August 27, 2014, 07:04:37 PM

Author Topic: New or Refurbished Lens?  (Read 7070 times)

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3906
    • View Profile
    • http://dylannguyen.smugmug.com/browse
Re: New or Refurbished Lens?
« Reply #15 on: April 05, 2013, 12:31:35 AM »
I might be the only one in this post will never buy refur. For couple hundred less, I would go for new. Otherwise, X-mas seems to be the best time to buy NEW from authorized dealers. I got mine 70-200 f2.8 IS II from B&H NEW for $1974 shipped ;D
Body: 1DX -- 5D III
Zoom: 24-70L II -- 70-200L f2.8 IS II
Prime: 40mm -- 85L II -- 135L -- 400L f2.8 IS II

RGF

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1264
  • How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
    • View Profile
Re: New or Refurbished Lens?
« Reply #16 on: April 05, 2013, 01:12:20 AM »
I occasionally buy refurbs.  Mostly when I can find them and I don't the lens in a hurry.

The last lens I got, 100-400 zoom, came with case and lens hood but not box.  Previous lens have had box marked refurbished (but this one was purchased through B&H).

JPAZ

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 544
  • If only I knew what I was doing.....
    • View Profile
Re: New or Refurbished Lens?
« Reply #17 on: April 05, 2013, 01:16:12 AM »
I just got a 100-400 refurb.  Arrived today.  Date code is October 2012.  It is pristine.  Even the carrying strap looks new.  The only difference I can tell is no original box (actually arrived in better packing than I've seen from other vendors with "new" lenses) and no warranty card.  I'll give it a thorough workout this weekend but just playing around with natural light indoors at night, seems fine (shot cabinet hardware with and without IS and looks awfully good at 400 f6.3).

Anyone find and purchase an extended warranty for a refurb lens?  I once had a malfunctioning zoom repaired that was 6 yrs old (got a Mack 7 yr warranty when I purchased it) and it worked out well.  It is not clear to me that this type of warranty is available for a factory-refurbished product.
5d Mkiii; Eos-M; too many lenses; 430 EXii and a whole lot of stuff

expatinasia

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 901
    • View Profile
Re: New or Refurbished Lens?
« Reply #18 on: April 05, 2013, 01:41:03 AM »
I might be the only one in this post will never buy refur. For couple hundred less, I would go for new.

+1 I agree with you. If the savings were greater then maybe, but I would much prefer new.
1D X + backup + different L lenses etc.

Rienzphotoz

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3322
  • Peace unto all ye Canon, Nikon & Sony shooters
    • View Profile
Re: New or Refurbished Lens?
« Reply #19 on: April 05, 2013, 03:36:02 AM »
All refurbished items get checked over by the manufacturer by hand, inspected very thoroughly, diagnosed, and calibrated by experienced technicians, and could therefore turn out to be more dependable than a new item - which will only have been checked by a process of systematic quality control protocol i.e. by random sampling as it comes off the conveyor belt.
Canon 5DMK3 70D | Nikon D610 | Sony a7 a6000 | RX100M3 | 16-35/2.8LII | 70-200/2.8LISII | 100/2.8LIS | 100-400LIS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 600EX-RTx2 | ST-E3-RT | 24/3.5 T-S | 10-18/4 OSS 16-50 | 24-70/4OSS | 55/1.8 | 55-210 OSS | 70-200/4 OSS | 28-300VR | HVL-F43M | GoPro Black 3+ & DJI Phantom

johnb

  • SX50 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: New or Refurbished Lens?
« Reply #20 on: April 05, 2013, 03:54:43 AM »
It sounds as if arrangements in the States are very different from arrangements in the UK. Here a company called Digital River (based, I believe, in the Netherlands) sells on behalf of Canon via eBay. I've bought lots of things from them over the years, two cameras, three printers, and, more relevant to the OP, a 100mm 2.8L IS macro. They never offer a full range of Canon equipment. Items vary and the selection seems arbitrary, though items that are nearing their 'sell-buy' date, like the 5D Mark 2 and the 7D have appeared in quantities at very much reduced prices over the past few months (5D Mk 2 body only £999 at one point, 7D body only £699 when it's on).

