Mass destruction of the Canon cameras

This pile of digital cameras, lenses and camcorders boxes is worth no less than half a million U.S. dollar:

Mass destruction of the Canon cameras

Mass destruction of the Canon cameras

This is Canon EOS 20D DSLR - $1200

Mass destruction of the Canon cameras

And this one - professional EOS 1Ds Mark II. Street price around $8000

Mass destruction of the Canon cameras

$2500 - world’s first “affordable” full-frame digital SLR camera Canon EOS 5D:

Mass destruction of the Canon cameras

But nothing could stop those guys with the hammers:

Mass destruction of the Canon cameras

Professional DSLRs, cheap point & shoots, amateur miniDV camcorders - everything mercilessly destroyed:

Mass destruction of the Canon cameras
Mass destruction of the Canon cameras

Two Canon Pro1 superzooms and one camcorder - $800 each

Mass destruction of the Canon cameras

L-grade telephoto lens for sports photojournalists (around $6000) - smashed

Mass destruction of the Canon cameras

All that whitey L lenses that are so good and so expensive, they are all killed

Mass destruction of the Canon cameras

It might look like Nikon fans orgy but reality is pretty simple. All that gear were damaged during transportation or storage. Canon just can’t allow this stuff to hit the shelves no matter how expensive (or cheap) it is.

Next: Harvester ran over a bear »
Previous: « Signs of Eastern Canada

80 Responses to “Mass destruction of the Canon cameras”

  1. dgblues on September 12th, 2007 7:20 pm

    eh what? O.o

    i would take that for free happily no matter what kind of defect, i’m quite a hobbyist though …

    :( :(

    i just need the sensor part etc. of a dslr (without the viewfinder and mirror)

  2. paradoxoff on September 13th, 2007 3:24 am

    I think Canon will not be very happy if the damaged products will appear some way in the gray market. It will harm their reputation.

  3. wewewe on January 19th, 2008 7:19 pm

    i will take em

  4. Fritz on March 8th, 2008 3:21 pm

    Why did they have to destroy it? Why not sell for 1/1000 the price. Or better yet, give it for free. They could have donated it to third world countries.

  5. Paul on March 9th, 2008 6:30 am

    well what the blog didnt say is what they do with that stuff, thats canons recycling program, they take in the damaged products, or trashed products by the consumer, u can go to their website and learn more about it, they don’t actually trash all of that, they recycle the old parts into new products, or refurbished products, (i.e, you send in your broken dslr for repairs, your replacement parts are coming from those trashed products.. so its not like they are just throwing it all away, hence them sorting thru the products, sorting lens, bodies, ext…

  6. Harvey Henkelman on March 12th, 2008 12:13 am

    Canon have a reputation to protect. To allow them to market damaged goods would be unforgivable.

  7. Niteshooter on March 12th, 2008 1:44 am

    What is interesting is that the pix were taken with an Olympus camera.

    I’d agree with the person who said these things might get back out into the grey market. I think Canon does have a responsibility to it’s customers to ensure that their products meet certain standards.

    Ever seen the uproar online when someone gets a dud??????

    I’m sure their repair department has a pile of unrepairable gear and perhaps this is a batch that had been accumulating over time. I would suspect that anything that was salvageable was.

  8. Tad on March 12th, 2008 11:47 pm

    .
    I’m surprised they don’t just rehab them & sell them as such.

  9. Janne on March 14th, 2008 8:46 pm

    Most likely everything was insured, and the insurance company required them to make sure nothing will be sold at any price.

  10. Chris L on March 18th, 2008 3:00 pm

    Caption could be “Nikon’s adopts new ploy to pull ahead in camera market”

  11. Gordon on March 21st, 2008 12:07 am

    Did someone say that Canon does this to protect the value of its products?? Hell it does!
    They create new and cheaper products to compete with existing high-end products within months of release. They introduce consumer products which compete technically with their own professional products and destroy the value of investments in their pro products by you and I. They have confused the market with their current offerings. And to make matters worse, they control prices and limit availability to maintain prices when it suits them. I like the products but not the company.

