Disappointed with Canon Refurbs

I've bought 2 bodies and have owned 2 lenses that were refurbs. All were mint / excellent / flawless (as much as any new Canon item is).

Maybe there are issues and I've just gotten lucky? Or maybe the issues are few & far between? At this point I prefer refurb over new!!!

- Keith -

n1as wrote in post #14687626
I've bought 2 bodies and have owned 2 lenses that were refurbs. All were mint / excellent / flawless (as much as any new Canon item is).

Maybe there are issues and I've just gotten lucky? Or maybe the issues are few & far between? At this point I prefer refurb over new!!!

- Keith -

I've bought 3 and wouldn't buy new if a refurb was available.

I bought Canon refurbs 3 times.

First time was my 50D Kit I bought through Canon Loyalty Program, which came with only 30 clicks. Very happy.

Second time was 10-22mm during 15% off refurb sale, which had a black spec inside, exchanged for another one which had visible signs of use, called again and while talking with a supervisor for another exchange the lens became out of stock. After going back and forth, they sent me a brand new 10-22mm. Super happy.

Third time was 17-40mm I received last week during Canon's 20% off refurb sale. Not quite sure about this one as I am yet to be blown away with its IQ. Doesn't show much IQ difference between this lens and 28-135mm.

LunaP.... don't expect to be blown away by the 17-40L... it is an old lens built for old standards. I have one that gets used never.

On the subject of not perfect lenses though... people need to understand that a small piece of dust or a small scratch 99.999 percent of the time will not show up unless you are stopped way down. Shot anything wider than f8, you will almost never see them in your images. There are some really great articles on the web about this... so don't despair. People often focus on issues that don't impact image quality.

Worry more about misaligned elements showing up as softness in the corners. Or slow and sluggish focusing. These are more impactful than a spec of dust.

Virto wrote in post #14683255
I've bought refurb glass from Canon before and it's always been flawless. Although dust and minor scratches have no effect on IQ, if you're not happy with it, Canon will refund or exchange it.

I have not had this good experience with Canon direct on a refurb.

On a refurbished T3i with the EF-S 18-55mm IS II kit lens, it arrived with no battery! Via email support, they are shipping me a battery, but made it very clear that this is a "courtesy" replacement as "a gesture of goodwill", which I understand, as I cannot prove I did not receive one.

Inspecting the lens, I see an area on the front glass that looks like a hazy smudge, so I looked at it via low-power magnification, and it is an area of scratches which looks like something was dragged accross the front of the lens - under higher magnification, I see that the scratches are small, but go through the coating into the glass, with small bits of metal embedded in the coating! It's definitely not just micro-scratches from cleaning.
The attached picture with sidelight shows it.

I emailed Canon direct support about this, and they say they do not do RMAs or exchanges, that it is a warranty issue, and I must ship it to a factory service center at my own cost. I've only had the lens 1 day, and I thought there was a 14 day return/exchange policy!!!! I guess I should try calling them Monday and talk about why they will not exchange it, but if they do not get me a better quality lens, I will return the whole camera, if they will allow that??? If not, I'll do a charge back if I have to. This refurb only saved me $90 over a new one from Amazon, and it hasn't been worth it.

Steven

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Croasdail wrote in post #14687785
LunaP.... don't expect to be blown away by the 17-40L... it is an old lens built for old standards. I have one that gets used never.

On the subject of not perfect lenses though... people need to understand that a small piece of dust or a small scratch 99.999 percent of the time will not show up unless you are stopped way down. Shot anything wider than f8, you will almost never see them in your images. There are some really great articles on the web about this... so don't despair. People often focus on issues that don't impact image quality.

Worry more about misaligned elements showing up as softness in the corners. Or slow and sluggish focusing. These are more impactful than a spec of dust.

Yeah even brand new lenses often have a little tiny spec of dust inside now and again if you shine a flashlight into them.

Dust is irrelevant. Unless there is a TON of dust, and I mean a TON, it will not impact anything lol.

scubaboy wrote in post #15115750
I have not had this good experience with Canon direct on a refurb.

On a refurbished T3i with the EF-S 18-55mm IS II kit lens, it arrived with no battery! Via email support, they are shipping me a battery, but made it very clear that this is a "courtesy" replacement as "a gesture of goodwill", which I understand, as I cannot prove I did not receive one.

Inspecting the lens, I see an area on the front glass that looks like a hazy smudge, so I looked at it via low-power magnification, and it is an area of scratches which looks like something was dragged accross the front of the lens - under higher magnification, I see that the scratches are small, but go through the coating into the glass, with small bits of metal embedded in the coating! It's definitely not just micro-scratches from cleaning.
The attached picture with sidelight shows it.

I emailed Canon direct support about this, and they say they do not do RMAs or exchanges, that it is a warranty issue, and I must ship it to a factory service center at my own cost. I've only had the lens 1 day, and I thought there was a 14 day return/exchange policy!!!! I guess I should try calling them Monday and talk about why they will not exchange it, but if they do not get me a better quality lens, I will return the whole camera, if they will allow that??? If not, I'll do a charge back if I have to. This refurb only saved me $90 over a new one from Amazon, and it hasn't been worth it.

