Are refurbished Canon lenses typically pretty "old"?

Just got a refurb 24-70 f/2.8 ii. Pretty psyched, haven't really had a chance to go out and shoot with it yet. I was inspecting the lens, and as many people have stated it looks pretty good so far, the only blemishes I saw were some small smudges on the front lens element and a bit of dust on the rear element. Otherwise the lens looks good.

However, I noticed this is a "96" date code, which would mean it was manufactured in November of 2012, barely 2 months after this lens was first released. Seems a bit old to me. I don't think it's anything (barring other issues) that will get me to return the lens or anything like that obviously, but I'm wondering if it's normal to get a refurb this old, and if so what would cause such a delay in the refurb - sale process?

For example I'm thinking if a typical refurb is a return, then a lens manufactured in 11/2012 probably gets on a store's shelf by about 2/2013, even if it sits for 3 months, we are talking sale by 5/2013, and then return by 6/2013. So almost a full year of just sitting around during the "refurbishment" process? Seems pretty long.

I don't really think it is that unlikely... If you think about it, that lens could have been sent and stocked at a smaller store where it sat on the shelf for a year before they dusted off the box and sold it to someone. That person could have tried it out and returned it, in which it makes its way back to Canon. They refurbish the lens, sent it back to "stock" at the online store and eventually someone else buys it (you).

I think when I bought refurb lenses they had date codes from the previous year (or two).

Related to the Op's question, I am looking at refurb lenses just now too....is it normal for them to have smudges or marks on the front element or visible dust? Putting aside for a moment whether it can have an impact on the images, I would have thought the refurb process would include a cleaning both inside and out....

Or am I expecting too much?

a two year old lens is old? what?

a refurb to me is more than just a return. it's usually something broke on it and had to be fixed.

The refurb lenses/bodies should be clean without any real flaws. I had an 85L come with a chip on the front element and I got it exchanged for one that was perfect. All my other refurb purchases looked brand new.

I am kind of shocked the refurb did not come to you in pristine condition. I have purchased a lens and a body from the Canon refurb store and both were immaculate condition when I received them. I would maybe give them a call and let them know about the smudges and see if they will smudges and dust and see if they would be willing to send you out a new lens.
That is actually very surprising to me that you would not get it spotless.

The Dark Knight wrote in post #17089958
For example I'm thinking if a typical refurb is a return, then a lens manufactured in 11/2012 probably gets on a store's shelf by about 2/2013, even if it sits for 3 months, we are talking sale by 5/2013, and then return by 6/2013. So almost a full year of just sitting around during the "refurbishment" process? Seems pretty long.

I think you're underestimating significantly how long something can sit on a shelf. The lens could have languished far longer at a distribution center, a store shelf, Canon's service center, and/or, finally, on the reseller's shelf. Two years old doesn't surprise me in the least. Two-year-old new stock wouldn't surprise me either.

These refurb lenses and cameras ,do they really get checked and fixed to factory standards, or they just get reboxed with new accessories and resold? I had a really bad experience when I bought a refurb 5d mk2. Like the op, the camera had smudges on the screen, had dead pixels in the lcd and sensor. I returned it and got my money back after nearly 6 weeks with phone calls every 3 days. That was with canon direct un the UK. I haave never looked at refurbs again.

There are other possibilities as well. It could have been returned by the store themselves either as unsold stock or as a floor demo. It could have been a sales person's demo, or it could have been a trade show demo, or... lots of other things. A referb doesn't necessary mean someone bought it and returned it.

hang your cross wrote in post #17090057
a two year old lens is old? what?

a refurb to me is more than just a return. it's usually something broke on it and had to be fixed.

I would think 'usually' it is someone who changed their mind, or found they didn't like it after buying it. Most retailers have about 30 days on NQA returns. Everyone of those is a 'refurbished' lens when it gets back to Canon. If Canon had enough 'bad' lenses to run the refurb business they run, they'd be out of business.

OP,
With a few notable exceptions, refurbished lenses are cheaper than used, and come with a one-year warranty. I have purchased two bodies and three or four lenses from Canon refurb. The only one I had any issues with was the 50 1.8. I got my money back in a no-hassle 10 days or so. Try that on craigslist.

If you are buying the lens to USE, (not to answer the ubiquitous "date code?" question) then does it really matter how old it is? Canon has refurbished it, so all mechanicals and electricals should be as new, and as far as I can tell, glass doesn't age, so what it your concern as to the age of a refurbished lens?
As others have mentioned, there are many reasons for a lens to be refubished; buyer remorse, return of a "bad copy," not what the buyer was expecting, etc. I would not read too much into the (sacred) date code on it.

sirquack wrote in post #17090094
I am kind of shocked the refurb did not come to you in pristine condition. I have purchased a lens and a body from the Canon refurb store and both were immaculate condition when I received them. I would maybe give them a call and let them know about the smudges and see if they will smudges and dust and see if they would be willing to send you out a new lens.
That is actually very surprising to me that you would not get it spotless.

Yea, I'm on the fence about this right now. I also found a small indentation/ dent on the zoom ring, so this lens is not quite in the "almost undistinguishable from new" condition that some people describe their refurbished lenses as.

That being said the issues I've uncovered so far seem to be cosmetic rather than functional. I'm inclined to test the lens out a bit and as long as there are no issues with IQ/ functionality, I might just keep it. But I'll definitely return/ exchange it if there are additional problems I uncover.

The lens is also showing as out of stock on Canon's website, so I'm also a bit concerned about how fast I'd be able to get an exchange, I might just give Canon a call anyways though just to see what they say.

That seems like a solid approach - at least then you would be on the record as having noted several issues early on. If the lens ends up having real problems, your early notification of concern might be helpful for you.

I've looked into refurb lenses a few times, but the savings of a couple hundred dollars only (on the lenses I was looking at) versus a brand new lens always gives me pause. Especially since I don't really know for sure what is replaced and what is simply tested and "within tolerance" on a refurb lens. For instance, I wonder if the refurb I get might have a focus motor that tests out okay, but actually only has about half its life left...

Hope it turns out well for you.

jsvphoto wrote in post #17091593
That seems like a solid approach - at least then you would be on the record as having noted several issues early on. If the lens ends up having real problems, your early notification of concern might be helpful for you.

I've looked into refurb lenses a few times, but the savings of a couple hundred dollars only (on the lenses I was looking at) versus a brand new lens always gives me pause. Especially since I don't really know for sure what is replaced and what is simply tested and "within tolerance" on a refurb lens. For instance, I wonder if the refurb I get might have a focus motor that tests out okay, but actually only has about half its life left...

Hope it turns out well for you.

Thanks, I decided to return to the lens. The lens was a bit soft wide open at 24mm, which doesn't seem consistent with most of the samples I've seen that show this lens actually being sharper at the wide end than the tele end. I also found a bit more dust actually inside the front lens element.

I got this lens during the ongoing 15% sale so it saved me quite a bit over going brand new, and some of these "issues" I might overlook if it weren't for the fact that this is a pretty pricey lens (even refurbished) and I was also planning on it being my main workhorse lens, so I really want a good copy. Might just go brand new, as I have to return it rather than exchange (cause the lens is out of stock).

Canon customer service was good, they even pay the return shipping (which I didn't think they did).

Ironically, I recently purchased a new 70-200 2.8 non-IS instead of buying a refurb, and I've had nothing but problems with it. Tomorrow it's taking it's 2nd trip to Canon service. Go figure, I guess!