Canon's "Err 99" strikes again

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

My new Digital Rebel XT worked for all of 1.5 days before it crashed and
died with the infamous Error 99 message no on-line camera review site had
ever mentioned. After it happened to me, a web search for "err 99"
turned up beaucoup complaints from Canon EOS owners. Their fix-it
suggestions all failed, so I returned the camera to the vendor today.

Next, hefting the Nikon D70 and Pentax *iST-DS at a local camera store, I
instantly fell in love with the Pentax's size, great prism, and overall
"feel". In fact, the Pentax build quality made the dead Canon feel
cheap, while the D70 felt bulky and heavy.

I will, however, miss the Canon's low digital noise at high ISO speeds,
and its fast working (until it died, that is).

My only gripe against the Pentax is that its kit lens is assembled in
Vietnam... and our war loss still rankles.

--
Anti-Spam address: my last name at his dot com
Charles Gillen -- Reston, Virginia, USA
13 answers Last reply
More about canon strikes again
  1. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    Charles Gillen <see-my-sig@below.com> writes:

    > My new Digital Rebel XT worked for all of 1.5 days before it crashed and
    > died with the infamous Error 99 message no on-line camera review site had
    > ever mentioned. After it happened to me, a web search for "err 99"
    > turned up beaucoup complaints from Canon EOS owners. Their fix-it
    > suggestions all failed, so I returned the camera to the vendor
    > today.

    What lens were you using on it?

    If it's an old Sigma, this isn't a faulty camera.

    --
    Todd H.
    http://www.toddh.net/
  2. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    Charles Gillen trolls idiotically:

    > My new Digital Rebel XT worked for all of 1.5 days before it crashed
    and
    > died with the infamous Error 99 message no on-line camera review site
    had
    > ever mentioned.

    I guess all we need to do is find one (1) review that mentions it.
    Let's see:

    www.google.com: canon digital rebel xt error review 99

    I click on the first link and read about an "error 99" on 2005 Mar 23
    -- two months ago.

    > After it happened to me, a web search for "err 99"

    > turned up beaucoup complaints from Canon EOS owners. Their fix-it
    > suggestions all failed, so I returned the camera to the vendor today.

    This letter has been mailed to you from Canon HQ. I'll post it now
    just to make sure you read it:

    Dear Mr. Gillen,

    It has come to our attention that you have recently returned a Canon
    Digital Rebel XT to one of our retailers because of claims of an "error
    99" and your lack of adaptability in overcoming it.

    On behalf of Canon, I would like to thank you for returning this
    merchandise so that a more worthy member of H. sapiens can make more
    productive use of our superior technology. Indeed, your continued
    ownership of the equipment would have amounted to a literal smack in
    the face to people like Arthur Morris and millions of satisfied -- and
    intelligent -- customers worldwide. When we brought up this matter
    with our customer service department, and particularly its resolution,
    the cries of joyous relief were audible even in Tokyo.

    Please do not attempt to purchase any more material from Canon, from
    any of our departments. We deserve better than the likes of you.

    Yours very truly,

    Fujio Mitarai
    President & CEO
    Canon, Inc.

    > My only gripe against the Pentax is that its kit lens is assembled in

    > Vietnam... and our war loss still rankles.

    http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/youare.swf
  3. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    Yeah, that's the tone that successful Japanese high-level executives
    take all the time. Riiiiiight.
  4. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    Charles Gillen <see-my-sig@below.com> writes:

    > My only gripe against the Pentax is that its kit lens is assembled
    > in Vietnam... and our war loss still rankles.

    What's worse is that history is repeating itself, only a bit further
    west, this time in an urban guerilla war.

    --
    Todd H.
    http://www.toddh.net/
  5. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    Charles Gillen wrote:

    > Vietnam... and our war loss still rankles.

