Canon 24-70 F2.8 MK2 woes

vulcan2912

vulcan2912

Messages
2,223
Name
Gary
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi

Well,after much anticipation I received my new lens earlier in the week.When I get a new lens I normally just walk outside a take a few images and have a look on the back screen and if it looks ok that's good enough for me.I did the same as usual with the new 24-70 but something didn't look quite right with the images.I put it down to poor lighting,handholding without the help of IS etc.
However, I decided to test the lens properly this morning just to make sure.I'm glad I did because I found the right hand side of the images to be very poorTotally gutted and the lens is now on it's way back to HDEW for a refund.

It's the first time I have had a duffer and it leaves a bit of a horrible taste in the mouth,especially on such an expensive piece of glass.I'm now stuck in the dilema of trying another one or just going back to a trusty old 24-105L.I was sucked in by all the reports of sharpness across the frame at F2.8.
There seems to be more and more reports coming from people with less than positive experiences with this new lens.

24mm F2.8-manual focus using live view and full mag.Both ends of the bungalow are the same distance from the camera(approx 35feet).
i-Sgq8Q45-XL.jpg


Crop each side
i-Wwb3NLf-X3.jpg


Things don't get a great deal better at F5.6
i-BGbvNFn-XL.jpg


i-VwMzpMR-X3.jpg


Gary
 
Lens misalignment - it happens. Personally I might have been tempted to get it calibrated to the body under warranty, but I can understand returning it.

Everyone I know that has one thinks that it's a stellar lens - expensive but brilliant.
 
This makes me nervous as is just splashed out on a new lens -though not this one. I didn't realise you'd get problems in this price range.

When I look at that top picture, the two sides of the bungalow don't actually look equi-distant to me, and I can't really tell because of the summer house. Are you sure they are? Sorry if I'm asking a silly question!
 
Oh dear :( I'm expecting a 70-200 2.8 to arrive tomorrow. I don't know if they're prone to qc problems, but I shall be a bit more wary now.
 
Bebop said:
Oh dear :( I'm expecting a 70-200 2.8 to arrive tomorrow. I don't know if they're prone to qc problems, but I shall be a bit more wary now.
Click to expand...

I saw one of those too :thumbsdown:. It was only a slight front focus so nothing severe, but my 1ds mk2 won't microadjust so was no good...
 
daugirdas said:
I saw one of those too :thumbsdown:. It was only a slight front focus so nothing severe, but my 1ds mk2 won't microadjust so was no good...
Click to expand...
Thanks for mentioning. I'll make sure I check it out properly. I'll be using it on a 5d3 which I've only had since Christmas, so I'm still getting used to that.
 
That's not just a 'poor copy' it's clearly faulty and would never have got through anybody's quality control like that. It must have suffered a misfortune somewhere along the way.
 
Just out of interest is there a specific procedure (suggested by canon e.g.) or is it just a case of shoot and view image?
 
1.2f said:
Just out of interest is there a specific procedure (suggested by canon e.g.) or is it just a case of shoot and view image?
Click to expand...

shoot the image... shoot the same thing in the centre, then left, then right... then do some other tests.

Of course canon will suggest it is within spec and you should be happy with it :wacky::puke::shake: (had this conversation with them a while ago). Within spec probably means decent 5x7 print :shrug:
 
Not having much luck with these lenses.Here's some samples from lens no2.
This one has more even sharpness across the frame but degrades badly on the left hand side.Totally opposite to last time but nowhere as severe.At 24mm the new lens is also not as sharp in the centre as the first lens.Might accept this on a £500 lens but a £1700 lens!!!

A 1300pxx1100px crop from the left hand corner.
i-xhhHWgz-X2.jpg


A 1000px crop fron the centre-new lens
i-S7vZzvw-XL.jpg


Old lens
i-TqwV3qS-XL.jpg


Gary
 
EXIF says that 2nd shot was taken with a Canon Powershot S100?
 
Must be duff info from the exif software
 
Can you upload the 1st image to a hosting site that would allow us to download the full size image straight out the camera? I think it would give a better idea of what is happening. That tower looks a large crop. :)
 
pmac said:
Seems like the QC is slipping across the board... Just be thank full st not as bad as nikons.
Click to expand...