  12. Griff on March 27th, 2008 4:46 pm

    This is ridiculous. one day when there are limited supplies were going to look back and ask ourselves how we can do these things

  13. Matt on March 27th, 2008 6:59 pm

    What was wrong with them??

  14. joe on March 28th, 2008 4:20 am

    if they are going to be used for parts, why the hammer smashing? why not simple disassembly?

    p.s. - i may be a die-hard nikonian, but it still hurts to see all that equipment treated in such a way.

  15. Ben on March 28th, 2008 4:50 am

    O god why?!!!!!

  16. caroline on March 28th, 2008 5:23 am

    Big companies like that will throw things away before they give it out for free because having it out there free cuts the market value. If anyone can get it free, they won’t buy it.

  17. heyzeus on March 28th, 2008 8:41 am

    But nothing could stop those guys with the hummers:

    Gotta love those Ball-peen hummers.

  18. KATACTPoffA on March 31st, 2008 2:08 am

    The correct decision! Though it was possible to repair the goods having replaced details. It is a pity to me a labour spent on assembly of these chambers. As far as I know complex{difficult} mechanisms are going to hands of people.

  19. Paul on April 14th, 2008 2:12 am

    That’s a heart breaking sight. But I’m surprised that they don’t have a machine to destroy the equipment more efficiently that just some hammers.

  20. Chris L on May 31st, 2008 8:10 am

    The fact they’re use hammers and not a machine maybe suggests that there’s some recycling going on but they’re hammered enough not to end up back on the market?

  21. Angella on June 4th, 2008 3:32 pm

    I just shed a tear. Or twenty.

  22. Rich on June 4th, 2008 4:36 pm

    This could be one of the reasons that Canon is so expensive. You don’t think it costs CANON anything to destroy this stuff; no, it just adds to the cost of doing business which gets passed onto the consumer when they buy the “GOOD” stuff. Maybe they need to pay a bit more on transportation and storage.

  23. nsr on June 4th, 2008 5:30 pm

    i think the reason for the hammers is that they have to be “destroyed”. a simple disassembly means that they could be reassembled.

    this reminds me of a nice aritcle i read in wired magazine (wired.com) about a freighter ship carrying almost a million mazda cars which capsized. a salvage crew went in to try to salvage the ship. the end result was that mazda (and their insurance company) destroyed every vehicle that was on the ship — not just the damaged ones. there are too many variables to be sure which ones are fine, whcih ones are partially damaged, and which ones are toast.

  24. Jason on June 4th, 2008 8:09 pm

    “But nothing could stop those guys with the hummers” Hummers?!?

    And W T F?!? Reputation? Bullshit. It’s wasteful & greedy to destroy it just because they can’t get the top dollar for that stuff.

  25. me on June 4th, 2008 11:03 pm

    …but will it blend?

  26. joe on June 5th, 2008 12:09 am

    They had to destroy is since some asshole in the US would get a hold of it, and say it was sold to him defective and sue them for more than the loss would be worth.

  27. niner on June 5th, 2008 7:11 am

    I used to work for a big-name Japanese OEM automotive parts warehouse [ not mentioning any names ] and we used to destroy parts inventory for all sorts of reasons. Some parts were damaged, but some parts were not feasible to be stored in that location anymore and it was deemed too expensive to ship them to another warehouse location. Many of these parts had been relocated so many times, it was pretty ridiculous.
    The reason we destroyed them was to keep them off the market [obviously] and also because local scavengers regularly dumpster-dove, despite the security they had in place for that.
    We did not have any special equipment for doing this other than basic hammers, hand saws and some power tools [ grinders ]. Once in a while we would get a forklift and drop the forks on a stack of doors or hoods to speed up the process.
    This wasn’t anybody’s regular job and it wasn’t common enough to even warrant a ‘destruction area’ in the warehouse; we usually made a pile to go through in some loading area.
    I thought it was weird when I was there; I only had a chance to do this a few times. It was fun at first but it turned into work quicker than you would think. These pictures are pretty close approximations to what we were doing anyway.