    The USA was defeated by the USA.
  6. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    On 16 May 2005 17:18:25 -0400, Charles Gillen <see-my-sig@below.com>
    wrote:

    >My new Digital Rebel XT worked for all of 1.5 days before it crashed and
    >died with the infamous Error 99 message no on-line camera review site had
    >ever mentioned. After it happened to me, a web search for "err 99"
    >turned up beaucoup complaints from Canon EOS owners. Their fix-it
    >suggestions all failed, so I returned the camera to the vendor today.
    >
    >Next, hefting the Nikon D70 and Pentax *iST-DS at a local camera store, I
    >instantly fell in love with the Pentax's size, great prism, and overall
    >"feel". In fact, the Pentax build quality made the dead Canon feel
    >cheap, while the D70 felt bulky and heavy.
    >
    >I will, however, miss the Canon's low digital noise at high ISO speeds,
    >and its fast working (until it died, that is).
    >
    >My only gripe against the Pentax is that its kit lens is assembled in
    >Vietnam... and our war loss still rankles.

    The U.S. is now Vietnam's number one trading partner as well.
    Bill Clinton revived relations.
    -Rich
  7. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    t@toddh.net (Todd H.) wrote:

    > What lens were you using on it?
    > If it's an old Sigma, this isn't a faulty camera.

    It was the Canon 18~55mm kit lens usually sold with the camera. With
    freshly-charged Canon battery and a Canon CF card. Tried other brand CF
    cards with no better result. Not a Sigma needing to be re-chipped.

    "eawckyegcy@yahoo.com" <eawckyegcy@yahoo.com> wrote:

    >This letter has been mailed to you from Canon HQ. I'll post it now
    >just to make sure you read it:
    >Please do not attempt to purchase any more material from Canon, from
    >any of our departments. We deserve better than the likes of you.

    You've set a new record in gratuitous anal orificedom. I checked your
    other Usenet posts and found you really are consistent... always obnoxious
    and vituperative. Of course, a decent sane person would not hide behind an
    anonymous email address. The Vietnamese have a term for folks like you:
    "Throw rock, hide hand." Put your _real_ name where your loud mouth is.

    --
    Anti-Spam address: my last name at his dot com
    Charles Gillen -- Reston, Virginia, USA
  8. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    Charles Gillen <see-my-sig@below.com> writes:

    > t@toddh.net (Todd H.) wrote:
    >
    > > What lens were you using on it?
    > > If it's an old Sigma, this isn't a faulty camera.
    >
    > It was the Canon 18~55mm kit lens usually sold with the camera. With
    > freshly-charged Canon battery and a Canon CF card. Tried other brand CF
    > cards with no better result. Not a Sigma needing to be re-chipped.

    Cool. I know I freaked when I ran into Err 99 and finally figured out
    it was because of my old school Sigma APO glass. I didn't want to
    use those at anything but f/2.8 anyway (yeah that's the ticket!).


    --
    Todd H.
    http://www.toddh.net/
  9. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    "with no socks" <badspam@nono.com> wrote:

    > did you try contacting Canon instead of just going by what fix-it
    > suggestions you could find on the internet from other owners?

    Of course not... Canon would have told me to ship it off for warranty repair,
    but then my new camera would have become "refurbished" at the original full
    price. Bad economics. I returned my dead Canon to its maker hoping this will
    help persuade Canon to clean up this error-prone design.

    I certainly did not want my day-old camera FIXED... I wanted it GONE!

    --
    Anti-Spam address: my last name at his dot com
    Charles Gillen -- Reston, Virginia, USA
  10. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    "Charles Gillen" <see-my-sig@below.com> trolled:
    > My new Digital Rebel XT worked for all of 1.5 days before it crashed and
    > died with the infamous Error 99 message
    snip
    > so I returned the camera to the vendor today.
    >
    > Next, hefting the Nikon D70 and Pentax *iST-DS at a local camera store, I
    > instantly fell in love with the Pentax's size, great prism, and overall
    > "feel". In fact, the Pentax build quality made the dead Canon feel
    > cheap, while the D70 felt bulky and heavy.

    Good move! It is always better to get help from the experts on Usenet and
    blogs instead of the factory service people, especially with a sophisticated
    product such as a DSLR. Pentax makes a nice product, as do Canon, Nikon,
    and Minolta. Choice is a wonderful thing.

