Originally posted by Tom S. You are missing the point. Remember, this 6% is a catastrophic failure. Reported auto problems can be something as simple as a loose bolt. Not to mention it's in an item that is a thousand times more complicated than a lens, yet comes with as much as a ten year warranty. In fact on that point, no new car comes with anything less than a three year warranty. My point was if you bought a car and it had a problem that cost 40% of it's value to fix after very little use, it would be totally unacceptable. I suspect your view would be entirely different if it was your lens that went bad, especially if you were living on a fixed income.
uhhh catastrophic failure, like that the lens explode or stop working? we are talking only about AF the rest of the lens is still fine.
Most repairs SDM repairs involve unsrewing the back of the lens where the mount it, it's basically a cover where the electronics are and the SDM.
Not sure how the SDM is held in placed but it's meant to be replaceable so not a big of an deal really.
The report is few hundred pages so there would be data about the kind of failures i assume.
Well that's a warranty problem, something very else you went on about first. And it's not 40% of the value it's 10 to 15% and that's with the man hour, you can actually replace the motor yourself if you want.
Here in my country there is a law about that actually extend the warranty of the product by expected expectations. The DA* range is put forward as a professional lens serries and as such it's expected to be better and more reliable then the consumer product so that the lens stop working after 6 years is unacceptable since there are many cases of SDM failures that makes it a strong case for me. I'm not worried.
Fixed income is much better you know what you get at the moment i don't have that luxury so i need to watchout what i do...