100-400L IS motor faliure

Foggiest wrote in post #14173581
Is 5.6 that slow in NZ ?
I always though you guys had plenty of the golden sunshine over there .

Have family there , they always invite me over , but the wildlife scares the proverbial out of me .
As Terry Pratchet hinted "they have no snakes there , the spiders ate them all" !

Yeah well we did have lots of sunshine, but this summer has been ****e.
We have a couple of spiders "Catipo" & "Avondale" and now the pesky Australian "White Tail" but apart from that, nothing

Simpleboy wrote in post #14176347
Just remember the duty tax when bringing a lens into the country.

I had a breif look over the NZ customs website and it doesn't appear that there is any import duty on camera or lenses, but you do have to pay GST on the "value" I think I'll stick to buying in NZ

joeseph wrote in post #14177238
Judith Collins...

Amen to that!

MarkTyler wrote in post #14177303
srry, but you should have snet it in as soon as it started failing IMO. But, I also think "L" glass should have a longer warranty, especially for prodcts with known bugs

Don't be sorry, each is entitled to their own opinion, and if you read the full thread you will see why I didn't send it in imediatly.

Having to replace the IS unit is not a cheap repair either. I had mine done twice. $700+.

AbPho wrote in post #14182345
Having to replace the IS unit is not a cheap repair either. I had mine done twice. $700+.

With a 30% gold discount? That seems excessive.

watt100 wrote in post #14146572
think it has something to do with the number of lens rented ?

No. 20% of 100 or 20% of 1000 is still 20%. Just that the quality of the percentage will be better the more lenses of that type they rent out.

But you did totally miss the point.

50% of the 100-400 lenses (in one serial number range) had 13 IS failures.
50% of the 100-400 lenses (outside that serial number range) had 0 IS failures.

The above is a huge skew, so it should be a clear indication that one of the components used during this specific time frame are not as good as it should have been. Maybe Canon switched subcontractor and failed to notice the use of the wrong material, or incorrect heat treatment or incorrect tolerances.

pwm2 wrote in post #14182430
No. 20% of 100 or 20% of 1000 is still 20%. Just that the quality of the percentage will be better the more lenses of that type they rent out.

But you did totally miss the point.

50% of the 100-400 lenses (in one serial number range) had 13 IS failures.
50% of the 100-400 lenses (outside that serial number range) had 0 IS failures.

The above is a huge skew, so it should be a clear indication that one of the components used during this specific time frame are not as good as it should have been. Maybe Canon switched subcontractor and failed to notice the use of the wrong material, or incorrect heat treatment or incorrect tolerances.

I totally agree, and It does happen, manufacturers change suppliers all the time. But how would we ever get companies to admit that there is somthing wrong?

My IS unit on the 100-400 failed in exactly the same way when the lens was 16 months old. I had to pay £130 to have the lens repaired under Canon's fixed price repair scheme (after first been quoted a lot more)...


https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1099521


Interestingly my SN is 47xxxx - within the range stated on the above posts.

What's the SN on your lens OP?

Edit - sorry just realised you don't have the lens to check. I wish I'd taken the lens back to the retailer, I only realised I could do this afterwards. Please let us know what the serial number is when you get the lens back.

Milutiche wrote in post #14172887
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.

If it fails on the new owner, will he be able to bring it back to you and force you to pay to have it fixed it for him?

I know this is a bit older thread but thought to share anyway:

When I bought my 24-70L in Finland I tried to buy the extended 3 year warranty they were marketing at the desk. They told it's only for the business customers (companies only), regular consumers have consumer laws protecting them over the standard 1 year warranty period anyway.

ScubaDude wrote in post #14627950
If it fails on the new owner, will he be able to bring it back to you and force you to pay to have it fixed it for him?

No, the act doesnt cover private sales.

And yes, similae, in many countries with such acts, extended warranties are useless. However, sometimes they can cover things in which you are not protected.

The real question is, with the 100-400, the IS is so innefective, how would one even know if it wasn't working? :P /kidding

Simpleboy wrote in post #14628304
However, sometimes they can cover things in which you are not protected.

This is the reason I would actually prefer buying the extended warranty. Clearer rules -> less hassle.

Simpleboy wrote in post #14628304
No, the act doesnt cover private sales.

And yes, similae, in many countries with such acts, extended warranties are useless. However, sometimes they can cover things in which you are not protected.

It doesn't have to be a law. He could do it just because it's the right thing to do... to protect the consumer, ya know.

Milutiche wrote in post #14183083
I totally agree, and It does happen, manufacturers change suppliers all the time. But how would we ever get companies to admit that there is somthing wrong?

Vote with your wallet. Research your purchases and don't buy lenses with higher than average failure rates.

BethsDad wrote in post #14621854
My IS unit on the 100-400 failed in exactly the same way when the lens was 16 months old. I had to pay £130 to have the lens repaired under Canon's fixed price repair scheme (after first been quoted a lot more)...


https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1099521


Interestingly my SN is 47xxxx - within the range stated on the above posts.

What's the SN on your lens OP?

I Have had my lens back for a couple of months now and decided to keep it, My serial number is 49xxxx

ScubaDude wrote in post #14627950
If it fails on the new owner, will he be able to bring it back to you and force you to pay to have it fixed it for him?

Thats just stupid, the private sale of second hand good is not covered by the CGA

ScubaDude wrote in post #14631005
It doesn't have to be a law. He could do it just because it's the right thing to do... to protect the consumer, ya know.

Again, stupid, imho

Milutiche wrote in post #14659340
Again, stupid, imho

Why is that stupid?

If it would be wrong for the retailer not to pay to have the lens fixed, why would it not be just as wrong for you not to pay for having it fixed for the next owner? The retailer sells Canon because they have a reputation for making high-quality camera gear; you're selling that particular lens because you think it may break again in the future and you don't want to be stuck with it when it does. Will you be telling the prospective buyer that it already broke once and you're afraid that it will break again?