  28. Bob on June 5th, 2008 12:35 pm

    “almost a million mazda cars which capsized”

    Uh yeah. A million. Retard.

  29. paradoxoff on June 5th, 2008 12:57 pm

    4700 cars to be precise

  30. Johan on June 5th, 2008 5:19 pm

    - “And what you do for a living?”

    - “I smash camera gear all day long. Man those expensive lenses are really tough to crack but after a while you get the hang of it. By the way have you seen my 400mm hammer laying around?”

  31. joomba on June 5th, 2008 5:22 pm

    Canon won’t sell these cheaper because (a) their reputation would be at stake for selling low-quality gear, and (b) selling a lens at a cheaper price to someone might mean that that same consumer might not buy the same thing at full price.

    I’d prefer that crap get destroyed. I wouldn’t want any sub-par gear crossing my path one day.

    But damn, I really could have used that Canon body cap on the 5D :-)

  32. Pj on June 5th, 2008 5:59 pm

    what a PR strategy! Nice attempt!

    Apparently, a lot of people have fallen into this trap.

    Why do they have to make this public?

  33. karl on June 5th, 2008 9:32 pm

    This is completely amazing.

    You’d think they were destroying priceless modern art from the way people are responding here. It’s just expensive camera shit.

  34. Tero on June 6th, 2008 11:04 am

    I dont understand what reputation they are trying to protect?
    They are already shipping total crap and buggy products to customer…

  35. tc on June 6th, 2008 2:24 pm

    How old is this? Canon still makes 20D’s???

  36. SG on June 7th, 2008 10:34 am

    It doesn’t cost them anything to do this; they’ll just roll the cost of all that manufacturing and assembly work into the next model’s price.

    As far as people not wanting the factory seconds, plenty of companies have come up with ways to permanently mark seconds so they can be sold as such without risk of someone returning one for warranty service or replacement. Other companies just create a new “low-end” brand and rebrand all of their substandard stuff - or create a special “WalMart only” model.

  37. Bruno on June 7th, 2008 3:07 pm

    Yep, i still believed that this is a PR activities of them. They know how values they put into the products including :labor, materials,intelligence ,…so they will know how to keep & make them produce another value for them until it “disappear”. In other words, some of these parts will be on another products package and holding on ur hand. That’s it ! A way to make them “perfect” in customers’ eyes…

  38. Andy on June 7th, 2008 7:06 pm

    wat a waste man…..bloody waste…..cant believe they did that…

  39. siamak on June 8th, 2008 11:13 am

    How can we havw some of them Guyz?

  40. Nevermore on June 8th, 2008 3:19 pm

    There are a whole lot of comments on what happened here that are pretty far from the truth, more than likely they were being destroyed because for Canon to re-claim what was lost in the damages the insurance company must see all inventory destroyed so they cannot sell it for profit or even give it away.

  41. HF on June 8th, 2008 5:25 pm

    How terrible it was. I wish I had a piece of them…..

  42. Alex on June 9th, 2008 1:49 am

    Man that hurts :(

  43. Mark on June 9th, 2008 10:34 am

    Possibly counterfeit goods being destroyed?

  44. David Rossi on June 9th, 2008 4:09 pm

    Please, let me know how to contact them! I’ll buy some items, and my friends will do the same! We’re VERY interested!!! No matter what defect they have! We live in Italy! Please, let me know how to contact them!!!

  45. me on June 9th, 2008 8:09 pm

    NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO !!!

    now i won´t sleep for days!!!

  46. 'Tonka Tough' on June 10th, 2008 1:59 am

    What Nevermore said.

    Spastics.

  47. goat on June 10th, 2008 3:51 am

    I destroyed a stack of old audio and VHS tapes on the weekend. And niner is right, it turns into work pretty darn fast. After the first one in fact. Making VHS tapes unreadable with a hammer is harder than you think, the hammer hardly even marks a reel of tape. That stuff is hard! They probably make airplane black boxes out of it.

  48. Swig on June 10th, 2008 10:53 am

    David you’re missing the point. What you want to do is exactly what they *don’t* want you doing.

