Is the camera I bought really "new" if it has had 5,500 shots taken on it?

[TrickiWoo]

Hi,

I'm looking for people's opinion to see if they agree if I am worrying about nothing.

I bought a 5d mkiii a week ago, in a shop I went to in person - I'm not going to name the shop, as that is not the purpose of the thread. Suffice it to say, this is a decent shop, and we're not talking some grey import, etc.

I looked at the camera, which was in an unsealed box. It was taken out, and the battery put in, so I could try the handling, settings, etc. I didn't take any shots with it (I knew what I wanted anyway), but I would expec that others may have gone in and tried one in the shop a bit. I also would expect that these are shifting off the shelves pretty quickly, so I doubt too many would come in just for a play. Clearly one of the advantages of a real shop is the touchy feely aspect of getting your hands on a camera, so I'm not upset that shots have been taken, but ....

I took about 30-50 shots in the house during the week, just getting used to the differences from the 40D, and configuring settings. I then did a shoot at the weekend.

When I came to post process images, the first one I have is numbered around image number 5650. I know you can reset the numbering to zero, but you can't set it to a specific number, so the only way it could be at that count is having had over 5,500 shots taken. That's about what I shoot in a year! (probably need to up that stat, given this new investment though!)

I don't see that that many people can have come in and tried 50-100 shots in the shop, so this makes me think that this is either an ex-demo (and people have taken the camera out for a few days each), or it is a return ... am I being unreasonable to go back to the shop and challenge this?

Thanks, Simon

 

[acetone]

First question, is did you use a clean formated memory card, as if you used one previously used in you 40D, it can just start the file numbering to continue from the one on the card.

 

[artyman]

Also if someone else tried the camera in the shop and inserted their card to take test shots it would have picked up the file number from that. If it looks new in all other respects then I wouldn't worry.

 

[TrickiWoo]

I knew there was a good reason to ask people's opinion on this! I would say that it's close enough to where I was on the old (unformated) card to assume it's what has happened here.

Although I do think I used an SD card which was clean first, but because I deleted the first few images on that, which were pure throw away shots, I can't tell.

Does seem daft that you can't just look somewhere on the camera and see how many times the shutter has been released, but I understand that's a canon only function to perform.

Thanks, Simon

 

[GHP]

Why dont you upload an image to myshuttercount.com
Then you'll know for sure.

 

[Al1944]

Hi,

.. am I being unreasonable to go back to the shop and challenge this?

Thanks, Simon

Not in the slightest. If it was me I would certainly take it back and ask them to explain it. If not to your satisfaction get them to change it.

Al

 

[GHP]

As I said, check it first yourself.
Upload a jpeg to www.myshuttercount.com
I know it works for most dslrs, but it might not work on Canon, depends on the model I think. Worth a check though. Nothing to lose.
If not, I would definitely take a trip back to the shop.

 

[Dave *]

Not in the slightest. If it was me I would certainly take it back and ask them to explain it. If not to your satisfaction get them to change it.

Al

Why? It's a well known fact that using a second hand card will cause the camera to grab the last number on the card as the starting point. At this stage it's just going to waste the OPs time (and shops time and possibly end up pushing up the shops costs if they do just swap out to get the customer back out the door).

The 5D iii is compatible with http://www.eoscount.com/

Make sure you actually have a problem before wasting your time going back to the shop.

 

[Al1944]

Why? It's a well known fact that using a second hand card will cause the camera to grab the last number on the card as the starting point. At this stage it's just going to waste the OPs time (and shops time and possibly end up pushing up the shops costs if they do just swap out to get the customer back out the door).

The 5D iii is compatible with http://www.eoscount.com/

Make sure you actually have a problem before wasting your time going back to the shop.

Because the OP (if he is anything like me) will be forever wondering about it. Quite simple to take it back and ask the shop to explain it. If not happy with the explanation then he should ask to have it changed.

Al

 

[Dave *]

Because the OP (if he is anything like me) will be forever wondering about it. Quite simple to take it back and ask the shop to explain it. If not happy with the explanation then he should ask to have it changed.

Al

Do you honestly believe a sales assistant in a shop is going to understand a technical issue like this to the level they can explain it?

And what explanation can they give that would stop the OP wondering? "Honest Guv, brand new out the box, promise" wouldn't make me any happier, and what else will they say?

Eoscount uses the same protocol as Canon to read the total shutter count, so if the OP really wants a definitive answer it is the only way short of sending the camera to Canon to set his mind at rest.

 

[Balb0wa]

Id put magic lantern on a card.

Will tell you how many, and how many in live view mode.

http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=2602.0

 

[andyred]

As has been said, get an actual count from the Camera, before you worry about it / consider swapping it.

If it is around the 5500, then I'd probably be speaking to the shop and see what they say, but if it's a lot less then, no worries and enjoy your new purchase - it's a body on my wish list ...

 

[TrickiWoo]

Thank you all for the lively debate.

I will have a look at the eos count option first, and I'm sure that will put my mind at rest.

