounted o the tripod, I can wiggle the body, and it clicks back and forth. I know others with the same issue, one guy who has the same problem with a 5D and a 100-400mm. I just live with it, the images are unaffected. In contrast, just got a 16-35mm/2.8 last week and it's really tight.
I have to disagree with just living with it. It is just sloppy manufacturing, and it looks like Canon's manufacturing is on the decline. I have NEVER heard of any issues like this with Nikon. I've been a loyal Canon guy since 1995, but my previous strong recommendation for Canon gear isn't so strong. When we spend $3K for a camera body, I expect a little more.
Edit: With regards to image quality, I believe the problem with my camera does affect it. Everytime I press the shutter, there is a noticable shift. This sort of defeats the purpose of having metal quick release plates, mounting on a tripod, etc.. Now if I'm using a cable release, than the image quality will be less affected, but that wasn't practical when photographing eagles in front of the Olympic mountains at Beef Creek.
You know, I may call Canon and press them on this and just see what they say. I wonder if it's just a certain timeframe of lenses that have this problem, because Nancy and Bryan don't have the issue. FWIW, my date code on the lens shows it was manufactured at Canon's factory in Utsunomiya, Japan, in May 2007 (See Ken Rockwell's site if you want to know how to date your lenses).
One final thought: I have the 70-200mm non-IS which does NOT have the rubber gasket on the mount for weathersealing... does that gasket cut down the wiggle I wonder?
I've resigned to wait for a friend of mine who used to be a camera tech to evaluate/fix it. He'll be up in August.