Notice: Caution Regarding Counterfeit Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II Lenses

[Maiaibing]

I blame not only criminal counterfeiters and greedy, stupid buyers but to some extent also CANON INC. for incidents like these.

Canon could and should do more to ensure (honest!) customers get the real thing.

1. Serial Number on lens barrel
not sure whether Canon puts one on EF 50/1.8 II. If yes, it makes counterfeiting more difficult: either the bad guys produce cheaply a run of lenses with all copies carrying the same serial # - much easier to be identify.

Hardly comes any easier than the photo Canon released? I know what I would look for, and its not a number somewhere.

2. Canon Date Code
as second factor of authenticity and valuable information to first buyer and to second-hand byuers, should be included on any genuine Canon EF, EF-S, AF-M lens.

If - a big if - people have a clue about this the counterfeiters will know even better how to replicate this.

3. Serial # and Lens Date Code in embedded lens chip firmware
should be incldued in lens chip. Camera body should show "error 99" or even preferrably "lens not recognized" upon attaching lens to body. That way, buyers could test immediately upon receipt of lens. If error shows up ... the problem

Yeah - lets kill all the Sigma / Tamron / Zeiss alternatives. :

4. Proper sealing on every genuine Canon camera and lens outer packaging
Why are original Canon boxes not sealed?

Hardly a measure against fakes?

Overall, your suggestions do not make much sense to me with regard to the problem we are facing with the fake 50mm f/1.8 lenses out there.

 

[AvTvM]

A. Canon is also very much responsible! Because they are not even implementing all of the 4 easy measured I have listed previously to protect their products against counterfeiting and their brand value and customer trust.

1. serial number on every product. prominently. non-removable.
2. date code on every product
3. chip + protective firmware in every product,
4. fully sealed packaging

Sales opportunity: all honest, duped customers have a 100% confirmed and immediate interest to buy a specific Canon product. But they have been disappointed by the experience of getting a counterfeit product and maybe no full refund or no refund at all. This is one of the very best sales situations you can get as a seller. All that's needed is a message "we sympathize with you", "we do everything to earn your trust" and "we have the pleasure to make you a *very special offer* to now get the REAL DEAL, a GENUINE Canon product. GUARANTEED. Available NOW, at any of our authorized Re-Sellers."

 

[AvTvM]

Overall, your suggestions do not make much sense to me with regard to the problem we are facing with the fake 50mm f/1.8 lenses out there.

They do.

How much easier is it to counterfeit a product without consecutive serial number on it, without second code etched/stamped/engraved, without chip/firmware protection, without sealed package ... compared to a product that has all of these measures in place?

How much easier is it to detect countrerfeit products with these measures in place?

How much easier is it, to give specific notice to customers and/or to handle notice/product recalls etc. with these measures implemented, rather than not present?

If you fail to see this, I cannot help you. Sorry.

 

[hbr]

Overall, your suggestions do not make much sense to me with regard to the problem we are facing with the fake 50mm f/1.8 lenses out there.

They do.

How much easier is it to counterfeit a product without consecutive serial number on it, without second code etched/stamped/engraved, without chip/firmware protection, without sealed package ... compared to a product that has all of these measures in place?

How much easier is it to detect countrerfeit products with these measures in place?

How much easier is it, to give specific notice to customers and/or to handle notice/product recalls etc. with these measures implemented, rather than not present?

If you fail to see this, I cannot help you. Sorry.

It seems to me that Canon offering a rebate to these customers would only encourage the counterfeiters, distributors and sellers. So let's buy up 1000 of these, turn them into Canon and get a genuine product in exchange at a reduced price. One could make a lot of money doing this and reselling the genuine product on ebay.

The one idea I do like is that Canon place a chip inside each product that would identify it if it were stolen and then taken to a pawn shop. I believe that most pawn shops have some type of rf scanners.

 

[Andrew Davies Photography]

Have to agree what on earth is the point of counterfeiting the cheapest possible lens which is already totally affordable to those who buy DSLRs anyway. Having owned a couple many moons ago - both broke within months so even the genuine ones are not exactly great !