Hows it not as bad, its a £1750 lens and its second bad copy in a row. Not exactly a dodgy repair job.
 
pmac said:
Seems like the QC is slipping across the board... Just be thank full st not as bad as nikons.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. I had a tiny stupid idea that maybe buying a good nikon would be easier. Now I can put that to rest.

It sounds like it is back to the old ways of walking in to the shop and testing out 20 or so copies, then maybe buying the best one of them :bang:. I wonder if zeiss (cosina!!!) allows similar slip ups
 
pmac said:
look at all the d800 issues.- new cameras, repairs.. d600 oil issues, general nikon repair work..canon seems to be ahead still.

it is unacceptable to pay this much for a lens and have issues though.
Click to expand...


What, like Canons 5d light like, oily shutters, dodgy lens copies, dodgy AF? Nobodies "ahead" they could all improve.

Like Canons cameras not all D6/800s are affected. You were unfortunately unlucky. And yes, Nikon UK does seem to need a kick up the .... !
 
Last edited:
this has nothing to do with me,regardless if i had issues. nikon is trailing big time in QC and customer service.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/09/lensrentals-repair-data-january-july-2012
i know its US but this is an indication.

I do think they ALL need a big kick...sadly as with most things a lot of users are hobbyist and will continue to buy kit form them regardless of any issues.

I would like to heard canons reply regarding this as its meant to be one of there flag ship lens.
 
pmac said:
sadly as with most things a lot of users are hobbyist and will continue to buy kit form them regardless of any issues.
Click to expand...

Its a bit like what came first, chicken or egg, whats more important, a working lens or a working body. Both are equally guilty imo.

This is the problem, it happens with everything nowadays, companies cutting costs but still charging the Earth for items, consumers being the test subjects/cases/R&D. :bang:
 
pmac said:
this has nothing to do with me,regardless if i had issues. nikon is trailing big time in QC and customer service.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/09/lensrentals-repair-data-january-july-2012
i know its US but this is an indication.

I do think they ALL need a big kick...sadly as with most things a lot of users are hobbyist and will continue to buy kit form them regardless of any issues.

I would like to heard canons reply regarding this as its meant to be one of there flag ship lens.
Click to expand...

Or they need a big EU class action lawsuit and a big payment to our budgets :D

Any willing lawyers up here? :LOL:
 
As lenses are quite complex devices comprising optical, mechanical and electronic elements and involve quite a degree of manual rather than machine processing and assembly we can hardly be surprised that duffers get through.

As with Sigma panic I personally don't think that bad samples should put people off unless there's a specific design or build issue. If there is I'd move on to something else but if the issue is just a number of bad samples I'd just do what I've always done - buy from a reputable dealer and hope that you get a good copy but have confidence that the dealer is reputable and will help you out as they should if you get a bad copy.
 
woof woof said:
As lenses are quite complex devices comprising optical, mechanical and electronic elements and involve quite a degree of manual rather than machine processing and assembly we can hardly be surprised that duffers get through.
Click to expand...

Agree to a point but not with the type of duffness in this thread. Are you saying that the lens companies shouldn't even do a check of IQ by testing against a standard image where this sort of thing would have been highlighted straight away?
 
woof woof said:
As lenses are quite complex devices comprising optical, mechanical and electronic elements and involve quite a degree of manual rather than machine processing and assembly we can hardly be surprised that duffers get through.
Click to expand...

I appreciate how easy it is to make a 'duff' lens. However it is not that difficult (for them) to spend extra time making sure the duff ones take a step back to the calibration team, is it? Calibration team should be similarly given extra time per lens to make sure they don't pass on one like above. They would post a few lenses less in a day or employ a few more staff, but in the end the users would be a lot more happy. It seems Sigma has finally got the idea (at least so it appears from the feedback) so maybe it is now Canon and Nikon time?
 
ernesto said:
Agree to a point but not with the type of duffness in this thread. Are you saying that the lens companies shouldn't even do a check of IQ by testing against a standard image where this sort of thing would have been highlighted straight away?
Click to expand...