Until recently everything was sold on an auction basis. They now seem to have gone over largely to 'buy it now' sales. Everything I bought came in original Canon packaging, not marked 'refurbished' and carried a one year UK Canon guarantee, which is the same cover as you get in the UK if you buy new. Everything that I have bought has been completely unmarked and has functioned perfectly. The 100mm came in all the original packaging, no 'refurbished' marking, appeared to be brand new, had lens & body caps, lens hood and pouch. I bought it about three months after that lens was released and paid more than £150 less than the cheapest available elsewhere, including on the net, at that time. I would be only too happy to buy another lens from them, though they don't seem at present to be offering as many as they once did.

Googling Canon eBay store will get you through to it.  And, no, I don't work for Canon or their eBay store!

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3906
    • View Profile
    • http://dylannguyen.smugmug.com/browse
Re: New or Refurbished Lens?
« Reply #21 on: April 05, 2013, 06:45:11 PM »
All refurbished items get checked over by the manufacturer by hand, inspected very thoroughly, diagnosed, and calibrated by experienced technicians, and could therefore turn out to be more dependable than a new item - which will only have been checked by a process of systematic quality control protocol i.e. by random sampling as it comes off the conveyor belt.

I'm with MFG team for 11yrs and now 3yrs in R&D. NO - refur items DO NOT get special treatment.

1. Most big companies would just replace defective part(s) or entile PCB inside the lens. They don't want a tech to spend too much time in trouble shooting(time = $$$, replace defective part(s) is cheaper)

2. Once the defective part(s) is replaced, the lens will be tested under "Functional Level Test", NOT same level as manufacture test(much less).

Most of these steps are done by one tech. NO Q.A involved. All data get recorded under company system for their record: failures, part(s) replaced & repaired, and test values. Logistic team will take over once the lens is repaired.

You said "which will only have been checked by a process of systematic quality control protocol i.e. by random sampling as it comes off the conveyor belt" 100% NOT TRUE in manufacture. I think you prefer to SQL Inspection. SQL is applied ONLY if Canon has 3rd party(sub-contract manufacture) build their gear from start(WP) to finish good(FG). I DO NOT believe Canon has CM(s) build their high-end DSLR products.

Bottom line is: DO NOT expect more when you pay less.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2013, 07:35:55 PM by Dylan777 »
Body: 1DX -- 5D III
Zoom: 24-70L II -- 70-200L f2.8 IS II
Prime: 40mm -- 85L II -- 135L -- 400L f2.8 IS II

JPAZ

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 544
  • If only I knew what I was doing.....
    • View Profile
Re: New or Refurbished Lens?
« Reply #22 on: April 06, 2013, 12:53:03 PM »
"I'm with MFG team for 11yrs and now 3yrs in R&D. NO - refur items DO NOT get special treatment.".......


So, Dylan777, does that mean, in your opinion, that refurbs are not a great idea?  It makes inherent sense that you don't pay less and get more.  But is the "less" simply a shorter warranty or is the "less"  a lessor product?  In other words( assuming that whatever quality control process is used when a lens is manufactured and sold as new) would you expect a refurb to be better, same, or worse than a new product in terms of performance and reliability?

5d Mkiii; Eos-M; too many lenses; 430 EXii and a whole lot of stuff

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3906
    • View Profile
    • http://dylannguyen.smugmug.com/browse
Re: New or Refurbished Lens?
« Reply #23 on: April 07, 2013, 12:57:48 AM »
"I'm with MFG team for 11yrs and now 3yrs in R&D. NO - refur items DO NOT get special treatment.".......


So, Dylan777, does that mean, in your opinion, that refurbs are not a great idea?  It makes inherent sense that you don't pay less and get more.  But is the "less" simply a shorter warranty or is the "less"  a lessor product?  In other words( assuming that whatever quality control process is used when a lens is manufactured and sold as new) would you expect a refurb to be better, same, or worse than a new product in terms of performance and reliability?

In my opinion, refurs are never better than new or same as new.

Why?
1. Let say you buy a brand new 24-70 f2.8 II lens. 
2. 3days later, the lens goes bad, exp. AF is stop working due to bad components on PCB(digital SMT parts)
3. You bring your lens back to authourized seller(exp. B&H) and demand for new lens.
4. B&H gives you new lens and returns defected lens to nearest Canon service center(not Canon manufacture in Japan)
5. Canon Tech. reads failure notes or defect codes, in this case AF is stop working
6. The Tech. now knows he needs new PCB to fix AF issue. New PCB is now requested based on RMA #.

