1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  1. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,191
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I ahve had this since new.. just noticed when cleaning this.... its on the inside..

    Been out in rain a few times but not much more than drizzle.. obviously a pic makes it more prominant.. you ahve to actyually angle the lens to see it in real life and as i usually either use it in dark places or its on off busy then i hadnt noticed it before :(

    cant remeber when i bought it but out of warranty..

    what next ?: (

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2017
  2. newbie1

    newbie1

    Messages:
    621
    Name:
    Newbie1
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    What a coincidence...I was cleaning mine last week and noticed something inside. Nothing visible in pictures but irritating all the same. Take it in to CPS for maintenance clean?
     
  3. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,191
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes

    I am going down to canon elstree ina couple of weeks to ahve my 400 looked at (probable new connection mount) am taking 1dxII to be checked over.. nothing wrong with it but still under warranty so will ahve them check it... going to take 24-70 as well

    it doesnt lok like fungus which would be aaaaaargh... looks like damp/wet got in this so called weatherproof lens :(
     
  4. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,191
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    PS takes perfect pics
     
  5. robinsslee

    robinsslee

    Messages:
    488
    Name:
    Robin
    Edit My Images:
    No
    The photo you have shown looks like mould inside the glass element... :eek:
     
  6. StewartR

    StewartR Efrem Zimbalist Jr Advertiser

    Messages:
    10,364
    Name:
    Stewart (duh)
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Phil V likes this.
  7. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,191
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    hmmm.. nothing changes using anything on the outside so i preume inside.. hard for me to say for sure :(

    looked at your thread.. can see final outcome that canon will replace any more you get.. but do you have any cost ideas for one ?
     
  8. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,191
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    ps all the pics i ahve seen of fungus looks like growth and has a simmilar pattern..... nothing like mine

    pps its around 75% of the edge of the glass.. round not inwards ..
     
  9. Canon Bob

    Canon Bob Loves the Enemy

    Messages:
    9,899
    Name:
    Bob
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Unless you've had more than one of these lenses then it's the one that you bought from me about 2-1/2 years ago, Tony.
    I bought it new in 2014 (2013 date code) and used it once for a wedding before seliing it to you in early 2015.

    Bob
     
    KIPAX likes this.
  10. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,191
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    THANKS :)

    Do you know what.. I honestly couldn't remmeber... Still can't..just presumed bought new haha.... right so no point looking for recipet.. will just take in and see what they say... going 9th Oct so another 2 weeks to wait .... used it this morning for team pics and works OK
     
  11. StewartR

    StewartR Efrem Zimbalist Jr Advertiser

    Messages:
    10,364
    Name:
    Stewart (duh)
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    If you can wait until Monday, I'll dig out the maintenance records and see what I paid for them.
     
  12. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,191
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes

    No rush mate.. in a corner nothing I can do about it.. taking it to canon elstree on 9th oct along with my 400 so its gonna be what its gonna be.. just wanted to maybe take some of the shock out of it :)
     
  13. Phil V

    Phil V

    Messages:
    19,711
    Name:
    Phil
    Edit My Images:
    No
    This is what I thought it looked like - I think I've had old lenses with coating problems in the distant past.
     
  14. StewartR

    StewartR Efrem Zimbalist Jr Advertiser

    Messages:
    10,364
    Name:
    Stewart (duh)
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Well, I had to get something from the office so I dug out the maintenance records.

    We had 14 front elements of this type of lens replaced in 2015-2016. Prices including VAT were
    £153.05
    £128.20
    £156.50
    £156.50
    and then Canon paid for the other 10.
     