I'm surprised you'd put such silly words in my mouth :D

How much QC a company does is a commercial decision and there will always be a number of duffers that get through or are knocked out of whack once they leave the factory. Generally I'd agree that the more you pay the less chance of a reject there should be.
 
woof woof said:
I'm surprised you'd put such silly words in my mouth :D

How much QC a company does is a commercial decision and there will always be a number of duffers that get through or are knocked out of whack once they leave the factory. Generally I'd agree that the more you pay the less chance of a reject there should be.
Click to expand...

We are getting close now. It is indeed an easy commercial decision to 'screw over' their customers by setting very generous QC guidelines and therefore releasing such products that do not meet expectation but internal 'standards' :puke:. So is £1700 lens a cheap mass marketed item (as Canon told me once) or is it too expensive to be duff?
 
woof woof said:
I'm surprised you'd put such silly words in my mouth :D

How much QC a company does is a commercial decision and there will always be a number of duffers that get through or are knocked out of whack once they leave the factory. Generally I'd agree that the more you pay the less chance of a reject there should be.
Click to expand...

I don't think duffers like this should get through any company as it is the most basic check of a lens that could be performed (outside of just looking for blemishes physically)
If the issues are knocks in transit then Canon should be aware of the issues and improve their packaging.
There are answers to all the issues and it is more essential that the issues don't have any chance to occur when paying for a premium item.
 
woof woof said:
As lenses are quite complex devices comprising optical, mechanical and electronic elements and involve quite a degree of manual rather than machine processing and assembly we can hardly be surprised that duffers get through.

As with Sigma panic I personally don't think that bad samples should put people off unless there's a specific design or build issue. If there is I'd move on to something else but if the issue is just a number of bad samples I'd just do what I've always done - buy from a reputable dealer and hope that you get a good copy but have confidence that the dealer is reputable and will help you out as they should if you get a bad copy.
Click to expand...

This!! Always rely on your 7 day right and send it back if they arent helpful, personally as it stands at the moment Ive had a 50/50 success rate with Sigmas, duffers go back, never sold on like some on Ebay, I generally now buy them used (known good) or UK for easy returns and consumer rights. Sigma is hit and miss but when you get a good version of their primes/fast tele zooms its easy to understand why they are fantastic value for money.
 
Last edited:
Part of a commercial decision is how much other companies charge, how much you can charge and how much customers will actually pay.

I'm not making excuses for Canon, I've no reason to but they're probably no worse than Nikon and that's the measure really... what others do and therefore what they spend on manufacture and QC and how much profit they make (if any) sort of dictates what you do too.
 
daugirdas said:
. It is indeed an easy commercial decision to 'screw over' their customers by setting very generous QC guidelines and therefore releasing such products that do not meet expectation.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand this Tomas. Any company who has in place proper QC may not know their QC is strict enough. Any company that adopts the Six Sigma approach for example will tell you that the reason stringent QC is in place is not only to meet customer satisfaction but also to save said company money, time and efficiency by cutting down warranty and returns issues.

I do wonder then if Nikon/Canon do use Six Sigma, if not they should do.
 
Digifrog said:
I'm not sure I understand this Tomas. Any company who has in place proper QC may not know their QC is strict enough. Any company that adopts the Six Sigma approach for example will tell you that the reason stringent QC is in place is not only to meet customer satisfaction but also to save said company money, time and efficiency by cutting down warranty and returns issues.

I do wonder then if Nikon/Canon do use Six Sigma, if not they should do.
Click to expand...

It should be like that.

It seems that these asian companies may have a different way of thinking though. Let me postulate my wild guesses what may go through the minds of marketing departments:

* our competitors already do this OR we worked like that for decades. We need to keep the status quo (sounds very Japanese here)
* lenses are expensive to build. binning duffers is counterproductive, and chances are most our customers won't have a clue anyway. This was certainly the case in film days, but with digital and the rise of pixel peeping not so much.
* sending a duffer for recalibration takes a lot of time and is counterproductive. Chances are it won't get returned, and even if it does we'll sell it as refurbished on ebay outlet or spend an hour and recalibrate it there and then.
* when it comes to claims, the lenses have passed QC and are within limits - so what's the problem sir?
* Finally - competitor X has just raised the prices. We'd better catch up soon! QC cab wait though...

Does that sound plausible?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top