Extended Warrenty on 400 5.6L?

So I am finally purchasing the Canon 400mm f5.6L USM.
I was wondering if I should buy the extended warranty. On B&H their 3-year package is $132.99 and on Adorama there 3-year package is $39.95. That seems like quite a bit of a deference between the two companies; maby even too good to be true?

B&H goes through N.E.W. and Adorama through MACK. I read a few reviews on the MACK company and a lot of them said that MACK has problems with repairing items and their customer service is really bad.
I didnt find anything about NEW.

Most of my lens purchases I have gone through a store in my area and havnt had to deal with this. The local store doesnt normally carry the 400 5.6 and they said it would take 2weeks to get in so I decided to go online.

If anyone has any thoughts or experience on these two companies much appreciated.

-BB

I don't see any of my lenses breaking any soon. I don't believe in paying for those extended warranties. If something does go bad out of the blue, I'll just send it in to Canon and eat the fees.

BirdBoy wrote in post #10832170
So I am finally purchasing the Canon 400mm f5.6L USM.
I was wondering if I should buy the extended warranty. On B&H their 3-year package is $132.99 and on Adorama there 3-year package is $39.95. That seems like quite a bit of a deference between the two companies; maby even too good to be true?

B&H goes through N.E.W. and Adorama through MACK. I read a few reviews on the MACK company and a lot of them said that MACK has problems with repairing items and their customer service is really bad.
I didnt find anything about NEW.

Most of my lens purchases I have gone through a store in my area and havnt had to deal with this. The local store doesnt normally carry the 400 5.6 and they said it would take 2weeks to get in so I decided to go online.

If anyone has any thoughts or experience on these two companies much appreciated.

-BB

You aren't really comparing like with like. I think the N.E.W. policy you are looking at gives you accidental damage coverage, as against the Mack you've highlighted which is just an extension of the manufacturer warranty.
A better comparison would be the Mack Diamond, but looking at the Mack website it seems to me you would also be getting more coverage for less money!

There is another difference; if you need to claim on the Mack warranty you contact Mack directly, and you will be put in touch with a local service facility close to you (even overseas). But I think (& you need to check this) N.E.W. operates more as a call center.

You can visit www.mackcam.com for more in-depth details on their individual programs, and it is also worth you taking a note of the contact details of Desiree, the Customer Relations Supervisor for Mack; she can answer any specific questions regarding the warranties and can be reached via email at elpdesk@mackcam.com

BirdBoy wrote in post #10832170
So I am finally purchasing the Canon 400mm f5.6L USM.
I was wondering if I should buy the extended warranty. On B&H their 3-year package is $132.99 and on Adorama there 3-year package is $39.95. That seems like quite a bit of a deference between the two companies; maby even too good to be true?

B&H goes through N.E.W. and Adorama through MACK. I read a few reviews on the MACK company and a lot of them said that MACK has problems with repairing items and their customer service is really bad.
I didnt find anything about NEW.

Most of my lens purchases I have gone through a store in my area and havnt had to deal with this. The local store doesnt normally carry the 400 5.6 and they said it would take 2weeks to get in so I decided to go online.



If anyone has any thoughts or experience on these two companies much appreciated.

-BB

Typically, a lens is a lemon right out of the box and is covered by Canon for the 1st year, or it works for years to come. Buying an extended warranty is throwing money down the drain.