Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 05 Jul 2010 (Monday) 20:40
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon lens - Probability of getting a good copy

 
dnauer
Senior Member
Avatar
529 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 46
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Colorado
     
Jul 07, 2010 16:05 |  #46

Xcelx wrote in post #10484305 (external link)
My 85mm 1.8 was front focusing a bit and after a free trip to the service center it now focuses dead on every time. I'm loving the reliability now, easy fix :)

Same here with the same lens. I don't regret sending it in. I have a recent (and rather long post) on my experience with my first service repair.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Lowner
"I'm the original idiot"
Avatar
12,924 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Salisbury, UK.
     
Jul 07, 2010 17:24 |  #47

I've not had a bad apple yet, new or used they have all been fine. Touch wood, apart from one or two odd refusals to fire for no apparent reason, the cameras have also been OK.


Richard

http://rcb4344.zenfoli​o.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Volker ­ Boehme
Member
60 posts
Joined Feb 2008
     
Jul 09, 2010 16:16 as a reply to  @ post 10483296 |  #48

Hi,

I'm always wondering that people buy expensive L lenses and then whine about a 'bad copy' while nobody does about a 18-55 non-IS. Probably 90% of the business is your own handling of the lens, including knowing it's weaknesses. You might add another 9% to that.

Best regards,
Volker




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
55,306 posts
Likes: 2335
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Jul 09, 2010 23:42 |  #49

Volker Boehme wrote in post #10507468 (external link)
I'm always wondering that people buy expensive L lenses and then whine about a 'bad copy' while nobody does about a 18-55 non-IS.

It's pretty obvious, no? I just paid $1500 for a lens that performing about as good as a $100 18-55. Wouldn't you complain as well?


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Volker ­ Boehme
Member
60 posts
Joined Feb 2008
     
Jul 10, 2010 01:20 as a reply to  @ gjl711's post |  #50

Hi,

yes, but are they barking up the right tree?

Canon Quality control isn't perfect, but when reading the forums, it always sounds like there is a huge variation in individual quality within the pro lens lineup.

I personaly do believe that a lot of those who complain do not a have a better or worse lens than others, but rather expect the impossible from their lens.

Of course, if you spend so much money on the lens, you can be critical for a reason, but spending ten times as much will not mean that the lens is ten times as sharp.

That doen't mean that every once in a while, somebody can have bad luck, as you apparently did, but I think the presence of "bad copies" is much lower than it appears.

Best regards,
Volker




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
malla1962
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,714 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jul 2004
Location: Walney Island,cumbria,uk
     
Jul 10, 2010 04:26 as a reply to  @ post 10483296 |  #51

I have had one hell of a lot of lenses both new and used and never had a bad one yet.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rsyx
Senior Member
619 posts
Joined May 2010
Location: Europe
     
Jul 10, 2010 04:31 |  #52

Volker Boehme wrote in post #10509514 (external link)
Hi,

yes, but are they barking up the right tree?

Canon Quality control isn't perfect, but when reading the forums, it always sounds like there is a huge variation in individual quality within the pro lens lineup.

I personaly do believe that a lot of those who complain do not a have a better or worse lens than others, but rather expect the impossible from their lens.

Of course, if you spend so much money on the lens, you can be critical for a reason, but spending ten times as much will not mean that the lens is ten times as sharp.

That doen't mean that every once in a while, somebody can have bad luck, as you apparently did, but I think the presence of "bad copies" is much lower than it appears.

Best regards,
Volker

I agree. It's perfectly understandable that people are concerned with receiving a fine copy if they spend a lot of money on it, but it seems like people are so worried that they see defects everywhere.

Instead of endlessly photographing charts, I think it's a better idea to take a new lens out for a day and actually see how real shots come out.


5D II + ZE 50 MP

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elitejp
Goldmember
1,762 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 203
Joined Mar 2008
     
Jul 10, 2010 04:40 as a reply to  @ Rsyx's post |  #53

The probability of getting a properly working lens from any of the major manufacturers is extremely high. The probability of someone posting on the web their bad luck with a non properly working lens is much much higher.


