[alexeyga]

Why everybody are so anal about weather-proofing? With in-lens SR/VR/SI and in-lens focusing motor your lens will need servicing way sooner then you'd expect anyways... and for reasons other than dust or humidity...

I'm not saying WR is a bad thing, just that I find it silly that people are so obsessed with it... But i guss it's just like with UV-filters... over-paranoidal selling point...

[pingflood]

Why everybody are so anal about weather-proofing? With in-lens SR/VR/SI and in-lens focusing motor your lens will need servicing way sooner then you'd expect anyways... and for reasons other than dust or humidity...

Why do you say that?

USM lenses have proven very reliable, and it's not often that I hear about IS lens failures even with the earlier (late 90s) ones.

[alexeyga]

Why do you say that?

USM lenses have proven very reliable, and it's not often that I hear about IS lens failures even with the earlier (late 90s) ones.

I tend to believe that by incorporating the AF-motor and IS in the lens, Ca/Nikon have changed lenses into something just as disposable as bodies with a calculated life-span... lenses aren't something to hold-on to anymore, since with every new release VR(SI) gets better, focusing is faster... etc... Consumerism at it's best...

[awo425]

Um, why compare lenses that are in production to those that have been discontinued for 6 years?

Because these 2 are the workhorses of any system. The fact that Pentax does not have them in production is quite puzzling too.
And no, tokina made 50-135 2.8 and 16-50 2.8 are not quite the same.

[awo425]

Not quite, if you hang around Canon forums like POTN you will see that people are still using older USM L lenses even the rear ones like 28-70 2.8-4.0L or 80-200 2.8L And they are still working fine. These are probably over 15 years old at least
Surprisingly they are even keeping value. Nice condition 80-200 2.8L will sell for $800 in the mater of minutes

I tend to believe that by incorporating the AF-motor and IS in the lens, Ca/Nikon have changed lenses into something just as disposable as bodies with a calculated life-span... lenses aren't something to hold-on to anymore, since with every new release VR(SI) gets better, focusing is faster... etc... Consumerism at it's best...

[wlachan]

Are the FA*'s weather-proof? Also are they made out of metal? Just wondering since in the pictures they look kind of plasticky.

All FA* have metal bodies but not sealed at all. The silver finish looks nice at first but soon be scratched beyond ugly. A poor choice by Pentax imho.

[wlachan]

Why everybody are so anal about weather-proofing?

I guess people are running out of things to brag about Pentax. Let's see, Limited primes, body SR, weatherseal... Limited primes, body SR, um... what else... Can't be SDM right? K7 with inferior noise control than K-x, and K-x has mirror slap issue the K-m doesn't, what's wrong with Pentax? And why stopped with a plastic back on a magnesium body? Can't they make everything right in a single body? Is that too much to ask?

[wlachan]

I tend to believe that by incorporating the AF-motor and IS in the lens, Ca/Nikon have changed lenses into something just as disposable as bodies with a calculated life-span... lenses aren't something to hold-on to anymore, since with every new release VR(SI) gets better, focusing is faster... etc... Consumerism at it's best...

The genuine issue is that Canon stops carrying parts after 5 years. That means even those super expensive lenses would soon become paperweight once their IS or USM died.

[Samsungian]

I've read 1st generation big white paint lenses Canon stopped supplying parts for USM motors in 1999, some 10+ years after they were introduced. Since then USM motors have evolved and I've never read of any year 2000 date code lens or newer being denied USM parts. Yes Canon date codes their lens with month and year built. Recently I passed on a 600mm f4 USM at local shop due to price and most importantly, it's from 1993. A door stop, paperweight when USM fails.

I've yet to read of one Canon Image Stabilization failure. I'm sure its happened, Maybe you've got a link to an unhappy IS lens unit failure thread ? And subsequent denial of repair due to no IS parts ?


I've read pentax denied on poster here a repair on his FA 300mm 2.8, which was current until last year. What reasons? I don't know. Was there more than one version of FA 300mm 2.8 ?

Canon is on their 2nd and 3rd generation of USM technology. Pentax SDM is still first generation and done with micro motors. Hopefully it'll get better in the future generations

The genuine issue is that Canon stops carrying parts after 5 years. That means even those super expensive lenses would soon become paperweight once their IS or USM died.

