Are de-kitted lenses more prone to sample variation?

assaft wrote:

I'm about to order the Panasonic 14-140 and I know I won't have time to properly test it within the return period. Therefore, I'm trying to reduce the chances of getting a bad copy (e.g a de-centered lens) and I would like to understand from other users' experience if ordering the more expensive fully-packaged version of a lens is generally safer than the cheaper de-kitted version.

I already had one de-kitted version of the P14-140 in the past and I returned it because it had a de-centered element. However, a single case is obviously not enough for identifying a pattern whether kit lenses are more prone to sample variation than their fully-packaged counterparts. I'm wondering what other people' experience is.

Impossible to answer this question, one would need access to hundreds of lenses from both sources to tell you one way or the other. All you're gonna get here are anecdotes, like "I bought a new one and it worked great", or "I bought a de-kited one and it worked great" or "I bought a new one and it was decentered". Sample size is too small to accurately inform and you don't know how thoroughly each user tested each lens. Sample variation is by nature random, so if you want to make any absolute determination you need a huge sample size for polling.

However, assuming the de-kit lens is just that, a lens taken from a kit, and not a used lens, or a returned lens, there should be absolutely no reason why it would be more likely to have sample variation/problems. Both lenses in all likelihood come from the same factory.

But if you're worried, just buy a new one with a warranty.