Stellar lens, no weak spots

higheronymous wrote:

lokatz wrote:

RogerZoul wrote:

lokatz wrote:

RogerZoul wrote:

I feel your pain on this. I suggest you pay Canon to fix it. Also, I wish you had posted this under your own thread rather than ruin this one where the initial poster was trying to praise this lens. It seems very unfair.

Wait, now: what makes it unfair to post a caveat that comes from painful first-hand experience on a thread where someone else praises the lens?

I think we all OWE it to each other to freely share the good and the not-so-good, so noone is misled about a piece of gear. This would be different if someone was merely badmouthing the lens, but that does not seem to be the case here at all.

He can start his own thread for that. No one is stopping him from doing that and anyone can read it as they can this one. It is unfair because the creator of this thread has seen his thread hijacked by something that may not even be the fault of the lens. No one is stopping or even suggesting sharing anything, but there is a thing about respecting threads created by others.

Well, I respect your opinion, but I also cannot help but disagree. This is a discussion forum, not a showcase. I also did not see anything I would call hijacking since that to me means driving the discussion off topic.

It's a tough call, but here's my opinion... Canon makes it very easy to get gear repaired, so, true, you might want Canon to fix free of charge, but the odds of that are low if you didn't get the carepak. Of course they will dismiss water damage. It is written into almost every warranty on the planet... water damage is a no fix situation..

Some designs are more susceptible to water damage than others. People who decide to get a lens that has external moving elements should realize that it is less resistant to moisture and dust infiltration. Buying another lens that did not have external moving elements may well have resulted in no mold inside the lens in this case. So that could well have "fixed" the resulting problem. Of course it would be longer and less convenient to store in the bag.... This design has it's plusses and minuses.

For me, choosing an external moving element design depends on how long the lens without external moving elements will be. If the long lens is so big I would rarely use it (as in the case of the 100-400mm lens), then I would def go with the shorter design in spite of the durability issues. For my purposes, I can deal with a full-length 70-200mm lens, so I would prefer the more durable design (but of course when storing it in my bag I will be wishing I had bought the shorter one