  15. Balb0wa

    Balb0wa

    Messages:
    493
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    My 70-300L went like that, no other canon lens i have,has done it, i complained , asked for manager at cps etc, they agreed to knock 30% off i think, still cost me £183 , its a faulty coating, but they weren't bothered.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2017
    KIPAX likes this.
  16. LBJNBA

    LBJNBA

    Messages:
    588
    Edit My Images:
    No
    On a similar note, my MacBook pro retina screen went like that before I got it replaced under warranty, its definitely the coating thats coming off. It won't look or feel like its on the front element and not inside but it will be, have you used anything to clean the lens thats perhaps damaged it, thats what happened on my mac, that and rubbing a bit too hard.
     
  17. GreenNinja67

    GreenNinja67

    Messages:
    2,664
    Name:
    Terry
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    If that's moisture and the lens is supposedly waterproof then it maybe a trades descriptions act issue.

    I'd expect Canon UK to service that free of charge.
     
  18. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,191
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I cant tell.. my missus says it looks on the outside and maybe coating.... Roll on the 9th october when i get it into canon..
     
  19. Eloise

    Eloise

    Messages:
    1,049
    Name:
    Eloise
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Lenses (and cameras generally) aren’t waterproof... they are weather resistant. A term which means nothing (legally) and doesn’t indicate that a lens can be used in particular conditions.
     
  20. GreenNinja67

    GreenNinja67

    Messages:
    2,664
    Name:
    Terry
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    If that's the case it's pointless buying "weatherproof" lenses isn't it?

    And it DOES indicate they can be used in inclement conditions. That's the whole point of being weatherproof.
     
  21. Eloise

    Eloise

    Messages:
    1,049
    Name:
    Eloise
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    They are more weatherproof than other lenses; however they do not offer any guarantee of the amount of water they can cope with!
     
  22. GreenNinja67

    GreenNinja67

    Messages:
    2,664
    Name:
    Terry
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Please desist using exclamation marks where they are not necessary. You came across as rather exasperated in your reply to which was a valid statement.

    If a manufacturer has stated "weatherproof" on an item this must be measurable, otherwise there is no point in stating this in the first place.
     
  23. Eloise

    Eloise

    Messages:
    1,049
    Name:
    Eloise
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    A manufacturer states weatherproof when they have built an item to a standard to be proofed against some “weather”. But weather is an undefined term... a light summer drizzle will be okay; using it in a monsoon is unlikely to be: but ther term is undefined.

    Waterproof on the other hand has international standards to back it up.
     
    stumac likes this.
  24. MatBin

    MatBin

    Messages:
    2,845
    Name:
    matt
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Some of Canon's weather resistant lens are only so when a front filter is fitted, my 70-200 f4 is L is one such lens, don't know about the 24-70 2.8 MK2. If this is the case with this lens then perhaps Canon could claiming hadn't been used in a manner to create a waterproof lens and so invalidated any warranty?
    Matt
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2017
  25. TonyHall

    TonyHall

    Messages:
    346
    Edit My Images:
    No
    FWIW for this lens:
    Specifications state "Dust/moisture resistance".
    Instruction book states "Tight seal structure ensures excellent dustproof and drip-proof performance."
     
  26. GreenNinja67

    GreenNinja67

    Messages:
    2,664
    Name:
    Terry
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    So if that's moisture in the lens the OP has a case for Canon to answer. As I suggested in the first instance. Thank you Tony
     
  27. Eloise

    Eloise

    Messages:
    1,049
    Name:
    Eloise
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    No, because water damage is specifically excluded from Canon’s European warranty.
     
  28. MatBin

    MatBin

    Messages:
    2,845
    Name:
    matt
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Says that about my 70-200 but it also says I need a filter over the front element to maintain the seal.
     
  29. Canon Bob

    Canon Bob Loves the Enemy

    Messages:
    9,899
    Name:
    Bob
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    The 24-70 is an extending lens so it will always draw air in as the internal volume increases.
     
  30. Phil V

    Phil V

    Messages:
    19,711
    Name:
    Phil
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Except the damage appears to be nothing to do with weather resistance, it definitely looks like damage to the lens coating.

