fbpixel

Moderators: Greg Downing, E.J. Peiker

All times are UTC - 5 hours

  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 16 posts | 
by OntPhoto on Sun Jun 09, 2019 7:07 pm
User avatar
OntPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 6655
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario. Canada.
Canon 70-200 2.8L non-IS.  14 years.  Worked flawlessly.  Dropped on asphalt.  Camera end is bent (where the contacts are).  I see some screws there.  Does that sound like an expensive repair?  


Last edited by OntPhoto on Mon Jun 24, 2019 5:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 

by SantaFeJoe on Sun Jun 09, 2019 7:11 pm
User avatar
SantaFeJoe
Forum Contributor
Posts: 6772
Joined: 28 Jan 2012
Member #:01817
Yes.

Joe
Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist.  -Pablo Picasso
 

by OntPhoto on Sun Jun 09, 2019 7:15 pm
User avatar
OntPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 6655
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario. Canada.
SantaFeJoe wrote:
Yes.

Joe


Thanks.  I took a look at the new lens price and it's close to $1,750 CAD.  If it's only a few hundred to fix, I'm OK with that.  


After looking at the video, it looks like I may be able to do it myself.  It's the silver collar piece that's bent.  May not be too expensive a repair?  Look at the 1:37 mark of the video as that piece is taken off the lens.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVLcz4Nz9bU
 

by OntPhoto on Sun Jun 09, 2019 7:54 pm
User avatar
OntPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 6655
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario. Canada.
Looking at the cost of new Canon lenses, all I can say is that I'm so glad I purchased them a long time ago.  Just look at the Canon 500 f4 II.  $8,000 CAD back when the Canadian dollar was near par with the USD.  That same lens is around $13,500 CAD now. Timing.

Pays to buy quality too. Gitzo tripod has lasted a long time, over 10 years.  A loose leg that was easy to fix.  Still working fine after all these years.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Sun Jun 09, 2019 11:36 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 83725
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
My guess would be somewhere around $1K CAD if they will fix it at all - a non IS version of that lens, which first came to market in 1995, may still contain some lead glass in which case they won't touch it.  The current lens is WAY WAY WAY better so if it really is over $1K to repair, it might make more sense to get a new one or a new model on the used market....

Another reason they may decline to work on it is that the repair is almost certainly going to cost more than the present value of the lens.  

Best of luck!!!
 

by OntPhoto on Mon Jun 10, 2019 12:12 am
User avatar
OntPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 6655
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario. Canada.
E.J. Peiker wrote:
My guess would be somewhere around $1K CAD if they will fix it at all - a non IS version of that lens, which first came to market in 1995, may still contain some lead glass in which case they won't touch it.  The current lens is WAY WAY WAY better so if it really is over $1K to repair, it might make more sense to get a new one or a new model on the used market....

Another reason they may decline to work on it is that the repair is almost certainly going to cost more than the present value of the lens.  

Best of luck!!!


Thanks E.J.  I had not considered the lead glass part, if it is there.  After looking at a video, I think it may be a do-it-yourself repair.  The lens hood and back-end (mostly) of the lens took the impact.  Here is a photo of the damage.  I can't seem to embed the new Pbase images so here is a link.  https://pbase.com/image/169332635

PS.  I like the 70-200 2.8L so much that if the lens cannot be repaired for a reasonable price, I would get the new 70-200 2.8L IS III. But the original non-IS is so good, I'd hang onto it if it is cost-effective to fix.  I could replace it with the exact same model but if buying new, I've always wanted IS.  I am truly amazed at how well the 70-200 2.8L has stood up after so many years of constant use.  My most used lens paired with a 1.4x.
 

by signgrap on Mon Jun 10, 2019 8:40 am
User avatar
signgrap
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1640
Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Location: Delaware Water Gap, PA
Member #:00424
With a dent that deep I'd be concerned that one or more lens elements would have been knocked out of alignment.
Dick Ludwig
 

by Photo123 on Mon Jun 10, 2019 12:03 pm
Photo123
Forum Contributor
Posts: 26
Joined: 26 Feb 2005
signgrap wrote:
With a dent that deep I'd be concerned that one or more lens elements would have been knocked out of alignment.

If you had a chance to see the linked video, there isn’t much directly underneath the dented area of the bayonet mount.  It almost serves as an attachment piece only.  The gold coloured contacts have wires that control the electronics.  Once the bayonet piece is taken off, you’ll see there is a lot of space behind it.  No lense elements.  Unless you mean the shock of the impact may have thrown some lense elements off, that is very possible.  

