IS System Repaired

How repairable is the IS system in a lens? I just sent my 17-55 off to be repaired as my camera was giving me the "Err 01" message constantly when it was attached, and the image was very jumpy during focusing.

Are you asking if they will be able to fix/replace the IS system? If so, the answer is yes it can be fixed.

DDCSD wrote in post #9808852
Are you asking if they will be able to fix/replace the IS system? If so, the answer is yes it can be fixed.

Yes, that's basically what I'm asking. I purchased the lens used from Adorama a month ago, and just sent it in to be repaired yesterday. I don't think they have another used 17-55 to replace it with, so I'm assuming they'll try to repair it.

eaglefan wrote in post #9808875
Yes, that's basically what I'm asking. I purchased the lens used from Adorama a month ago, and just sent it in to be repaired yesterday. I don't think they have another used 17-55 to replace it with, so I'm assuming they'll try to repair it.

It's a fairly routine repair. You seem to hear of the IS going out in a fair number of 17-55's.

DDCSD wrote in post #9810421
It's a fairly routine repair. You seem to hear of the IS going out in a fair number of 17-55's.

The main reason why I sent it in was because I was routinely receiving the "Err 01 Communication between the camera and lens is faulty. Clean the lens contacts" message, and I narrowed it down to that lens. Do you know if that could be related to an IS problem?

DDCSD wrote in post #9810421
It's a fairly routine repair. You seem to hear of the IS going out in a fair number of 17-55's.

Can you back that up with statistics? Hey, I'm just askin' MAYBE there's a "fair number" of 'em out there in use, too

eaglefan wrote in post #9810480
The main reason why I sent it in was because I was routinely receiving the "Err 01 Communication between the camera and lens is faulty. Clean the lens contacts" message, and I narrowed it down to that lens. Do you know if that could be related to an IS problem?

I honestly have absolutely no idea.

440roadrunner wrote in post #9810482
Can you back that up with statistics? Hey, I'm just askin' MAYBE there's a "fair number" of 'em out there in use, too

Nope, and only Canon knows the actual fail rate. Why would I have to back up what I say that I've heard with statistics? I didn't make a claim that a high percentage of 17-55 have IS failures. I simply said that you hear about it fairly often. Yes there are a lot of them out there. I just know that I've read quite a few posts here on POTN about the IS failing on a 17-55 IS. I've read a lot more about the 17-55 IS failing than I have of all other lenses' IS failing.

That equates to a "fair number" to me, regardless of actual failure rate. I didn't say it was a bad lens. Just saying that the IS does fail on occasion and that it should be a fairly routine repair for someone that repairs lenses.

DDCSD wrote in post #9810704
I honestly have absolutely no idea.

Why would I have to back up what I say that I've heard with statistics? I didn't make a claim that a high percentage of 17-55 have IS failures. I simply said that you hear about it fairly often. Yes there are a lot of them out there.

That equates to a "fair number" to me, regardless of actual failure rate. I didn't say it was a bad lens. Just saying that the IS does fail on occasion and that it should be a fairly routine repair for someone that repairs lenses.

Well, no, you did NOT say --in my mind-- that these lenses "fail on occasion"

What you put in my mind is that BY MAKING THE ORIGINAL STATEMENT is that in your opinion these lenses have a high failure rate--higher than should be expected, or you would not have mentioned it.

I was merely asking if you CAN back this up, or whether it was something you "just thought". Since I own one, I'm interested, because I have NOT "heard" about this being a problem with this lens.

440roadrunner wrote in post #9815718
I was merely asking if you CAN back this up, or whether it was something you "just thought". Since I own one, I'm interested, because I have NOT "heard" about this being a problem with this lens.

This isn't from Canon, but it's a very good source:

http://www.lensrentals​.com …11.01/lens-repair-data-35

The IS in my 17-55 was repaired about 3 months ago. I never thought it worked right but I didn't use it all that much. I actually had to send mine back because something was out of adjustment inside causing it to front focus terribly. When the invoice came back it said that they replaced/repaired the IS system.

So actually my 17-55 had 2 problems. Don't know how many have had 2 problems at once, but I have read other 17-55 "IS" problems on this forum so I wasn't suprised

i had bought a brand new 17-55 and used it for a few months and in the short time i owned it i had no issues.

although i did read about that particular lens having IS issues

440roadrunner wrote in post #9815718
Well, no, you did NOT say --in my mind-- that these lenses "fail on occasion"

What you put in my mind is that BY MAKING THE ORIGINAL STATEMENT is that in your opinion these lenses have a high failure rate--higher than should be expected, or you would not have mentioned it.

I was merely asking if you CAN back this up, or whether it was something you "just thought". Since I own one, I'm interested, because I have NOT "heard" about this being a problem with this lens.

Here is what I said.

DDCSD wrote in post #9810421
It's a fairly routine repair. You seem to hear of the IS going out in a fair number of 17-55's.

I never meant to insinuate that the 17-55 IS has a high failure rate. I simply meant it to mean that people that repair Canon lenses have probably replaced the IS unit in a 17-55 IS and that it isn't a major repair.

440roadrunner wrote in post #9810482
Can you back that up with statistics? Hey, I'm just askin' MAYBE there's a "fair number" of 'em out there in use, too

My statistics:

My 17-55 has been aback to Canon for repair six times. AF failures, IS failures.

440roadrunner wrote in post #9815718
Well, no, you did NOT say --in my mind-- that these lenses "fail on occasion"

What you put in my mind is that BY MAKING THE ORIGINAL STATEMENT is that in your opinion these lenses have a high failure rate--higher than should be expected, or you would not have mentioned it.

I was merely asking if you CAN back this up, or whether it was something you "just thought". Since I own one, I'm interested, because I have NOT "heard" about this being a problem with this lens.

Someone a little cranky today?

SMP_Homer wrote in post #9815897
This isn't from Canon, but it's a very good source:

http://www.lensrentals​.com …11.01/lens-repair-data-35

Thanks for the link, it was very interesting.