Wedding Photographer North East & Yorkshire Northumberland & Wedding Photographer Cumbria

 

[hbr]

If you go to any Asian country you will find millions of counterfeit items, from fake Rolex watches, Louis Vuitton purses and fake CD's/DVDs. A week after Disney releases a movie there are millions of low quality copies being sold in the shops and by street vendors. The giveaway is the low prices, ($1000 Rolex selling for $150.00, for example). Usually you get what you pay for.
So even if the counterfeiter only makes a couple of dollars off of each item, that could amount to millions in profit for him.
The proper steps to take would be for the customer to take the item up with the seller to get his money back and report the seller to the proper authorities.

 

[AvTvM]

It seems to me that Canon offering a rebate to these customers would only encourage the counterfeiters, distributors and sellers. So let's buy up 1000 of these, turn them into Canon and get a genuine product in exchange at a reduced price. One could make a lot of money doing this and reselling the genuine product on ebay.

In case you did not notice: that's why I would limit such an offer to 1 copy of a given lens per customer.

But more important would be Canon stepping up its effort to protect their products against counterfeitng in the first place.

 

[hbr]

It seems to me that Canon offering a rebate to these customers would only encourage the counterfeiters, distributors and sellers. So let's buy up 1000 of these, turn them into Canon and get a genuine product in exchange at a reduced price. One could make a lot of money doing this and reselling the genuine product on ebay.

In case you did not notice: that's why I would limit such an offer to 1 copy of a given lens per customer.

But more important would be Canon stepping up its effort to protect their products against counterfeitng in the first place.

I fully understand your point. A nice gesture is a nice gesture, but

1) the sheer number of these knock-offs could be magnitudes higher than the legitimate items thus negating any profits Canon makes on the legitimate lenses.

2) Canon's customers that purchased their legitimate items from an authorized seller and paid the full price would feel ripped off and might leave Canon.

3) Does Canon offer the same rebates on all the knock-off batteries and battery chargers?

4) What happens when the items are no longer cheap lenses but expensive cameras and lenses?

Your idea would set a precedent that is unheard of. When an individual purchases an item from a non-authorized dealer so as not to have to pay the price that the authorized dealers are asking, he know the risk he is taking. It is that simple.

Again, you get what you pay for.

 

[rrcphoto]

It seems to me that Canon offering a rebate to these customers would only encourage the counterfeiters, distributors and sellers. So let's buy up 1000 of these, turn them into Canon and get a genuine product in exchange at a reduced price. One could make a lot of money doing this and reselling the genuine product on ebay.

In case you did not notice: that's why I would limit such an offer to 1 copy of a given lens per customer.

But more important would be Canon stepping up its effort to protect their products against counterfeitng in the first place.

Except the 50mm 1.8 II is no longer made.

So is a time machine in the AvTvM Universe™ as well?

Also serial numbers. I had to laugh at that. How is a consumer going to know if they duplicated a random serial number? buy 3 and check?

but yes.. stupid canon for creating the most successful mount in the history of photography that gets other companies attempting to illegally profit with counterfeit equipment.

I'm curious.. does the US federal reserve do this with counterfeit money? if so .. please hang on .. I'm busy I need to get printing.

 

[hbr]

So to save some money you purchase your ticket to a football game from a street vendor instead of an authorized ticket seller and when you arrive at the gate you find out that the ticket is fake. Is the team owner of the team that you are rooting for feel sorry for you and offer you a rebate on a legitimate ticket?

AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN!

 

[jolyonralph]

In answer to the questions about what Canon should do if someone unwittingly sends one in for repair - the answer is simple. Canon have no alternative but to keep and destroy the lens as it's illegal to knowingly send counterfeit items through the post.

On the plus side here's a fun trick for everyone:

If you see one of these fake lenses being sold on ebay, buy it. Then once you receive it report it to ebay as a counterfeit (with evidence, of course). Ebay's policies are quite strict on this. You will get your money refunded and you do NOT have to return the item (in fact, as mentioned above, it's illegal for you to even try).

So you'll get a fake 50mm lens for free.

Have a handful of counterfeit Transcend memory cards in the past that I ended up keeping because of this (although they were actually far too slow to be useful!)

 

[Loswr]

1. serial number on every product. prominently. non-removable.
2. date code on every product
3. chip + protective firmware in every product,
4. fully sealed packaging

LOL.

Yeah, counterfeiters can't print numbers on lenses. My 3 year old can put glue and stickers on cardboard boxes, so I suspect counterfeiters could figure that one out, too. As for 'protective chip + firmware', did you just suggest that Canon lock out all third-party lenses to prevent them from functioning on Canon bodies? Regardless, YN reverse-engineered Canon's RT protocols and could almost certainly do the same for lens firmware. The guts of the lens in question are likely YN-made, but in any case unless Canon locks out all 3rd party lenses it and other counterfeits would work, and how many would notice something else in the EXIF, especially if it showed up as a Cańon lens?).

