$640.00 to repair autofocus on Sigma 120-300 2.8

ed rader wrote in post #13546174
i recently had to shell out more than $1500 for a root canal and a crown and i hate sigma lenses so just imagine how i feel .

ed rader

and to think that the sigma COULD leave a bad taste in your mouth....


where as the Novocain DOES leave a bad taste in your mouth!!!

irishman wrote in post #13546953
Canon charged me $177 to repair and recalibrate my 70-200 2.8 IS.

And they charge $341 to check/clean/recalibrat​e the 100-400. That's without anything being broken or needing any repairs - just to check it & clean it. Based on that, $640 to actually fix something doesn't seem too far off.

ed rader wrote in post #13546174
i recently had to shell out more than $1500 for a root canal and a crown and i hate sigma lenses so just imagine how i feel .

ed rader

Yeah. I know that story. I had a crown break off after just two years and had to have a new post & core and new crown. Then the dentist says to keep it from breaking again in the future we need to cut off the perfectly good crown next to it and put a two-tooth fused crown in its place. And to think I could have had the new Canon 70-200 f2.8 L IS II instead........

Oh, what a coincidence. I'm currently in need of a root canal that's going to cost ~$2000.. imagine the toys I can buy with that money .

Anyway, you gotta do what you gotta do. If you need the lens then it's worth it.

well, enough talk of root canals. My teeth are beginning to hurt. lol

Really, I would bite the bullet and fix it. It's a great lens. It shouldn't fail again. Whatever did this was most likely a manufacturer defect that went unnoticed. It probably caused something to wear abnormally which led to the failure. Now fixing it is expensive, but those related parts should all be repaired and it should be as good as, or better than new.

$640 isn't bad for this $3000 lens. If it bugs you, you can buy a 7 yr mack warranty from Adorama. At the very least, you could fix it and sell it - just making sure you disclose the repair of course. Repaired, I wouldn't hesitate to spend $1500 on it and I would have to dig for the money. Others with the case more readily available may pay even more. But if you really really don't want to mess with it, send me the repair estimate and I'll buy it as-is for $500 and pay for the repair.

And I wouldn't let this stop me from buying Sigma lenses. If you are happy with the lens, often even buying it a second time can cost less than the Canon counterpart.

The Sigma 120-300 is a very expensive lens so it is reasonable to expect a very expensive repair. I had other issues with Sigma regarding repairs that took several months so I sold all of my Sigma stuff and never looked back. Canon charges allot for repairs but at least they get the lens back to you quickly.

$640 on that lens isn't bad, get it repaired and either put it to good use or sell it.

iluxa007 wrote in post #13547010
Oh wow... I just bought a new Sigma 12-24mm II that came out not too long ago. I still have a chance to return it. Don't know how reliable sigma really is. Maybe I Should get a 16-35L II after all...

Don't worry about it. I have a five year old 70-200 f/4 L IS and had to have it repaired this year. With time and use any of them can break.

Thats a substantial amount of money. If that focal length fits your application you might as well put some life back into the lens.

640 is pretty cheap if you look at a brand new 3000 dollar lens. f/2.8 makes that lens sound attractive. Just make sure after you get it repaired you check to see that the repair doesn't introduce the horrid AF issues sigma tends to have.

How about Fix it, sell it for $1200.00 and pick up one of the new Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG OS APO HSM AF Lenses.

--Evan

PHughes wrote in post #13549281
Don't worry about it. I have a five year old 70-200 f/4 L IS and had to have it repaired this year. With time and use any of them can break.

You're right. Bit sometimes quality equipment (L-Glass) can last you way longer than any other third-party lenses.

But I made up my mind: going to keep my 12-24 II
I don't care how bad of a rep Sigma gets, the 12-24 is a "WOW" lens on FF

Evan Idler wrote in post #13552400
How about Fix it, sell it for $1200.00 and pick up one of the new Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG OS APO HSM AF Lenses.

--Evan

I don't get your math...

irishman wrote in post #13546953
Canon charged me $177 to repair and recalibrate my 70-200 2.8 IS.

they charged me more than $300 to calibrate my 24-105l. i think it was $350!

ed rader

ed rader wrote in post #13552764
they charged me more than $300 to calibrate my 24-105l. i think it was $350!

ed rader

The $177 included fixing my broken AF system. When I got it back it was like a different lens---MUCH sharper than when new.

Evan Idler wrote in post #13552400
How about Fix it, sell it for $1200.00 and pick up one of the new Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG OS APO HSM AF Lenses.

--Evan

if he fixes it he can get a lot more than 1,200 for it...i say if you don't want to pay to fix it...sell it for like $1,000 including the email/description from sigma saying how much it'll cost to fix it...and then put the money towards something else...if you don't want to spend the $640...