100-400L IS motor faliure

Good to hear mate

Sounds pretty fair really

and that is EXACTLY what the act is in place for.

Milutiche wrote in post #14147222
Why can't people understand this? I guess some countries are just better set up to help out the consumer and not let "the man" dictate

yeah, the man is getting us down, you're lucky to live in a consumer "Portlandia" paradise

Good to hear about the deal.

It's quite funny that people from elsewhere might consider the consumer rights of countries like NZ and Aus as a bit extreme, yet probably live in a country where buying a lens and returning it at no cost within 30 days for no apparent reason is considered normal.

I was called all kinds of mean things, just for saying I would return a camera just because I don't like it. Almost every store in America offers a 100% satisfaction guarantee . If I'm offered it, there's nothing wrong with using it. I would have done the same thing the OP did. That would be a sweet law to have in America. Yes, canon has a one year warranty. But a $2,000 lens shouldnt crap out that quickly and canon knows it. they very likely would not accept responsiblity for the multiple failures, or even acknowledge it. That is why laws like this are in place. To protect the consumer from exactly this type of event.

Hey thanks people, Now for the next step, How much can I get for it second hand and what should I replace it with?

between $1500 & $1800 seems to be around the norm on TM. Why would you want to sell it? if it's been properly repaired, shouldn't you be keeping it!

Are you not getting it fixed? Or are you just moving on from it when you do? Why not take advantage of the repair and get it calibrated to your body as well?

I watch Ebay a bit in Aus, and they seem to be going for around A1200-$1400.......which is a bit silly really as you can get a new one out of HK for that money.

What to replace it with? Who else makes a decent 400 mm lens for the money? You could always wait for the 200-400 f4 (with inbuilt 1.4 converter), but how much is THAT going to cost going off how much Canon seem to want for new model glass nowdays!!! Or a 70-200 mk2 with 2* but that starts to add up as well.

Milutiche wrote in post #14166651
Hey thanks people, Now for the next step, How much can I get for it second hand and what should I replace it with?

I have a Sigma 50-500 OS and a Canon 300mm 2.8 IS, and with a recent 100-400 purchase, I've discovered what a wonderful lens it can be (my previous was poor/soft). I decided to ditch the Sigma because the 100-400L is such a fantastic lens. It's the perfect wildlife companion. I would keep it if I were you. If the rumored mk2 is really on its way this year, it's going to retail at 50%+ over the mk1.

will there even be a mk2 100-400? If they (ever) release the 200-400 it doesn't make much sense does it?.....or does it?

pixelbasher wrote in post #14167077
will there even be a mk2 100-400? If they (ever) release the 200-400 it doesn't make much sense does it?.....or does it?

If you only need < 400mm then for some uses anything over F/5.6 is simply a disadvantage (due to weight).

An example, airshows. People shooting with a 300 or 400 F/2.8, without a TC, for aircraft in bright sunlight confuse me. Sure if it's the long lens you already own, or you're using a TC, then that makes perfect sense. But at its native length in good light then you may as well just save yourself from lugging that beast around and use a 100-400 or 400 F/5.6.

So yes IMO a 100-400 still has a place. Particularly for airshows and for wildlife togs that'll want to keep mobile and lightweight.

I wasn't asking if it was a useful lens, I know how useful it is as I have one, I was asking if they will ever make a MK2 100-400 like someone just suggested above, when they now (when it is finally released) have a 200-400 F4 with a 1.4 inbuilt sitting at canon now. To me personally it makes no sense to continue with the 100-400 line in a Mk2 version after seeing the 200-400. Before it was announced, yes I would have thought a mk2 100-400, as it is really overdue for an upgrade, but not now.

pixelbasher wrote in post #14170804
I wasn't asking if it was a useful lens, I know how useful it is as I have one, I was asking if they will ever make a MK2 100-400 like someone just suggested above, when they now (when it is finally released) have a 200-400 F4 with a 1.4 inbuilt sitting at canon now. To me personally it makes no sense to continue with the 100-400 line in a Mk2 version after seeing the 200-400. Before it was announced, yes I would have thought a mk2 100-400, as it is really overdue for an upgrade, but not now.

And I was saying that the 100-400 and 200-400 are completely different lenses, so yet it makes sense. 1 stop is a huge difference, especially in weight/size when talking telephoto lenses.

joeseph wrote in post #14167061
between $1500 & $1800 seems to be around the norm on TM. Why would you want to sell it? if it's been properly repaired, shouldn't you be keeping it!

Well I know I didn't misuse it before the current failure so I'm worried that it might fail again and I don't want to go through this saga a second time.

pixelbasher wrote in post #14167066
Are you not getting it fixed? ......

Yep it's getting fixed right now

I do like the 400mm but I don't need it, I like wild life photography and sport but often the light isn't that good and f5.6 is just a little bit too slow and not overly sharp.

If I can get $1500-1600 for the 100-400 I've got a few options
->70-200 f2.8 (non IS) second hand $1400-1600 New $1900
->70-200 f4 IS New $1530
-> 135 f2 New $1385
-> 100mm Macro L $1240

I don't mind moving away from the big zoom and towards a good portrate lens so any of the options above would be nice and the could also double as a sports lens.