  49. shahab on June 11th, 2008 7:38 pm

    I will buy all of them

  50. Nuno Lagoa on June 12th, 2008 11:32 am

    I’m flabbergasted.

    For one, imagine all this stuff going to landfill - don’t tell me they’ll recycle this stuff, it just doesn’t make sense that these guys would recycle these materials when they could have so easily disassembled everything into smaller parts that could then be used for repairs.

    Second, I simply can’t believe that all this stuff was damaged in transit. Boxes are durable and are supposed to keep their goods pretty safe, except maybe from flooding and fire. I don’t see anything scorched and no boxes seem to have been soaked.

    Third, it really it heartbreaking to see this stuff being destroyed. My love for technology just makes me cringe when I see this. Despite preferring Nikon for semi-pro and pro cameras it really makes me sad seeing all those high-end bodies and lenses go to waste.

  51. Bob the retard on June 12th, 2008 2:28 pm

    i dont care if they destroy all those camera.. anyway i can still afford to buy them in the stores

  52. moiky on June 13th, 2008 12:01 pm

    where is this? id raid the damn place for parts :p

  53. Nikon User on June 13th, 2008 11:45 pm

    It’s a good start

  54. sanny on June 14th, 2008 5:32 am

    Is it possible that these are the fake ones? if there are any…

  55. Akinwale Olaniyi on June 14th, 2008 10:52 am

    It’s annoying to see what someone cherish and adore so much been given such a treatment.I believe it would have been very alright if the products are giver out to the third world countries where the professional photographers could not afford them instead of it been destroyed.Amy way,i am very available if the canon decide to give it out,because it will help at my photography school.

  56. hugo on June 18th, 2008 6:57 am

    it’s horrible

  57. Fernando on June 20th, 2008 2:54 pm

    Just a note ; Third world don`t need this kind of trash…
    Segestion : why not use some parts for repositions … It`s better to use it than destroy…

  58. ademol yusuf moh on June 21st, 2008 2:00 am

    I’m flabbergasted.

    For one, imagine all this stuff going to landfill - don’t tell me they’ll recycle this stuff, it just doesn’t make sense that these guys would recycle these materials when they could have so easily disassembled everything into smaller parts that could then be used for repairs.

  59. Mats on June 22nd, 2008 9:59 pm

    A sad moment. So many lenses, so many cameras.

  60. samane on June 25th, 2008 11:38 am

    oh i just need one 70-200 lens…

  61. Harry on July 7th, 2008 5:53 pm

    nooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!mad peoples!!!!don`t do it!!!!!!!!

  62. Ari on July 26th, 2008 4:35 am

    the price one pays for preserving quality, yeah go canon!

  63. Third World Country on July 29th, 2008 4:52 am

    F**K OFF FERNANDO!!!! I’m from a third world country and there are a lot of great photographers here. We too deserve to have good equipment.

  64. DiaB10 on July 30th, 2008 11:11 am

    Oh no…why did you do that?

  65. math_ on August 14th, 2008 7:10 am

    baktim herkes gavurca yaziyor ben de Turkce birseyler karalayayim dedim FK dan selamlar :PPP

    burada Canon a sesleniyorum:
    Gelin o lensleri kirmayin bana verin, Ar-Ge calismalariniz bedavaya gelsin,
    iddia ediyorum 24 e 500 bile yaparim :PPP
    diyafram araliklarinin iyi bisi olacagina garanti veremiyorum ama,
    galiba sanirsam soyle bi f:8 e 11 gibi birsey yaparim artikin ;)

  66. paradoxoff on August 14th, 2008 9:45 am

    What are you talking about, math_?

  67. Dave Coleman on August 25th, 2008 4:37 am

    Some people Just don’t get it!
    This is nothing more than a publicity stunt that is pulled by big companies every day.

    They do this to attract attention to their product. They can say ” look how we only allow the best equipment on to the market” which re-inforces the quality aspect, they can say ” we recycle it” which keeps the greenies happy and the story goes all around the world giving them lots of free advertising and media attention at bargain basement cost.

