Dust in a used 17-55 2.8; Dealbreaker?

Last week I purchased a used 17-55 2.8 off of Ebay from a seller with solid feedback. The ebay posting indicated that the lens was in "mint" condition, "as new" and as having no dust inside the lens.

After receiving the lens, I noticed that there are 2 dust specs inside the lens itself, one of which is pretty close to the center of the lens.

What to do? The seller has a return policy that pretty much dictates that I make a decision ASAP. Should I send it back or keep it? Purchase price was just shy of $850 including shipping, FWIW

Does the dust show up in images? I would have to guess not unless it's a dust-bunny sized dust ball.


If the lens performs otherwise returning it is un-necessary.


-F

If it bothers you, then return it. The seller should have indicated there was some dust. The 2 specks however will not affect the IQ. I had one and I should advise you that even if you eventually get one that has no dust in it, most likely that will not last. The dust will return. After Canon cleaned mine out twice at no charge (I had the warranty), the dust returned. I finally sold it. Enough is enough!

On the one hand, the seller misrepresented the item if they clearly stated 'there is no dust in this lens'.

On the other hand - every lens you own will eventually have some dust in it. I always clearly state what dust I see in a lens when selling it because I get the feeling some people think dust in a lens is uncommon or a big problem or something. I don't want hassles, so by stating the dust is in there up front I weed out purchasers that think there should never be dust in a lens.

I think the 17-55 suffers it's dust reputation mostly because the vents are in the front and the design of the lens makes dust on the front element very visible just looking at the front of it. To see the dust in most of my other lenses you have to take off both caps and look through the lens. But they pretty much all have some.

I've been trying to assess whether the dust is visible in the pictures. From what i can tell, it's not visible, but I haven't had great light yet.

Overall, it's the fact that it wasn't disclosed that bothers me. But if it doesn't result in image issues, why should I care?

it's normal to have dust in this lens. Most of them won't affect the IQ. even if you buy the new one in the future, it will eventually have dust in it.

If test photos show that the lens has excellent IQ and there are no other problems, perhaps you should contact the seller explaining the situation and ask if he would refund part of the price due to his error in not mentioning the dust. Even a return of $50 would make your deal exceptionally good.

any recommendations on the best way to assess whether the dust impacts IQ? pictures of something light? dark? solid background?

It may have been repositioned during shipment, and the seller was stating the truth.
To small specks of dust are just that.
They will most likely fall to the side, out of sight, over time.

Dust is undesirable though as it provides fungus with food on which to grow, Keep lens spotless, and protect from dust and moisture whenever possible.

If there's a visible residue on the glass around the specks, I would return it... it indicates the dust was exposed to moisture, and will most likely stay put.

blackhawk wrote in post #9693635
It may have been repositioned during shipment, and the seller was stating the truth.

good point - hadn't thought of that

mjsmn wrote in post #9693640
good point - hadn't thought of that

It's common even in new lens. Some lens also use packing material for the zoom mechanism that can break off during break-in.
This is common with the 70-200, this material is slightly larger than most dust, light tan-gray in color, and harmless.
It normally falls to the side in a few days.

http://www.pbase.com/r​cicala/1755_is_surgery

I've got more than 2 in mine and it doesn't affect IQ at ALL. Enjoy the lens, it rocks.

I've taken several shots this morning and can't see any sign of the dust in the pictures. Seeing the results, even with my poor subjects, I can see why this lens is so highly regarded.

Looks like I'm going to keep it