The buyers of 24-70 II

Aren't you guys worried (or are you even aware) that you may be (most likely) getting a copy that is manually opened/hand fixed in production line by Canon? You do know that there are bunch of issues beta testers had raised which is why the lens was delayed 3-4 times over the course of 7 months. You also do know that at each delay, Canon had produced lenses and they didn't throw them away, they most likely fixed them (hence the delay). And lastly, you are paying a whooping $2,300 for a lens that, for all purposes, is not perfect (I'd expect my $2,300 lens to be perfect).

I honestly don't understand the whole "pre-order" mentality, I'd wait a good 6 months to 9 months before buying anything new that costs more than a $1,000. Canon is a great company, but it's not a perfect company, as with any product any company makes, a product is bound to have issues.

Don't mean to ruin the mood, just interesting to observe nobody has brought this up yet.

Really, that's the same risk with any early adopter. Applies to pretty much anything... electronic, cars, etc...

SoCalTiger wrote in post #14995045
Really, that's the same risk with any early adopter. Applies to pretty much anything... electronic, cars, etc...

Exactly.

But with this particular lens, people have known about the production issues for months.

you certainly seem to "know" quite a bit about Canon's manufacturing process.

TheLensGuy wrote in post #14995040
Aren't you guys worried (or are you even aware) that you may be (most likely) getting a copy that is manually opened/hand fixed in production line by Canon?

I would much rather have one of these, than one they didn't bother to fix. Getting something that has been fixed is a good thing. Getting something that needed to be fixed and wasn't . . . that's bad.

It's always been my assumption that all L lenses have been gone over by hand during the production phase. How else would they work all of the bugs, flaws, & quirks out of each individual lens?

Tom Reichner wrote in post #14995141
I would much rather have one of these, than one they didn't bother to fix. Getting something that has been fixed is a good thing. Getting something that needed to be fixed and wasn't . . . that's bad.

It's always been my assumption that all L lenses have been gone over by hand during the production phase. How else would they work all of the bugs, flaws, & quirks out of each individual lens?

In addition, lenses are made of primarily mechanical components and quite a few of the mechanical components are designed to be adjusted either during or after the manufacturing process.

Most parts of a lens are not sealed "black box" components that can't be adjusted or brought into spec. There are parts that are like the focus chip or IS motor which are generally replaced and not repaired, but I see nothing wrong with a lens that's been "tweaked' on the Production line, it's generally a good thing.

I would assume the opposite of the OP, the 1st few batches will receive far more scrutiny than later batches because as confidence in the manufacturing process grows, intervention in the process lessens. In the long run, people cost more than machines...

Stone 13 wrote in post #14995234
In addition, lenses are made of primarily mechanical components and quite a few of the mechanical components are designed to be adjusted either during or after the manufacturing process.

Most parts of a lens are not sealed "black box" components that can't be adjusted or brought into spec. There are parts that are like the focus chip or IS motor which are generally replaced and not repaired, but I see nothing wrong with a lens that's been "tweaked' on the Production line, it's generally a good thing.

I would assume the opposite of the OP, the 1st few batches will receive far more scrutiny than later batches because as confidence in the manufacturing process grows, intervention in the process lessens. In the long run, people cost more than machines...

There is a difference between a "hack" and a "fix". When you have 50,000 items on assembly line and 50 people to work on them, I guarantee you each item won't be getting the same level of detail and attention as they'd in say a specific canon repair center.

Believe what you want, this is the first time I hear when people think the first batch of a product will be better than any other.

Tell that to the T4i owners who got a recalled camera or 5D Mark III with light leak or 40mm pancake that was also recalled.

TheLensGuy wrote in post #14995040
Aren't you guys worried (or are you even aware) that you may be (most likely) getting a copy that is manually opened/hand fixed in production line by Canon? You do know that there are bunch of issues beta testers had raised which is why the lens was delayed 3-4 times over the course of 7 months. You also do know that at each delay, Canon had produced lenses and they didn't throw them away, they most likely fixed them (hence the delay). And lastly, you are paying a whooping $2,300 for a lens that, for all purposes, is not perfect (I'd expect my $2,300 lens to be perfect).

