EF-M 22mm vs 11-22mm blind test

Microprism wrote:

Papa48 wrote:

OzarkAggie wrote:

Dareshooter wrote:

Persizi wrote:

Guys, cut the crap, please. My point is that in my experience variations of 11-22mm is practically no existing and yet my copy of EF-M 22mm F2 is touch better than 11-22mm in most of the cases. May be there is variation of the 22mm F2, but the only copy that I have is good.

Hope you didn't make a loss.

And yes, I did make loss.

Take it easy Persizi.I don't know why you're reacting to me like that as I've not been critical of you in any shape or form.

My fault for asking the obvious question.

Answer 1: UK vendors allow returns.

Answer 2: I sold the other lenses at a loss.

Personally I just drop by The-Digital-Picture.com, Chris Frost's channel, maybe some others, and then check out Canon Refurbished. My thinking is that the refurbs didn't make it through QA the first time so it had to be certified by a tech.

But then it's not my job to test lenses.

So does that mean refurbished lenses or any equipment for that matter are likely better, or worse than the average sample? I’ve seen arguments for both, but am still undecided whether to consider refurbs with future purchases.

Is equipment off the Canon assembly line individually qc'd or spot checked? Refurbs need to be individually checked to see if they are up to spec, right?

True, though a piece may be a refurb because someone previously returned it for its sub-par performance. Does a manufacturer correct all deficiencies before returning products as refurbished? That would be admirable, but also cut into profits.