    > My only gripe against the Pentax is that its kit lens is assembled in
    > Vietnam... and our war loss still rankles.

    I know what you mean. Why support those who have fought us! I am sure you
    try not to buy English, French, Mexican, Spanish, German, Italian,
    Panamanian, Japanese, Korean, Chinese and Grenadian products for the same
    reason. Come to think of it, isn't the Japanese camera body the more
    objectionable part of the package? After all, they attacked us rather than
    the other way around.
  11. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    Charles Gillen <see-my-sig@below.com> writes:

    > "with no socks" <badspam@nono.com> wrote:
    >
    > > did you try contacting Canon instead of just going by what fix-it
    > > suggestions you could find on the internet from other owners?
    >
    > Of course not... Canon would have told me to ship it off for warranty repair,
    > but then my new camera would have become "refurbished" at the original full
    > price. Bad economics. I returned my dead Canon to its maker hoping this will
    > help persuade Canon to clean up this error-prone design.
    >
    > I certainly did not want my day-old camera FIXED... I wanted it
    > GONE!

    I don't blame ya. Hell, I'm a Canon fan, but I can't understand why
    anyone is trying to talk ya out of your decision which has all the
    markings of an informed, good decision.

    --
    Todd H.
    http://www.toddh.net/
  12. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    "Todd H." <t@toddh.net> wrote in message news:84d5rq55l0.fsf@ripco.com...
    > Charles Gillen <see-my-sig@below.com> writes:
    >
    > > "with no socks" <badspam@nono.com> wrote:
    > >
    > > > did you try contacting Canon instead of just going by what fix-it
    > > > suggestions you could find on the internet from other owners?
    > >
    > > Of course not... Canon would have told me to ship it off for warranty
    repair,
    > > but then my new camera would have become "refurbished" at the original
    full
    > > price. Bad economics. I returned my dead Canon to its maker hoping this
    will
    > > help persuade Canon to clean up this error-prone design.
    > >
    > > I certainly did not want my day-old camera FIXED... I wanted it
    > > GONE!
    >
    > I don't blame ya. Hell, I'm a Canon fan, but I can't understand why
    > anyone is trying to talk ya out of your decision which has all the
    > markings of an informed, good decision.

    well like I said, I guess I shouldnt try to talk people out of it when
    they're the ones who make perfectly good equipment available at a fraction
    of the price so all the better for me!

    I guess I just didn't understand the decision to change brands because of
    this... if it were me I would have at least taken it back for a different
    DR, it probably would have been fine.

    --
    www.robinbauer.com
  13. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

    The err 99 typically means that the lens and not the camera is at fault. If
    you are using an older Sigma lens, you will need to send it back to Sigma to
    get it re-chipped. I had an older lens that I used with my 10D got these
    messages. Minor and free repair is all it took.

    Steve
    Tucson AZ


    "Charles Gillen" <see-my-sig@below.com> wrote in message
    news:Xns9658B01848266gillen@216.194.192.13...
    > My new Digital Rebel XT worked for all of 1.5 days before it crashed and
    > died with the infamous Error 99 message no on-line camera review site had
    > ever mentioned. After it happened to me, a web search for "err 99"
    > turned up beaucoup complaints from Canon EOS owners. Their fix-it
    > suggestions all failed, so I returned the camera to the vendor today.
    >
    > Next, hefting the Nikon D70 and Pentax *iST-DS at a local camera store, I
    > instantly fell in love with the Pentax's size, great prism, and overall
    > "feel". In fact, the Pentax build quality made the dead Canon feel
    > cheap, while the D70 felt bulky and heavy.
    >
    > I will, however, miss the Canon's low digital noise at high ISO speeds,
    > and its fast working (until it died, that is).
    >
    > My only gripe against the Pentax is that its kit lens is assembled in
    > Vietnam... and our war loss still rankles.
    >
    > --
    > Anti-Spam address: my last name at his dot com
    > Charles Gillen -- Reston, Virginia, USA
Ask a new question

Read More

SLR Pentax Cameras Canon