And then as you say, I can get back to enjoying my new purchase

 

[Dave *]

Thank you all for the lively debate.

I will have a look at the eos count option first, and I'm sure that will put my mind at rest.

And then as you say, I can get back to enjoying my new purchase

Eoscount will give you a definitive answer, just don't forget it only works on IE and Windows, and you'll need to install the activeX plug when it pops up for it to find the camera.

 

[graphilly]

Thank you all for the lively debate.

I will have a look at the eos count option first, and I'm sure that will put my mind at rest.

And then as you say, I can get back to enjoying my new purchase

I don't know if the new paid version of EOS count is any more reliable or whether it is just the same version but I got inaccurate data from it. It was counting about 1200 or 30+% less images than I had taken.

 

[Dave *]

I don't know if the new paid version of EOS count is any more reliable or whether it is just the same version but I got inaccurate data from it. It was counting about 1200 or 30+% less images than I had taken.

I've used it a number of times (all but 1 while it was free) and it was consistently in the same area that I was expecting the count to be.

A quick google only brings back comments confirming its accuracy, not sure how yours was so far different, but I suppose there are many variables involved in using the program and obtaining a count, nothing can ever be 100% accurate with those variables I suppose.

 

[modchild]

Do you still need to use a 32Bit browser to use EOSCount or can you use the default 65Bit on a 64Bit system. Last time I tried to get the count on a 7D I recently acquired I had to use a 32Bit version. Might be worth bearing in mind if you can't get it to work, I got a very accurate count though.

On the day I received my 5D3 I put a CF card in that had been used in my 7D and the picture number from the first shot was around 1870, can't remember the exact number but I then formatted the card and the picture number went back to 1. A few months after having the camera when the picture number was 5738 I checked on EOSCount and the shutter count was bang on at 5739. I've since gone way past the 9999 mark but the shutter count on EOSCount is still just 1 more than the picture number. The count now is 11,803 but the picture number is out now by 472 compared to the CF card, but that's because I went out 1 day and only had an SD card in the camera and took the shots on that.

 

[Dave *]

Do you still need to use a 32Bit browser to use EOSCount or can you use the default 65Bit on a 64Bit system. Last time I tried to get the count on a 7D I recently acquired I had to use a 32Bit version. Might be worth bearing in mind if you can't get it to work, I got a very accurate count though.

Looks like its still only 32bit (a Canon limitation according to them).

Why does the browser have to be 32-bit?
A browser must be 32-bit, as a 64-bit browser cannot run 32-bit ActiveX controls. The EOSCount control is 32-bit, because the Canon SDK is distributed in 32-bit form only.

From their FAQ.

 

[TrickiWoo]

So, I installed EOS Count, and the answer I got back is that it has shot 1,892 times.

I have taken approximately 200 of them, so I guess I need to have a discussion with the shop about whether they think it's ok to decsribe it and sell it as new, if it's had well over 1,500 shutter actuations....

 

[Dave *]

So, I installed EOS Count, and the answer I got back is that it has shot 1,892 times.

I have taken approximately 200 of them, so I guess I need to have a discussion with the shop about whether they think it's ok to decsribe it and sell it as new, if it's had well over 1,500 shutter actuations....

I wouldn't accept that as new, I would expect a discount for getting a demo unit or a replacement (and the replacement needs to be a sealed box).

 

[stu.artd]

I bought a 6mth old 5d mk2 from someone on another forum that had a lower shutter count than that. It's definitely not new. If it was being sold on a forum it could be classed "as new", but a shop's not allowed to sell something like that as a new camera.

 

[TrickiWoo]

Thanks for the clarification/comment - it all helps put my mind at ease that I'm not being overly touchy about this.

Thanks

 

[tijuana taxi]

Would you buy a new car that had 1500 miles on the clock, if you pay for new that's what you should get

Daresay it will make absolutely no difference whatsoever, but for me it would be a matter of principle. There again I always insist on seeing the security seal is in situ when buying in person

 

[Pookeyhead]

New should be new. This isn't new. Take it back, get a refund, or a NEW replacement. This is not something you need to ask for, or bargain for, this is you RIGHT under the Sale of Goods Act. It's not new, so it should have been sold as used, or ex demonstration.

Far too many "reputable" stores do this these days. I've walked in, asked for something, and they opened the display case to get a demonstration model and say "I'll just go and find the box for you".. LOL

 

[florinyes]

I think you should name and shame the shop..why keep quiet about who they are? Sound dodgy to me and I would like to know where not to buy from?

 

[Dave *]

I think you should name and shame the shop..why keep quiet about who they are? Sound dodgy to me and I would like to know where not to buy from?

I would agree, it's now evident that the shop has sold an ex-demo unit (at best) as new, it would be beneficial to know who it is so others can be aware when dealing with them.

As I said, I would be pushing for a 20% discount or a replacement.

 

[tiler65]

I think you should name and shame the shop..why keep quiet about who they are? Sound dodgy to me and I would like to know where not to buy from?

