Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Canon

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 20, 2005, 4:31 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1
Default

I was all ready to buy the SD500. Most reviews of the camera have been pretty positive, but as I dig into user reviews (not just cnet or other first-look reviews), I'm seeing enough of this LCD cracking nonsense to be worried. Especially when it seems to be happening in other SD-x00 series cameras.

Does anyone have any idea of just how pervasive an issue this is? I just read the warranty terms for the SD500, which basically gives Canon the option of saying any LCD issues are your problem, not theirs. So now the purchase is on hold until and unless someone can shed some light on whether this is an issue limited to (maybe?) early runs of the device, or if Canon has announced any plans to remedy the problem.

Anybody got any dirt that's useful on this topic?

Thanks!

notoriousfcp is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jul 21, 2005, 11:44 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

The only ones who really know how bad the problem is, is Canon.

Remember, people will post in multiple websites- sometimes more than once, so "problems" can turn out to be much less than you imagine. If you could go to all the web pages you visit and see who's behind all the user names, how many individual documented cases of a cracked LCD do you think you'd find? 50, 100, 200? I'd be shocked if you could count up to or more than 200.

How many of these bodies do you figure Canon has sold in all? Let's just say 5,000, knowing that is probably WAY off on the low side. 500 would be 10%, 50 would be 1%, so 100 is 2% and 200 is 4%, so if you found 200 users online who's LCD had cracked, that means 96% have not. It's the people that have had problems that post the most complaints....everywhere.

Just remember if you stick the camera in your pants pocket, and I'd never suggest anyone do that with a $300-$500 camera that could accidently be switched on and damage the lens assembly when it tries to extend, to NOT put it in a pocket where your keys or some loose coins can damage or scratch the LCD. Obviously almost any product made by man is going to have a percentage of units that have problems out of the box, but there is also probably plenty of user-related mishandling that cause problems.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 22, 2005, 2:19 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Carrots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 377
Default

But, not every photgrapher, or even digicam owner posts on forums. Some dont even have access to the internet.

I was wary of buying a S2 because of the cracked LCD problem (stupid, I know).

From what I gather, the problem is mainly with the US and Canadian bought SD's (you should maybe read the threads again and check if this is true). If I wanted to buy that class of camera, and lived in the US or Canada, I wouldn't buy a SD-x00.
Carrots is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 22, 2005, 3:37 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 935
Default

Carrots wrote:
Quote:
But, not every photgrapher, or even digicam owner posts on forums. Some dont even have access to the internet.

I was wary of buying a S2 because of the cracked LCD problem (stupid, I know).

From what I gather, the problem is mainly with the US and Canadian bought SD's (you should maybe read the threads again and check if this is true). If I wanted to buy that class of camera, and lived in the US or Canada, I wouldn't buy a SD-x00.
It'd be interesting to find out if the US and Canadian cameras are exactly the same as the Euro ones....like manufactured off the same production line.
Kenny_Leong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 30, 2005, 9:13 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 53
Default

I suspect that there is little if any difference between the components fitted to a Euro Canon, as opposed to a North American Canon. I also suspect that the number of each model sold is in the hundreds of thousands, and not anywhere near as low as 5,000 units. It isn't economical for a company like Canon to design and market a new model that doesn't sell more than 5,000 units in the first week of it's market appearence.

Consumer reviews and complaints always have to be taken with a grain of salt. Some people have an agenda other than the truth. Some are just so unlucky that they can break a steel anvil by looking at it, and some have a legitimate failure. I'm a good example of bias, as I have been a happy Canon customer since 1970. I have owned other cameras, including medium and large format stuff, and Canon has never let me down. That isn't to say that Canon doesn't make lemons, as I'm sure they do. Everyone does. If I had a bad experience, I'd pass it along, as I try to be an honest camera bigot.

I have not owned every Canon model, but I have owned most SLR types into the 90's, and a good sampling of the Canon digital non SLR lineup to date. I am abusive to my cameras (I don't mean to be, but they are tools, after all). I still have a new looking GIII QL that I bought in 1980 or thereabouts, but it only looks good because it was protected by it's case. Most of my cameras get dirty, wet, dropped, and in the case of the S200 and S400, share a pocket with keys and coins, yet still work perfectly after years of loving abuse. I have never had a Canon camera fail without my being at fault, nor have I ever met anyone who bought a lemon in person. That covers a boatload of photographers.

My S2 has taken a dive to the asphalt from about three feet of altitude (it fell out of an open camera bag). The drop popped out a retaing clip on the Hoya UV filter that was attached, and the handgrip is nicked up a bit, but everything (including the UV filter) is still working perfectly a Month after the fall. The LCD on the S2 is protected in fine fashion, as it can be folded into the body for storage. When it gets too many prints on it, a little Windex on a cloth brings it to like new condition (I know, purists don't use Windex, but my LCD is cleaner than theirs, and I have never damaged one yet).

To sum up, I have no doubt that Canon has sold individual problem cameras over the years. I also have no doubt that they were the exception, rather than the rule for any model, and that the percentage of defective cameras reaching consumers is at least as good as any other camera company in the current market. On this board alone, I have read a number of complaints about failures with the S400, yet in my little slice of the world, I own a well used S400 that I bought when they first came out, and and have three close friends that own and abuse theirs as well. I have also met several other people here that own them, and have never heard of a single problem. I don't doubt that some people have had problems with their S400's, but what percentage is that of the total number that have been shipped?

Voyager
Voyager13b is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 31, 2005, 10:33 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 935
Default

Voyager. But have you thought about why the complaints appear to come ONLY for THIS PARTICULAR series of CAMERA and no other? Ever thought about that?
Kenny_Leong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 1, 2005, 2:16 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Carrots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 377
Default

Voyager, I'm glad to hear that your S2 survived the drop.My Fuji A202 was dropped as well by some girl yanking the camera out of my hands (never take pictures of girls that are insecure with their looks). When it hit the concrete, the batteries came flying out. It still worked luckely, and still works today. I did not think the S2 would be able to handle that kind of abuse though. The lense looks a lot more sensitive than the simple A202 with no optical zoom. I'm feeling a bit more at ease knowing that my S2 is not as fragile as it looks.
Carrots is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 1, 2005, 7:22 PM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 53
Default

I sweat a few bullets when the S2 hit the ground, as I know it wasn't designed for that abuse, and I only had the camera for a short time to that point. I would have hated to buy a new S2 so soon after buying the first.... It worked out OK though.

Voyager
Voyager13b is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 1, 2005, 7:39 PM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 53
Default

Kenny,

Yes, I am considering that the complaints are centered on one series of camera. What I'm trying to suggest is that the problem might be limited to a particular production run, or a particular shipment of components used in production , rather than to the entire line. Canon needs to answer those questions, as it's tough for us to come to any conclusion without having the details about how many units have failed for reasons other than abuse.


Voyager
Voyager13b is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 1, 2005, 9:49 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 676
Default

"What I'm trying to suggest is that the problem might be limited to a particular production run, or a particular shipment of components used in production , rather than to the entire line."

That might be true if the problem had been reported with only one of the SD models; however, they all seem to experience it.
lucky2505 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:34 AM.