6D; canon 85mm 1.8, Tamron 24-70mm VC, Canon 135L Canon 70-200L is ii

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CountryBoy
"Tired of Goldmember label"
Avatar
5,168 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Okie
     
Jul 10, 2010 04:47 |  #54

About an 80% chance of getting a good one.


Hi

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Cham_001
Senior Member
Avatar
879 posts
Likes: 58
Joined Feb 2009
Location: based between Ruse, Bulgaria & Recife-Brazil
     
Jul 10, 2010 05:14 |  #55

This will always remain to be a controversial and contentious issue.
Canon should have, by default, included Micro Focus Adjustment [MFA] within ALL the camera-bodies. For older cameras there should be a Firmware Update (if and where possible) for ALL the older cameras.
The 'User' is then empowered to carry out their own tests and fine-tuning. That way Return-To-Base (RTBs) are greatly reduced. For Canon, they can then quickly identify genuinely defective lenses.....


"... with a clear perspective - the confusion is clearer ..."
Body: Canon 5D-IV
Lenses: 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM, 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM
Flashguns: 580ex II x 4, MT24 macro flash
Accessories: Pkt Wiz TT5 x 4, AC3, MiniTT1, Sekonic L-758DR
Studio Lights: <... pending ...>

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
55,306 posts
Likes: 2335
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Jul 10, 2010 06:58 |  #56

Cham_001 wrote in post #10510002 (external link)
This will always remain to be a controversial and contentious issue.
Canon should have, by default, included Micro Focus Adjustment [MFA] within ALL the camera-bodies. ....

I agree, but then Canon would have lost a sale, I would have kept my 40D. The only reason I sold that body was because of constant focus issues.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alexf9496
Member
Avatar
208 posts
Joined Feb 2008
Location: USA
     
Jul 10, 2010 11:22 |  #57

Volker Boehme wrote in post #10507468 (external link)
Hi,

I'm always wondering that people buy expensive L lenses and then whine about a 'bad copy' while nobody does about a 18-55 non-IS. Probably 90% of the business is your own handling of the lens, including knowing it's weaknesses. You might add another 9% to that.

Best regards,
Volker

The simple answer is price vs. expectation. The person who pays $1500 to $4000 for an L lens will have a higher standard of performance and return on investment than a person who paid $150 for the 18-55.


5D Mark II |5D Mark III | 1DMkIIN | 24-70 f2.8L Mk. II| 70-200 f2.8L IS II| 100 f2.8L Macro IS | 17-40 f4L |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alexf9496
Member
Avatar
208 posts
Joined Feb 2008
Location: USA
     
Jul 10, 2010 11:26 |  #58

Volker Boehme wrote in post #10509514 (external link)
Hi,

That doen't mean that every once in a while, somebody can have bad luck, as you apparently did, but I think the presence of "bad copies" is much lower than it appears.

Best regards,
Volker

Same here. And this forum is but a tiny fraction of buyers.


5D Mark II |5D Mark III | 1DMkIIN | 24-70 f2.8L Mk. II| 70-200 f2.8L IS II| 100 f2.8L Macro IS | 17-40 f4L |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wintermutant
Member
54 posts
Joined Mar 2010
     
Jul 10, 2010 12:24 as a reply to  @ alexf9496's post |  #59

there is an ascertainment bias...the thousands of people that have good copies don't come here and complain, they're out shooting...the people who are concerned are more likely to come here and post...i don't think anybody believes that the rate of bad lenses is equal to the ratio of "is my lens bad" posts to "i love my lens" posts...


old school 5D Mk I, 24-105L, 100 f/2.8L Macro IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SiaoP
Goldmember
Avatar
1,406 posts
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Bay Area
     
Jul 10, 2010 12:24 |  #60

The "bad copies" will be higher for us pixel peepers too :)


My Flickr (external link) | Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6,936 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon lens - Probability of getting a good copy
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is armychemical
541 guests, 221 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.