I don't agree, I think the shop should be named only in the event of the customer not receiving what he wants. This is still a long way off as he has not even been back to the shop in question yet.

 

[Milkfloat]

I don't agree, I think the shop should be named only in the event of the customer not receiving what he wants. This is still a long way off as he has not even been back to the shop in question yet.

And what about every other customer who is not getting what they paid for who may not have the knowledge to discover they have are not getting what they paid for?

 

[tiler65]

And what about every other customer who is not getting what they paid for who may not have the knowledge to discover they have are not getting what they paid for?

So if it is one instance, do you think Internet scaremongering is going to help?

Also, Simon has had the camera for a week and the 'new' shutter count is 1892 ....... how many of those are Simon's clicks?

How many of you receive a brand new car with 'no miles' on the clock?

If he wants an exchange, I am sure he will be entitled to it but there is no need to name and shame when there could be more than one reason for this occurrence.

 

[srichards]

I'd go back to the shop and ask them what shutter count maximum they would definine as brand new.

If it has been re-sealed then someone along the chain there has been a bit of underhand behaviour.

The shop may not check the shutter counts on cameras they sell. I'd also ask them if they do that as a matter of routine.

It could be a canon refurb that they are selling as new.

 

[Dave *]

I don't agree, I think the shop should be named only in the event of the customer not receiving what he wants. This is still a long way off as he has not even been back to the shop in question yet.

Sorry Tom, it's not a reflection on their customer service, the fact has been proven they have sold him a ex-demo or even used body as new. This could happen to any other customer of the shop, if they have done it to him, how many others have they done it to? And it's quite likely they will try it in the future.

I thinking naming them is the right thing, and then also updating as to how well (or badly) they now handle the issue with their method of resolution.

 

[admirable]

In the first post the OP states he thinks the shutter count is 5,500. Now suddenly it's 1892. I think the shutter count needs to be verified properly and not estimated by guesswork or some non official software downloaded from the internet.

Until this is done I think it would be unwise the name the supplier or accuse them of anything untoward.

 

[tiler65]

Sorry Tom, it's not a reflection on their customer service, the fact has been proven they have sold him a ex-demo or even used body as new. This could happen to any other customer of the shop, if they have done it to him, how many others have they done it to? And it's quite likely they will try it in the future.

I thinking naming them is the right thing, and then also updating as to how well (or badly) they now handle the issue with their method of resolution.

Do you ever make a mistake? If yes, do you get time to rectify said mistake? If no, well done you.

No proof yet is was ex-demo as like has already been pointed out.....conflicting shutter count reports.

 

[andyred]

Thanks for the clarification/comment - it all helps put my mind at ease that I'm not being overly touchy about this.

Thanks

Have you spoken to the shop ?

What have they said ?

 

[ukaskew]

the fact has been proven they have sold him a ex-demo or even used body as new.

That's not even vaguely correct, unless you have information I don't there is certainly no concrete evidence in this thread that it's used or ex-demo.

I think it's wise of the OP to collect all the facts first, particularly as there is no proven reliable way of getting an exact shutter count from Canon bodies (short of sending it back to Canon).

 

[ernesto]

facts, schmacts - hurry up and name the shop so I can get back to reading my Daily Mail.

 

[gramps]

Why would this be an incorrect reading?

 

[Dave *]

Why would this be an incorrect reading?

I know, it's not like it is the Canon SDK utilised to read the details.

 

[PJ S]

So if it is one instance, do you think Internet scaremongering is going to help?

Also, Simon has had the camera for a week and the 'new' shutter count is 1892 ....... how many of those are Simon's clicks?

How many of you receive a brand new car with 'no miles' on the clock?

You're making it sound like mentioning the shop is going to invoke mass hysteria when all it will do is make certain customers a bit more on their toes about dealing with them, and in fact, dealing with any retailer in this respect.

It might be a case of like pokey's comment above, some retailers' demo units are their stock units, which they may try and capitalise on with certain customers, if they think they'll get away with it.

As for your car analogy, it's known that cars will have delivery mileage from being driven at various points from the factory to dealer prep/shakedown before being happy it's ready for handover.
They could very easily wipe off the 10/20/30 miles clocked up, but that's considered illegal.

A camera will have zero shutter count from assembly, except those pulled from production as part of QC testing, which may then be sent out as press review models, sales rep demos, exhibition demo units, etc, etc.
If not, then they get zeroed and boxed up, and sold as new or sent to the repair section for fixing and boxed as refurbs or graded stock.

And I seem to recall Simon has acknowledged 300 of those are his before getting concerned with his image file number being in the 5000s.
Thankfully it's only 1500 ish, which is still a drop in the ocean for a shutter designed for at least 150K actuations, but paying full whack for just isn't cricket.

 

[George]

If you are going to do MF adjustment, and I assume you are, if you buy the excellent FoCal programme that amongst other things gives you an accurate shutter count.
I've found that most other free programmes I've tried are wildly inaccurate.