Stellar lens, no weak spots

I have to agree in term of optical performance and form factor, but I already got mold spot on the backside of its front element, and Canon refused to do something with it as it's not covered under warranty.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65475829

Seeing my RF 50mm f1.8 doesn't have sealing and no problem with the lens, the mold inside this sealed Pro grade lens almost makes my mind doesn't want to sleep at night.

Sinawang wrote:

I have to agree in term of optical performance and form factor, but I already got mold spot on the backside of its front element, and Canon refused to do something with it as it's not covered under warranty.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65475829

Seeing my RF 50mm f1.8 doesn't have sealing and no problem with the lens, the mold inside this sealed Pro grade lens almost makes my mind doesn't want to sleep at night.

What shooting conditions lead to a mold spot inside the lens?

I haven't done any outing in rainy condition with the lens, but I quite often shoot waterfals and fields in morning dew. The weather sealing makes me confident to shoot in such conditions but there you go, the mold managed to get inside the lens. Anything's possible, but that mold inside my RF 70-200 f4 L will disturbing my mind forever.

I saw someone abbused their cameras and lenses under the rain or beach by let them get wet with no problems, and I'm not even close doing something like that and there's a problem.

dmanthree wrote:

Sinawang wrote:

I have to agree in term of optical performance and form factor, but I already got mold spot on the backside of its front element, and Canon refused to do something with it as it's not covered under warranty.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65475829

Seeing my RF 50mm f1.8 doesn't have sealing and no problem with the lens, the mold inside this sealed Pro grade lens almost makes my mind doesn't want to sleep at night.

What shooting conditions lead to a mold spot inside the lens?

If you have the Carepak Canon will fix your lens free of charge. Recommend you buy that next time it is actually a great deal.

As you apparently don't have that I am sure Canon will fix it if you pay them. I recently sent in my EOS R for a shutter replacement, cost $400 but it's working now.

My only criticism of the lens is that with my copy (and another I tried), the corners at 70mm and at minimum focal distance were like mush. It may have just been a bad batch as they had similar serial numbers.

In practice I don't ever shoot in this manner so it is not a problem for me.

In the review from Gordon Laing, I read that the actual focal length is more like 50-150 when focussing close.

Is that what you see too?

JLock wrote:

My only criticism of the lens is that with my copy (and another I tried), the corners at 70mm and at minimum focal distance were like mush. It may have just been a bad batch as they had similar serial numbers.

In practice I don't ever shoot in this manner so it is not a problem for me.

I'll have to actually test mine under those conditions against a flat field. So far I haven't noticed that.

There is nothing man made that is of such utter perfection that it has "no" "weak" points!  

Leigh A. Wax wrote:

There is nothing man made that is of such utter perfection that it has "no" "weak" points!

I never said perfect. There is a huge difference between an optical imperfection, which all lenses have, and a weak spot. A weak spot, such as softness at a certain focal length and aperture combination would force you to NOT use that setting. That's what I consider a weak spot. You do not need to compensate for this lens.

RogerZoul wrote:

Sinawang wrote:

I haven't done any outing in rainy condition with the lens, but I quite often shoot waterfals and fields in morning dew. The weather sealing makes me confident to shoot in such conditions but there you go, the mold managed to get inside the lens. Anything's possible, but that mold inside my RF 70-200 f4 L will disturbing my mind forever.

I saw someone abbused their cameras and lenses under the rain or beach by let them get wet with no problems, and I'm not even close doing something like that and there's a problem.

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.

Not hardly. My experience is based on a single sample. Comments by others, positive or negative, are welcome. This is, after all, a forum.

StefanD wrote:

In the review from Gordon Laing, I read that the actual focal length is more like 50-150 when focussing close.

Is that what you see too?

Hard to tell since I don't have primes to compare it to or any device to measure actual angle of view.

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..