 

[AvTvM]

Except the 50mm 1.8 II is no longer made.

So is a time machine in the AvTvM Universe™ as well?

Also serial numbers. I had to laugh at that. How is a consumer going to know if they duplicated a random serial number? buy 3 and check?

In case you have not noticed, Mr. Smartass: this warning and thread is about EF 50/1.8 II ... in Canon Universe, not mine. http://www.canonrumors.com/service-notice-caution-regarding-counterfeit-canon-ef-50mm-f1-8-ii-lenses/


With a unique serial number on every lens, counterfeiters have 2 choices:
a) make a batch run of their warez, all having the same serial number
b) invest more time and money to put unique serial numbers on each copy (=a deterring factor)

When the first counterfeit products appear, Canon can provide a more specific warning notice "affected serial # range from x to y ... or "no serial number on lens" ... etc. ... that (potential) buyers can use to check authenticity of the product they bought or are about to buy.

Way more helpful than solely relying on counterfeiters mistake of missing space between CANON _ INC. What happens, if the bad guys now correct that one last mistake on their production run?

All of the 4 measures I listed used in combination would make it extremely more difficult to counterfeit Canon products without much of an increase in production cost [which could be passed on to customers fully or pratly]. Would be well worth it.

 

[AvTvM]

Yeah, counterfeiters can't print numbers on lenses. My 3 year old can put glue and stickers on cardboard boxes, so I suspect counterfeiters could figure that one out, too. As for 'protective chip + firmware', did you just suggest that Canon lock out all third-party lenses to prevent them from functioning on Canon bodies? Regardless, YN reverse-engineered Canon's RT protocols and could almost certainly do the same for lens firmware. The guts of the lens in question are likely YN-made, but in any case unless Canon locks out all 3rd party lenses it and other counterfeits would work, and how many would notice something else in the EXIF, especially if it showed up as a Cańon lens?).

Of course good counterfeiters can counterfeit also those 4 items I mention. BUT combo of all 4 makes it a hell of a lot more difficult.

And Canon could determine much more easily if the scam involves one (or more) of their own suppliers / partners along the entire supply chain and the entire sales/logistics chain.

e.g. it makes a difference, whether there are NO s/Ns on the counterfeit products or an invalid range or an already used range of S/Ns or if all copis found bear the same S/N. That's why banknotes DO carry serial numbers. Unless the notes are from your monopoly game set ..

 

[hbr]

The best way is still to purchase your items from an authorized Canon dealer. You know that they are purchasing directly from Canon. Also people trying to save a few dollars can easily get themselves in trouble. I wouldn't pay several thousand dollars for a top of the line camera and try to save twenty or thirty dollars on cheap batteries and chargers. Yet, I see it happening all the time.

 

[Steve Balcombe]

1. serial number on every product. prominently. non-removable.

Every Canon lens I've owned has a serial number on the body or mount, engraved/laser etched, not printed. (I agree it would be helpful if they were easier to read.)

2. date code on every product

What would that achieve? Just copy a date from one genuine lens.

3. chip + protective firmware in every product,

Actually you previously said: "3. Serial # and Lens Date Code in embedded lens chip firmware".
The serial number *is* embedded in the firmware. I haven't checked if this is true for every model, but I've seen it many times in EXIF data.
The date code would be pointless.

4. fully sealed packaging

Good idea, they probably don't have Sellotape in China.

 

[Don Haines]

Regardless, YN reverse-engineered Canon's RT protocols and could almost certainly do the same for lens firmware.

My suspicion is more that YN bought the latest version of the Camera/Lens data communications protocol manual from Canon. It is in Canon's best interest that their bodies work as well as possible with third party lenses, so it makes sense that they would make the manual(s) available.

 

[slclick]

Ok, I get it, not a good idea for Canon to offer/give/trade anything.

But I still think they need a Golden Ticket contest and if you win make sure you don't give your 50L IS to Slugworth.

 

[AvTvM]

1. serial number on every product. prominently. non-removable.

Every Canon lens I've owned has a serial number on the body or mount, engraved/laser etched, not printed. (I agree it would be helpful if they were easier to read.)