Steven

If you can only save $90, why even bother buying used (let's face it, that's what refurbs are) vs. new. With new you also get a 1 year warranty, not the refurb's 90 days. A bargain is only a bargain when you get something of equal value and quality for less. A $90 savings with a damaged lens and 9 months less warranty isn't a bargain. People praise refurbs and generally seems to luck out and save a lot of money in the process. If they don't make it right and you are not happy, send the whole thing back.

mwsilver wrote in post #15115774
If you can only save $90, why even bother buying used (let's face it, that's what refurbs are) vs. new. With new you also get a 1 year warranty, not the refurb's 90 days. A bargain is only a bargain when you get something of equal value and quality for less. A $90 savings with a damaged lens and 9 months less warranty isn't a bargain. People praise refurbs and generally seems to luck out and save a lot of money in the process. If they don't make it right and you are not happy, send the whole thing back.

Mark, I agree 100%. - Steve

Refurbished does not necesarily mean a previously defective item. Somewhere on the Canon website there is an explanation of where the refurbed camera's and lenses come from. Not all refurbed camera's and lenses were pre-owned. Some if not most are Canon overstocks, dealer overstock returns, industry display models and other uses where the units were not pre-owned or used, just handled. I have bought one refurbed body and lens with no problems, both looked brand new. I would much rather buy a refurbed from Canon than a used item from a private party because I know Canon will take care of me. Canon has a history of repairing items for free even when years out of warranty. -rick

[/QUOTE=Keebert;146781​46]Dust on the 17-55 is par for the course. Even if you got one that was spotless it wouldn't be after a while. Just stick it on the camera and shoot. Refurbished means a defective item that was returned to "as new functionality". [/QUOTE]

FWIW: the canon rep told me refurbished lenses are actually overstock items sent back from retailers. So... In essence a new lens. Not a true refurb in the sense.

alazgr8 wrote in post #15115935
Refurbished does not necesarily mean a previously defective item. Somewhere on the Canon website there is an explanation of where the refurbed camera's and lenses come from. Not all refurbed camera's and lenses were pre-owned. Some if not most are Canon overstocks, dealer overstock returns, industry display models and other uses where the units were not pre-owned or used, just handled. I have bought one refurbed body and lens with no problems, both looked brand new. I would much rather buy a refurbed from Canon than a used item from a private party because I know Canon will take care of me. Canon has a history of repairing items for free even when years out of warranty. -rick

[/QUOTE=Keebert;146781​46]Dust on the 17-55 is par for the course. Even if you got one that was spotless it wouldn't be after a while. Just stick it on the camera and shoot. Refurbished means a defective item that was returned to "as new functionality".

I agree with every thing you said except your definition of used. Handled lens are used lens, maybe lightly used, maybe not so lightly, but used nonetheless. Obviously, overstock lenses are not used. The main argument against refurbs is when the price savings isn't significant enough to make up for the normal wear and tear, actual or potential issues, and the 90 day limited warranty.

jerbear00 wrote in post #15115964
FWIW: the canon rep told me refurbished lenses are actually overstock items sent back from retailers. So... In essence a new lens. Not a true refurb in the sense.

I'm sure that's the case and why so many "refurbs" appear to be virtually new. But there is a small number of folks that get the defective ones or the heavily handled ones. For some of them them, buying new would have been a better choice.

jerbear00 wrote in post #15115964
FWIW: the canon rep told me refurbished lenses are actually overstock items sent back from retailers. So... In essence a new lens. Not a true refurb in the sense.

Well, some of them could be overstock, but a number of them are simply returned lenses that have been refurbished, as evidenced by scratches, etc.

I've tried the last couple of 20% sales to get the 85L, but wasn't able to. If I do ever get one, it better look and perform like new or else it's going back. Refurbished should mean refurbished.

Bryan

I do not believe, for a second, that overstock lenses are "untouched". If an overstock lens is still in a sealed box from Canon, I bet they just send them out again. If the "overstock" lens was opened then it's not an overstock lens but a used one.

I guess it depends on the definition of used. To me used is a lens that has been mounted on a camera and actuated, no matter if only in a camera shop. Refurbished can be damage is suspected and inspected, or it can be damaged and repaired. Handled is fondled but not mounted on a camera. These are my definitions. It seems like Canon refurb definition is anything that leaves and comes back and gets shipped out again is a refurbed, that's OK with me, as the refurb designation usually results in a pretty good savings. One question, what's a sealed box lens? Is there such a thing? This year I bought two new lenses, one from Samy's camera (EF-S 17-55 f/2.8), and one from B&H (EF 100 f/2.8L Macro) , and neither one had any type of seal on the box.

As far as cost savings, last month I bought a new 100 f/2.8L Macro (from B&H) during the $120 instant rebate promotion. I was trying to buy a refurb when Canon was having their 20% off sale, but they were flying off the shelf faster than I could get my CC out of my wallet. List price for that lens is $1049, I paid $929, the refurb price was $671. I consider that to be a pretty substantial cost savings, no? -rick

mwsilver wrote in post #15115989
I agree with every thing you said except your definition of used. Handled lens are used lens, maybe lightly used, maybe not so lightly, but used nonetheless. Obviously, overstock lenses are not used. The main argument against refurbs is when the price savings isn't significant enough to make up for the normal wear and tear, actual or potential issues, and the 90 day limited warranty.

Keebert wrote in post #15116549
I do not believe, for a second, that overstock lenses are "untouched". If an overstock lens is still in a sealed box from Canon, I bet they just send them out again. If the "overstock" lens was opened then it's not an overstock lens but a used one.