I honestly don't understand the whole "pre-order" mentality, I'd wait a good 6 months to 9 months before buying anything new that costs more than a $1,000. Canon is a great company, but it's not a perfect company, as with any product any company makes, a product is bound to have issues.

Don't mean to ruin the mood, just interesting to observe nobody has brought this up yet.

If everyone waited 6 - 9 months to buy something than all the bugs would still be there. You should be commending early adopters for working out those bugs, not trying to dissuade them.

-dave-m- wrote in post #14995426
If everyone waited 6 - 9 months to buy something than all the bugs would still be there. You should be commending early adopters for working out those bugs, not trying to dissuade them.

That's actually true, selfish, but true

I really don't think these lenses are hand assembled. There is probably some hand assembly, but very minimal.

The manufacturing process has certainly evolved from the Henry Ford days to the point where tech companies, to be price competitive, have to reduce the biggest cost item in the products they are producing which happens to be labor. In addition, any company manufacturing anything with more than a 1% defective rate would be out of business and there are many examples of this.

I really think the OP should "walk on the wild side", amd move on and buy that 24-70 II.

LensGuy/OP.....can you explain your motivation with this thread? I don't see a point to it. Are you angry that you don't have the funds to purchase one of these lens, and are just trying to instill buyers remorse into those who do? You speak in hypotheticals as if they are fact. Do you work on the Canon assembly line? You can guarantee us each lens won't get the attention and detail during assembly it would get in a service center?

Early reviews on this lens are promising. If someone has a need and the money for it, there should be no hesitation purchasing. Just because you like to wait 6-9 months doesn't mean others should.

okay, so if you get a lens copy that you feel is defective, or not up to specification...send it back and have it replaced.

what seems to be your problem here? i don't get what you're trying to say.

It has got nothing to do with me not having the funds for it, I will buy the lens sometime next year, when it settles and Canon finishes the first production runs. It's about common sense, and it's about not getting carried away. The lenses are obviously not defective and that's not what I said anywhere. What I'm saying is, it's very likely (in fact we should just say it is a fact) that every single lens that was produced in the first 6 months of this year had to be opened up, fixed, and put back in together. This is why this lens was delayed 9 months (not 9 days or 9 weeks), and as you know this wasn't 1 delay, it was 4 delays as far as I can remember. When I'm buying something serious, say a BMW, a 60" Samsung TV, 5D Mark III, anything, I don't go and buy it before it's released by pre-ordering it, I wait 6-9 months so that first a few batches of "problematic" products are out of the way. I want my product to be fresh, clean, and perfect. I don't want something that was touched and "had to be fixed" in any way.

We are photographers no? Photography itself is a profession (or hobby) that requires "perfection". Clearly not everyone is wired up that way and some people like "carpe diem" and they just don't think twice before doing something.

I was trying to help others by trying to get them to open their eyes, that's all.

I have to agree with being cautious on pre-orders. I've been burned a few times, outside of photography related purchases, by pre-ordering a product. The most recent I can remember is when I pre-ordered the Palm Pre from Sprint. There were so many issues with that phone that I felt completely ripped off. It took a good year for Palm to work out the kinks. Obviously, a lens is a little different than a hardware/software combo that can get OTA updates.

Overall, there is definitely some risk with pre-ordering a lens, however, I feel like it's essentially an all-or-nothing situation. The only way you aren't going to be thrilled with this lens is if it turns out to be a complete bust. It's certainly possible, but with Canon, I don't think it is likely.

TheLensGuy wrote in post #14995881
I was trying to help others by trying to get them to open their eyes, that's all.

Well thank you for enlightening us all with your ultimate wisdom.

The fact is, you're not guaranteed to get a perfect product, 6 days, 6 months, or 6 years after it's released. Might your odds be a little better the longer you wait? Sure. but it's certainly no guarantee. Meanwhile us fools who buy early will have days, weeks, months of great shots with our new equipment. It's all relative and different people have different priorities, some professionals for whatever reason NEED the lens as soon as they can get their hands on it.

You simply have different priorities and that's no crime, but neither is being an early adopter....