2. date code on every product

What would that achieve? Just copy a date from one genuine lens.

3. chip + protective firmware in every product,

Actually you previously said: "3. Serial # and Lens Date Code in embedded lens chip firmware".
The serial number *is* embedded in the firmware. I haven't checked if this is true for every model, but I've seen it many times in EXIF data.
The date code would be pointless.

4. fully sealed packaging

Good idea, they probably don't have Sellotape in China.

2 unique identifiers per copy = similar to 2 factor authorization = makes it harder to counterfeit. Plus the date code on lenses [should also go on cameras please!] is/was REALLY useful for informed customers, both new and even more so for 2nd hand lens transactions (buy & sell).

Counterfeiters then have the choice to
1) put nothing on lens, no S/N, no Date Code = easiest and cheapest to produce, but easily identified as fake
2) put the same 2 numbers on every lens = easy and cheap to produce, but warning notice will be very specific
3) put 2 unique numbers/codes on every copy they make = more effort, time, money. Also: WHAT numbers and codes to chose? Makes it easier to provide specific warning to potential buyers.

Just think if you were trying to counterfeit Canon lenses, which approach would you chose? What are pros and cons ... if you imagine you are Canon, do the same, just think about exact opposite.

S/N in firmware: yes for newer lenses. Don't know if all or not. No idea for 50/1.8 II ... don't have one in possession. But there are reports about S/N in EXIF being "wiped" = only zeroes ...


PS: if it were useless, why do most serious currencies have unique serial numbers on every banknote? Even the pretty weakly counterfeit protected US dollar notes ... https://www.moneyfactory.gov/resources/serialnumbers.html

PPS: no, neither Neuro nor his daughter/s could easily counterfeit all 4 items combined i listed. Well Neuro just might, he is a resourceful type ... ;D

 

[Loswr]

Yeah, counterfeiters can't print numbers on lenses. My 3 year old can put glue and stickers on cardboard boxes, so I suspect counterfeiters could figure that one out, too. As for 'protective chip + firmware', did you just suggest that Canon lock out all third-party lenses to prevent them from functioning on Canon bodies? Regardless, YN reverse-engineered Canon's RT protocols and could almost certainly do the same for lens firmware. The guts of the lens in question are likely YN-made, but in any case unless Canon locks out all 3rd party lenses it and other counterfeits would work, and how many would notice something else in the EXIF, especially if it showed up as a Cańon lens?).

Of course good counterfeiters can counterfeit also those 4 items I mention. BUT combo of all 4 makes it a hell of a lot more difficult.

And Canon could determine much more easily if the scam involves one (or more) of their own suppliers / partners along the entire supply chain and the entire sales/logistics chain.

e.g. it makes a difference, whether there are NO s/Ns on the counterfeit products or an invalid range or an already used range of S/Ns or if all copis found bear the same S/N. That's why banknotes DO carry serial numbers. Unless the notes are from your monopoly game set ..

2 unique identifiers per copy = similar to 2 factor authorization = makes it harder to counterfeit. Plus the date code on lenses [should also go on cameras please!] is/was REALLY useful for informed customers, both new and even more so for 2nd hand lens transactions (buy & sell).

Counterfeiters then have the choice to
1) put nothing on lens, no S/N, no Date Code = easiest and cheapest to produce, but easily identified as fake
2) put the same 2 numbers on every lens = easy and cheap to produce, but warning notice will be very specific
3) put 2 unique numbers/codes on every copy they make = more effort, time, money. Also: WHAT numbers and codes to chose? Makes it easier to provide specific warning to potential buyers.

We do understand that logic isn't your forte, but please try to put in a little thought before you post, mmmmkay?

If one is easy, all four are only marginally more difficult, if that.

So I'm a counterfeiter, I buy one legit lens then use that serial number and increment up from there. Then, the counterfeit lenses would have an appropriate, unique serial number and there would be just one counterfeit copy and just one Canon OEM copy of each serial number. Not going to set off red flags that way, nor would Canon releasing a list of affected S/N's help.

How exactly would a date code help? Canon doesn't use them anymore, anyway. A date code is a unique identifier? Do you even understand the term, 'unique identifier'? It bears repeating: please try to put in a little thought before you post, mmmmkay?

BTW, you never did answer my question... As for 'protective chip + firmware', did you just suggest that Canon lock out all third-party lenses to prevent them from functioning on Canon bodies?