This is where we can draw the line btw refur and new.
7. In order for the tech to get to PCB, he needs to remove many hardware, sub-components, cables, O-rings, gaskets, glasses etc....

8. The tech. will use Canon assembly or repair instruction to do the tasks above

NOTE: Let me ask you this question. To have the PCB replaced, would you prefer to have a assembler, who works for Canon in Japan Lens factory, been building this lens everydays?  OR do you prefer this Canon USA Tech who got trained onine or through 100 pages of repair instruction provided by Canon R&D group in Japan(never touch the lens before)? For me, I'll take assembler in Japan factory to replace the PCB over the USA tech in service center.

9. Once PCB is replaced, the tech will put the lens to AF "Functional Test Level" to confirm the original issue is no longer there. If the lens passed Canon AF spec test, then it goes to refur stock ready for sale. Keep in mind, Canon just added more labor hrs, parts, box, and transportation fees to this lens and it will be sold for less than original.

Do you think this lens now is good as new? My quick answer is NO. Why? how do I know that lens is completely sealed when the original gasket already been compressed, removed and reused by the USA Tech? There are much more to it...... ;)

 



« Last Edit: April 07, 2013, 01:12:03 AM by Dylan777 »
Body: 1DX -- 5D III
Zoom: 24-70L II -- 70-200L f2.8 IS II
Prime: 40mm -- 85L II -- 135L -- 400L f2.8 IS II

pgsdeepak

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
    • My Flickr Page
Re: New or Refurbished Lens?
« Reply #24 on: April 07, 2013, 11:40:51 PM »
Thanks Dylan777 for the insight. I got a 70-300MM L last week, refurbished. It was cheaper by USD 250. Do you think it is worth the money getting the refurb?
Cosmetically, the lens look clean and just like a new one. I took some pictures with, initially I was not really happy, but as I got used to it over the past 2-3 days, the results started getting better. Right now I only have a EOS 40D to play with. I assume, it will be even better on a 5D MIII.
Below is my flickr link for some of the sample photos.
Can someone check and let me know your opinion on whether the lens is a keeper? I did not have a lot of experiences with Canon L lenses until very recently, so not very sure if the lens I got is good enough (to my eyes the pictures are great now. As I get used to it, not sure if my impression will change). If there is any problem, I still have a week to return the lens. So trying everything to make sure the lens it good :)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/98679084@N00/sets/72157633193265030/
-pgsdeepak-
5D Mark III, 40D, 24-105L, 17-40 L, 100mm Macro, 70-300mm L IS USM

kennephoto

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 305
    • View Profile
Re: New or Refurbished Lens?
« Reply #25 on: April 08, 2013, 12:32:21 AM »
Refurb doesn't even mean that the item was previously damaged or not functioning properly. Refurb is still just a loose term theres no concrete definition unless the seller states a reason for refurb. I buy refurb electronics all the time and have no issues. I haven't bought a refurb lens yet because canon always runs out on the ones I'd want. Why not save money if you can, heck used is good too if you check it out. I always check lensrentals.com for used stuff because every time I rent from them it's clean and always a sharp lens.
Canon 5d Mark II Canon 1D classic EOSM 20-35 2.8L 50 1.2L 135 2.0L 80-200 2.8L 40 Pancake and a bunch of old film cameras

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3906
    • View Profile
    • http://dylannguyen.smugmug.com/browse
Re: New or Refurbished Lens?
« Reply #26 on: April 08, 2013, 09:29:36 AM »
Thanks Dylan777 for the insight. I got a 70-300MM L last week, refurbished. It was cheaper by USD 250. Do you think it is worth the money getting the refurb?
Cosmetically, the lens look clean and just like a new one. I took some pictures with, initially I was not really happy, but as I got used to it over the past 2-3 days, the results started getting better. Right now I only have a EOS 40D to play with. I assume, it will be even better on a 5D MIII.
Below is my flickr link for some of the sample photos.
Can someone check and let me know your opinion on whether the lens is a keeper? I did not have a lot of experiences with Canon L lenses until very recently, so not very sure if the lens I got is good enough (to my eyes the pictures are great now. As I get used to it, not sure if my impression will change). If there is any problem, I still have a week to return the lens. So trying everything to make sure the lens it good :)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/98679084@N00/sets/72157633193265030/

I simply don't buy refurs at all. I usually wait x-mas time when Canon & auth. sellers both offer rebates on new lenses.($300 - $400 in saving)

