EF-S 18-135 mm f/3,5-5,6 IS ... is .... (I'm disgusted)

[Tabazan]

Hello to all,


I received the18-135 back from wholesaler (don't think it event went to Canon, which wasn't even interested in having more informations ). It's a a new one. It is still as bad as the 18-55 IS (and even worse at some F/).


I sell it.


I think that Canon got all wrong on this take. I know they need to drag "amateurs" to the highly profitable market of the semi-pro market and later on the pro market ... maybe.


Becoming a member of the CPS requires only to have the right gear, not being a professional. It's a financial criteria, not a qualitative one.


Just to say that, when I began photography (and I'm young at it) I didn't know (care ?) about F/, bokeh and so on. Now I progressed. And as I enter the $ 1000 gear category , I'm better at choosing what I want, and what is worth (for me) - but not in that case _.


Selling the 18-135 (with or w/o the 7D) is a rip-off. Or sell it at 50$, for people who need a 50$ quality lens. No to me, thanks.


The stupid thing about this commercial strategy, is that I was seriously thinking of buying soon a 5D mark II (to add to my 50D) to make my first steps in the FF world... which implies L lenses ... for sure.


I'll buy it anyway (I'm a dumb faithfull customer, for the moment)


But knowing that Canon finally don't really mind much to release something that don't do the job, which will be bought by people who begin to care and have better knowledge (thanks to DP [] ), is p****** me off.


At this price (the 5d mk II + L lenses) ... isn't it worth to jump directly to Nikon ?? I would be pleased to hear some shock arguments from Canon to know how they keep a future "pro" customer...


I read a lot of things about calibration problems, software updates (even on the brand-new-and-tested 7D ... at this price !), and I really fear about buying, say, a 70-200 F4 IS at 1200 $ if there's 50% chances that I need to send it back, for 4-5 weeks, for calibration. I need to work with that, not waiting while reading user manuals.


Ok, other companies have the same flaws I suppose. I't not a valid reason. Market is hard. Gaining one more customer is hard. It's the same for everyone of us, and that's why we try to work better and better. Why not Canon ?


Practice makes prefect, they say. Well, no good news for Canon.

[lcnewkirk]

After reading this post and hearing all of the Nikon talk, I thought I'd share my Canon v Nikon customer service experiences. In 2003, I dropped my Canon (film) elph point and shoot in a creek. The warranty had expired. Canon repaired it free of charge. Sometime around 2006, my Canon (digital) elph stopped working. It's warranty had also expired, and Canon again repaired it free of charge. They also replaced the lcd screen that had a few burnt out pixels. All I ever paid was shipping. Not long after the 2006 incident, a friend had a Nikon digital point and shoot stop working. Nikon's response to him? $300 please.


I really don't know much else about Nikon, but I did quickly scan my localcamera shop's website, and the prices of Nikon lenses and flashesseem to be pretty much the same as Canon's, and in some places, much more expensive. Nikon's 17-55/2.8 and 24-70/2.8 are prime examples.

[Mark Elberson]

Nikon's 17-55/2.8 and 24-70/2.8 are prime examples.

Those are "zoom" examples! Sorry, I know that was horrible but I couldn't resist :-) From now on I'll leave the bad jokes to my father-in-law!!

[Colin500]

After reading this post and hearing all of the Nikon talk, I thought I'd share my Canon v Nikon customer service experiences. [...]

Well, then you were lucky. When I went too near a waterfall with my still-in-warranty G1, I had to pay nearly half it's price for the repair (it started to act erratically on occasion).


(And the G1 was really expensive, I would guesstimate about 2000,- EUR corrected for inflation, that's more than my 500D with three lenses...)


It's hard to jump to general conclusions based on anecdotal evidence, even if the evidence is true. Actually no, it's much too easy to jump to general conclusions, but what are these conclusions worth?


Probably fits with our (human) decision making process; once we have used products from a certain company we tend to stick with them, because if the products don't completely s*ck, given time, we create a completely irrational emotional attachment.


And then we are disillusioned when reality bites. (Mumble mumble a corporations first loyalty is not to customers mumble mumble must have some implications for the quality mumble mumble but then many customers can't, or don't want to, spend good money for good quality mumble mumble.)


The G1 reminds me of my old Canon CD300 photo printer. Didn't work in summer -- in Germany (!) -- because it overheated before finishing a single print. Perhaps I should have considered Nikonbefore getting the 500D ;-)


Enough babbling, back to taking and making pictures!


Colin

[Dave Throgmartin]

I am going through some old posts and WOW was taken back by the venom towards the 18-135. I'm not claiming the pics below are the world's greatest pics or anything, but they are nice memories from a fun vacation. If I'm using the 18-135 typically I'm stopping it down to maximize the pics and it isn't like the rocks in the corners are completely blurry. Are people expecting every lens, even those with 7.5X zoom, to provide a "L" pro grade result?

[Alan]

....but they are nice memories from a fun vacation.

Duluth!! Nice shots!!

[Dave Throgmartin]

Nicely done! Are you local to Minnesota?

[Alan]

Are you local to Minnesota?

Yep.