    Whether that damage is due to the coating being crap or user error is an argument between the owner and Canon.
     
    Eloise likes this.
  31. StewartR

    StewartR Efrem Zimbalist Jr Advertiser

    Messages:
    10,364
    Name:
    Stewart (duh)
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    @KIPAX - If it comes to this, I'd be happy for you to quote my experience at them. My problematic lenses were mostly with 2012 to 2013 date codes, so yours could be from the same batch. There are some quite extensive details in post #48 of that other thread, but if you want me to dig out chapter and verse, dates, serial numbers etc then just drop me a line and I can do so.

    Incidentally I think the reason we had these problems might have been down to the fact that we clean our lenses so often. They get a lot of use - especially workhorses like the 24-70mm f/2.8 - and obviously we make sure they're clean before every hire. So they get more exposure to cleaning tissues, solvents etc and if there's something about the coating that means it's less durable, it could be that we're just finding it sooner because we do more cleaning. That might be an argument you could use with Canon too.
     
    KIPAX and Phil V like this.
  32. MatBin

    MatBin

    Messages:
    2,845
    Name:
    matt
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Ah I see sir, you have been using these lenses, to take photographs? Mmm I think this might be where the problem lies .......:)
     
  33. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,191
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Cheers Stewart
    My wife is the lens cleaner as she can see betetr than me.. seriously... its rocket blower and lens cloths.. very very rarely photo lens cleaner product
     
  34. StewartR

    StewartR Efrem Zimbalist Jr Advertiser

    Messages:
    10,364
    Name:
    Stewart (duh)
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Same with us. Any kind of solvent is always the last resort, like the time when a client hired a lens for "glamour/boudoir" work (probably porn in other words) and it came back with blobs of wax on the front element. But anyway I reckon if the coating isn't properly bonded to the glass, it might be that we're effectively rubbing it off with tissues, even without solvents.
     
  35. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,191
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    So canon have the lens..

    they just phoned me with a fixed cost repair of 156 pounds which i agreed to..

    then i asked.. was it the coating on the lens.... she replied... do you use a lens hood.. the technician says its probably the cause..using a lens hood

    WHAT!!! ? :(

    So i asked them to look at the repair sheet i sent in showing exactly what the problem was with the lens...

    oh right so its just the glass you want replacing?..

    .duh :(

    am awaiting another phone call when they are done.. i will ask if glass replaced and still same set price


    Not amused :(
     
  36. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,191
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    So posted the lens monday and I wlil get back tomorrow Thursday.. total cost £156.50 and from I can gather it is the film? at the front..

    I wont know exact details until I get the work sheet they send back qwith it... also had my 1dxII cleaned and serviced.. so all done and back 4 days monday to thursday :)

    All in all not a bad experience apart from the mix up of what was wrong with it..
     
  37. Mike.P

    Mike.P

    Messages:
    3,658
    Edit My Images:
    No

    I really don't think you should be mentioning blobs of wax, glamour/boudoir, porn and rubbing off with tissues in the same sentence.

    My tea missed the computer keyboard thankfully.
     
  38. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,191
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    hopefully they know whats what and whatever fix they have done means i can clean away with a blower and a cloth :)
     
  39. KIPAX

    KIPAX Waldorf

    Messages:
    19,191
    Name:
    KIPAX
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Lens front element and zoom ring grip replaced.
    Serviced and calibrated.
    The unit has been examined, cleaned, checked and
    tested to manufacturers standard.
    Labour . . . : Replaced faulty/damaged
    external parts

    Spare parts . : RING, ZOOM
    LENS ASS'Y, 1ST GROUP


    Fixed Price Repair



    From what I can gather...no matter what was wrong with the lens its a fixed price repair which was £156 total
     
  40. StewartR

    StewartR Efrem Zimbalist Jr Advertiser

    Messages:
    10,364
    Name:
    Stewart (duh)
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Good result.
     

Share This Page