Canon does not repair this lense anymore.  Stopped in 2017.  But they may still have parts.  There is an authourized repair shop that has given me a preliminary estimate based on my description of he damage.  The part itself is not expensive but the labour to adjsut the AF will cost between $140 to $160 CAD.  Once the lens is looked over more carefully, an estimate will be provided.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Mon Jun 10, 2019 1:09 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 83725
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
What Dick said. even if you can replace the mount, there is almost a 100% certainty that you will have a decentered lens. All lens elements need to be aligned and reseated and there is also a high likelihood of internal damage inside the lens barrel.
 

by OntPhoto on Mon Jun 10, 2019 5:51 pm
User avatar
OntPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 6655
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario. Canada.
E.J. Peiker wrote:
What Dick said.  even if you can replace the mount, there is almost a 100% certainty that you will have a decentered lens.  All lens elements need to be aligned and reseated and there is also a high likelihood of internal damage inside the lens barrel.

About $1,400 from Adorama or B&H.  Don't remember.  Used well for 14 Years.  Works out to $100 a year for the privilege of enjoying the fine optics of the lens. Was still in great condition before it dropped.  I still plan to get it fixed in case the inside is OK.  I think it will be.

I've always wanted IS on this lens.  Every time I walk into a wooded area especially on an overcast day, I wish for IS. Shooting at dusk which I have been doing often the past 2 weeks following a barred owl family; wish I had IS. Well, here's my excuse to get one.  Will pick up a new 70-200 2.8L IS III.  Should be here in a week. 
 

by OntPhoto on Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:33 pm
User avatar
OntPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 6655
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario. Canada.
New lens has arrived.  I forgot how much heavier it feels over the non-IS version.  But -  I'm loving the sharp images at 1/40 handheld at 280 mm.  1/15 at 280 mm sharp as well. That alone is worth it.  Looking forward to field work. 

Lens came with a free Canon T-Shirt (Large). I prefer what Canon USA offers, a year of free CarePak with option to upgrade to 3 years. The new style lens cover is nice too. 

My damaged 70-200 2.8L non-IS is at repairs and waiting for an estimate.

Update. I've outdone my earlier results.  Handheld at 1/8 at 280 mm.  Took it outdoors for a spin late today.

Full-frame resized.  Handheld at 1/8 at 280 mm.
https://pbase.com/golfpic/image/169381434

100% crop.  1/8 at 280 mm.
https://pbase.com/golfpic/image/169381435
 

by OntPhoto on Mon Jun 24, 2019 5:51 pm
User avatar
OntPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 6655
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario. Canada.
Got the estimate.  Both the 70-200 2.8L non-IS and the 1.4x II can be repaired together for $350 CAD tax included.  Parts are cheap but labour is expensive.  I will ask them to check for decentering if possible.   The 1.4x II was dropped several years ago and never bothered to send it in for repair because I also have the 1.4x III.

But I'm still very happy to have the 70-200 2.8L IS III.  I have been testing the lens out in a wooded area where low-light is more common than not.  The IS is invaluable shooting here.  Or I would have to drag a tripod around.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:48 am
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 83725
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
That's shockingly cheap, I'm guessing that's just for the mount replacement, not a thorough checking of every element's position which is what a drop like that would call for. if it does include that, consider yourself very lucky :)
 

by OntPhoto on Tue Jun 25, 2019 10:05 am
User avatar
OntPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 6655
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario. Canada.
E.J. Peiker wrote:
That's shockingly cheap, I'm guessing that's just for the mount replacement, not a thorough checking of every element's position which is what a drop like that would call for.  if it does include that, consider yourself very lucky :)

I had a chat with them about the repair.  It doesn’t look too bad.  They will replace the necessary parts and then test the lens including a decenterng test using 3D charts.  They have laser setups as well.  I think they use the same equipment as Canon. These guys do repairs for Canon Canada as well. They did my 400 5.6L.  I had shipped it to Canon and Canon sub-contracted it to this shop.  Canon charges a premium    . This shop has much lower repair pricing.  If I recall, Canon would charge $250 just to look over the lens to provide an estimate.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Tue Jun 25, 2019 10:32 am
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 83725
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Ah ok, this is cutting Canon out which likely is saving you 50% - makes more sense now. In the USA it kind of works the opposite. If you bring Canon pro gear to a photo shop, they send it to Canon so there's the extra markup on the other end.
 

by OntPhoto on Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:22 pm
User avatar
OntPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 6655
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario. Canada.
E.J. Peiker wrote:
Ah ok, this is cutting Canon out which likely is saving you 50% - makes more sense now.  In the USA it kind of works the opposite.  If you bring Canon pro gear to a photo shop, they send it to Canon so there's the extra markup on the other end.

Yeah, Canon charges a premium.  I likely won't get the lens back until end of July or even early August due to parts being back-ordered.   
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
16 posts | 
  

People Who Like This:
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group