    Maybe some of this stuff had manufacturing defects, maybe some was perfectly good, either way, if it cost canon $100,000.00, it would be a very cheap way of getting worldwide advertising.

    This sort of product destruction thing goes on every day. there are in fact companies who specialize in doing it. My uncle used to work on a council tip and was always getting people bringing perfectly good things to him to be destroyed and disposed of. Things like beds, Umbrellas. electrical equipment, Furniture, brand new industrial equipment… You name it. Nearly all the time someone would be assigned from the company to make sure it was destroyed. My uncle would direct them to unload it in a certain place and then tell them they wouldn’t be getting over to that area till late in the afternoon. Pretty soon the person would get bored hanging round
    and leave. Then of course the scavenger hunt was on. He used to get so much stuff the whole extended family did well out of it a a visit to his place always included a walk through of the garage he built just to put this stuff in that was known as ” Alladins Cave”.

    Recently a friend who works for a large phone network had to go to one of these destructions and witnessed a full semi trailer load of brand new, unused, superseded mobile phones get destroyed. They didn’t take any chances with them, they were fed into what she described as a giant tree shredder like used to turn tree trunks into wood chips. The boxes were loaded and out came the phones in a thousand bits.

    They did do this as a publicity stunt, just as a part of their normal business. They know if they give these things away or seel them cheap it will cut into their business and hurt profits where as all the superceeded ones they destroy are rebated by the phone manufacturers.

    Don’t get sucked into thing this destruction is what it seems.
    It is nothing more than a cheap marketing ploy by canon.

  68. tugbay on September 2nd, 2008 6:11 pm

    anam yaz?kt?r günaht?r tele nin içine etti adam be

  69. Piet on September 5th, 2008 6:41 pm

    Why do I not feel sad after having had the famous Err99 on my 30D with Canon lens?

  70. adam1172 on December 21st, 2008 3:46 pm

    wuaaa i will cry for the lenses

  71. From the third world on January 27th, 2009 6:29 am

    To the one who said send em to the third world contries:

    Why we should buy your (….)?
    we spend money for that expecting that its ok..
    If you badly stored em, buy em and use em!

  72. Quantum3 on April 12th, 2009 8:40 am

    They send this trash to the third world, indeed…

  73. tony Anastasi on June 12th, 2009 5:01 am

    I know of a young couple of hippys that makes fantastic bracelets out of recycled lense barrels. They strip them apart and grind them down to make f-stop bracelets. They look fantastic in black, a couple of white ones would be great too..

    Is there anyhow we can grab a few of those lense barrels?

  74. Don Corleone on June 19th, 2009 4:28 pm

    Did anyone notice that only the glass was smashed. Looks like the bodies and electronics were kept. Glass can easily be melted back down and recycled. Even most of the LCD’s are still intact, I think I saw one that was smashed. Probably why there using thin hammers instead of steam rollers, ehh?

  75. RatFink on July 3rd, 2009 9:06 pm

    Stuff like this you cannot just sell really cheap or send off to another country. At some point someone will take a bunch of it and try to pass it off at the retail product.

    Many times the reason stuff is smashed like that is it was insured and needs to be disposed of in a way that the item is totally unworkable in order for the claim to be paid out.

  76. photographer on July 6th, 2009 7:24 am

    this make me sick. if i were there, i would have just pocketed as much as i could.

  77. Ann on July 10th, 2009 11:19 am

    Why not donate it to the poor, they would gladly have taken it, and Canon could have been hero’s…

  78. Calculator Ftvb on August 21st, 2009 11:52 pm

    In a paper I am currently writing, I discuss the far-reaching impacts of destroying unsold/damaged inventory — see the webpage at http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2009/01/gold/larmer-text.html
    Electronics consume a large portion of the gold produced in the world, and those destroying these products likely do not consider the multi-faceted aspects of their actions.

  79. gedasst on January 25th, 2010 5:30 pm

    Im dead…
    _/\_/\_/\__/\__/\___/\____/\_______________…
    My heart stoped !

  80. sosad on January 27th, 2010 7:16 pm

    soooooooooooo
    sad

Leave a Reply