[wlachan]

I don't have any specific details to provide cos I don't usually keep the links, but I do remember some expensive super teles had failed USM which Canon no longer had the parts so repair was impossible. I also read some IS failure but don't remember if there were any unrepairable cases. From what I have read, USM/IS failure could happen within a few years due to wear & tear (or just inferior parts to start with?). One specific case I remember was that the IS of the EF70-200/2.8L failed but the owner took the lens apart and fix it himself. Some plastic part of IS mechanism was broken and he did manage to repair it w/o new part.

[Samsungian]

Wild, I wouldn't try repair at home

I decided going in to Eos System in 2008 I'd keep lenses I bought new for at most 10 years and then sell them to avoid the:

"Beyond Serviceable Life" reply from Canon Repair.

The shop I visit has a few 1st generation Nikon AF 300mm 2.8 they keep for parts as Nikon no longer supplies the autofocus motors for them either.

I suppose this can surprise some, but with the magic of forums one can get a good handle on the potholes. I sure hope I can avoid them

I wonder how long Pentax will supply 1st generation SDM replacements once they've come out with SDM II ? SDM III ?


I've never read the 5 year time frame concerning denying service to a Canon lens. That seems extreme to me. Nikon USA lenses come with 5 year factory warranty. But I visit both Canon and Nikon forums so I'll look for the warning signs. User complaints are great resource. SDM failure threads was one of the few reasons I added Canon in 2008.

I see owners with various failures that get repaired threads but its not a crazy large sample considering 80% of all dslrs sold year after year are Canon and Nikon.

edit, edit

[wlachan]

I don't remember where I read it but if my memory was right, the 5 year was from the day the product was discontinued.

[Samsungian]

My 70-200mm 2.8 IS just got improved upon with new version II.

So the clock is ticking, somepoint my original version will no longer be for sale new. Its an easy guess its out of production now. Great lens. Well worth the $1459 I got it for, new version launch is $2500, ouch. I blame Nikon for that as their new version II started out at $2500 also.

Everything else glass-wise I own in canon eos is current, nothing discontiued as of yet. It sucks that I have to expect I'll replace lenses once they hit a certain age or sooner if I read otherwise.

I own several older Nikon lenses, AiS mount stuff from 20 to 30 years ago. I have no worries with it, no motors to fail ect. Manual focus glass simplicity has its good points. I bought a 35mm f2.8 Nikon shift lens a couple weeks ago, flawless & like new from 1975-76. It won't work on my D700 due to Non Ai mount but adapts perfect to Canon. Well worth the $250 the local shop charged me

[pingflood]

I tend to believe that by incorporating the AF-motor and IS in the lens, Ca/Nikon have changed lenses into something just as disposable as bodies with a calculated life-span... lenses aren't something to hold-on to anymore, since with every new release VR(SI) gets better, focusing is faster... etc... Consumerism at it's best...

Well, history so far has proven you wrong; Canon has been cranking out USM and IS lenses for quite a while now and this has not proven to be the case. They're not turning lenses "disposable". As far as technology improving, would you rather that it didn't? Just like with cameras, every generation gets a little better/faster. Doesn't mean the existing lenses suddenly become useless.

[dylansalt]

Correct, the 100-400 is known as the "dust pump" and frankly I don't know how in the hell you'd seal a push/pull zoom to begin with. And yes, the 400/5.6 lacks IS -- if Canon released that lens in an IS version or yet better created a 500/5.6 IS they would have birders worshipping at their feet. The 400/5.6 is a PERFECT birding lens for flight shots, so if you could add IS on to that for static work, coupled with a 7D it couldn't be beat. (Yeah, I know there are bigger/faster lenses but a crop body and 400/5.6 can be carried and used all day with comfort which makes a big difference.)

With regards that 500/5.6

If you have the $$ Canon has it.

In SA it sells for R 64 000 - the Nikon - R 90 000

The 600mm F4 L IS USM is similarly way cheaper than Nikon

With Canon you can pick up a 40D for R 6500 or a 50D for R 9000

So yes I would still put forward that if you are a budding amateur with many photographic interests including wildlife etc - Canon is the most affordable way to go.

Below the 500mm F4 L IS USM