AGAIN...that just me. I can't speak for everone else. Others willing to pay $3-$4 thousand in gear from unauthourized dealers(Ebay Sellers) as long they save $300-$500. Some purchases came with missing accessories etc.... :-\

Are you happy with the saving and how the lens performs?
Body: 1DX -- 5D III
Zoom: 24-70L II -- 70-200L f2.8 IS II
Prime: 40mm -- 85L II -- 135L -- 400L f2.8 IS II

kennephoto

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 305
    • View Profile
Re: New or Refurbished Lens?
« Reply #27 on: April 08, 2013, 11:13:49 AM »
If you wanna buy new, used, or refurb just do some homework and you can save money either way.
Canon 5d Mark II Canon 1D classic EOSM 20-35 2.8L 50 1.2L 135 2.0L 80-200 2.8L 40 Pancake and a bunch of old film cameras

Rienzphotoz

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3322
  • Peace unto all ye Canon, Nikon & Sony shooters
    • View Profile
Re: New or Refurbished Lens?
« Reply #28 on: April 08, 2013, 03:30:53 PM »
All refurbished items get checked over by the manufacturer by hand, inspected very thoroughly, diagnosed, and calibrated by experienced technicians, and could therefore turn out to be more dependable than a new item - which will only have been checked by a process of systematic quality control protocol i.e. by random sampling as it comes off the conveyor belt.

I'm with MFG team for 11yrs and now 3yrs in R&D. NO - refur items DO NOT get special treatment.

1. Most big companies would just replace defective part(s) or entile PCB inside the lens. They don't want a tech to spend too much time in trouble shooting(time = $$$, replace defective part(s) is cheaper)

2. Once the defective part(s) is replaced, the lens will be tested under "Functional Level Test", NOT same level as manufacture test(much less).

Most of these steps are done by one tech. NO Q.A involved. All data get recorded under company system for their record: failures, part(s) replaced & repaired, and test values. Logistic team will take over once the lens is repaired.

You said "which will only have been checked by a process of systematic quality control protocol i.e. by random sampling as it comes off the conveyor belt" 100% NOT TRUE in manufacture. I think you prefer to SQL Inspection. SQL is applied ONLY if Canon has 3rd party(sub-contract manufacture) build their gear from start(WP) to finish good(FG). I DO NOT believe Canon has CM(s) build their high-end DSLR products.

Bottom line is: DO NOT expect more when you pay less.
I am with an offshore & onshore drilling rig and other related equipment provider ... as a part of my job I have to conduct internal audits for the refurbished items our company provides, (offering discounted prices worth a few hundred dollars to several hundred thousand dollars). Every refurbished item we sell gets thoroughly checked both by our technicians, engineers & quality control team. I believe Canon & Nikon do something similar, if not same. Also my above post is actually a statement clearly displayed by Adorama on their website ... I have also bought refurbished items, all of which worked and continue to work without fail ... whereas several brand new items I had in the past conked off or developed problems but never with a refurbished item ... so from my experience I have reason to believe Adorama and I whole heartedly endorse refurbished items, especially Canon or Nikon refurbs.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2013, 03:51:44 PM by Rienzphotoz »
Canon 5DMK3 70D | Nikon D610 | Sony a7 a6000 | RX100M3 | 16-35/2.8LII | 70-200/2.8LISII | 100/2.8LIS | 100-400LIS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 600EX-RTx2 | ST-E3-RT | 24/3.5 T-S | 10-18/4 OSS 16-50 | 24-70/4OSS | 55/1.8 | 55-210 OSS | 70-200/4 OSS | 28-300VR | HVL-F43M | GoPro Black 3+ & DJI Phantom

pgsdeepak

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
    • My Flickr Page
Re: New or Refurbished Lens?
« Reply #29 on: April 08, 2013, 03:38:58 PM »
The lens came good. From outside, it looks just as new. I took some Zoo photos and I really liked the result. Initially I was finding it hard to justify replacing my 70-300 Non L with the L (I still have the non-L, trying to sell). But after spending some quality time with the lens, I got my justification. The lens is very sharp, period.

Here are some pictures. PLease share your opinion.

More pics at
http://www.flickr.com/photos/98679084@N00/sets/72157633193265030/
-pgsdeepak-
5D Mark III, 40D, 24-105L, 17-40 L, 100mm Macro, 70-300mm L IS USM