EF 70-200 F4L IS 1st gen

How all this started. Long story short: bought the lens used many years ago, it's been mostly sitting in its Canon pouch for years. Finally upgraded to FF camera and noticed that lens not always focuses accurately. I believed that camera and lens need to be focus calibrated to each other, so I sent it to Canon service center.

Turns out camera is fine and the lens needs "zoom mechanism replaced" (quote from service person). They quoted a price of 400 euros for this. My jaw hit the floor. I love the lens and its output, but does it worth repairing it for 90% of its current price on the used market? How much could I sell it for? I'm completely devastated.

SteveHU89 wrote:

How all this started. Long story short: bought the lens used many years ago, it's been mostly sitting in its Canon pouch for years. Finally upgraded to FF camera and noticed that lens not always focuses accurately. I believed that camera and lens need to be focus calibrated to each other, so I sent it to Canon service center.

Turns out camera is fine and the lens needs "zoom mechanism replaced" (quote from service person). They quoted a price of 400 euros for this. My jaw hit the floor. I love the lens and its output, but does it worth repairing it for 90% of its current price on the used market? How much could I sell it for? I'm completely devastated.

I had the 70-200 F4L IS version 1 and had the auto focus issue which is fairly common with this lens. Auto focus and manual focus doesn't work when lens is pointed up or down. I had to pay to have the USM system replaced. It cost $300 for the repair and I went ahead and had it done, here's why. I decided even though the resale value is pretty low now, the image quality from the lens was worth $300 as opposed to the lens being worth nothing. I made that decision based on the fact that I may never recoup that cost. So if I were you, I would make the decision to repair based on whether or not I will use the lens, not on resale value.

P.S.

I recently traded the lens through MPB and they gave me $425 credit for it. (MPB was informed of repair, I included invoice for repair work done.) With this said, I would still not count on recouping that cost.

jcr67 wrote:

SteveHU89 wrote:

How all this started. Long story short: bought the lens used many years ago, it's been mostly sitting in its Canon pouch for years. Finally upgraded to FF camera and noticed that lens not always focuses accurately. I believed that camera and lens need to be focus calibrated to each other, so I sent it to Canon service center.

Turns out camera is fine and the lens needs "zoom mechanism replaced" (quote from service person). They quoted a price of 400 euros for this. My jaw hit the floor. I love the lens and its output, but does it worth repairing it for 90% of its current price on the used market? How much could I sell it for? I'm completely devastated.

I had the 70-200 F4L IS version 1 and had the auto focus issue which is fairly common with this lens. Auto focus and manual focus doesn't work when lens is pointed up or down. I had to pay to have the USM system replaced. It cost $300 for the repair and I went ahead and had it done, here's why. I decided even though the resale value is pretty low now, the image quality from the lens was worth $300 as opposed to the lens being worth nothing. I made that decision based on the fact that I may never recoup that cost. So if I were you, I would make the decision to repair based on whether or not I will use the lens, not on resale value.

P.S.

I recently traded the lens through MPB and they gave me $425 credit for it. (MPB was informed of repair, I included invoice for repair work done.) With this said, I would still not count on recouping that cost.

I agree, at least that the sentimental value of the lens is priceless. When it decided to work and focus properly on subject, I got breathtaking results. Basically if I couldn't use this lens, then there would be no point for me to use FF as this is the lens I wanted to use like 99% of the time.

But I have to wonder if we are talking about the same issue ("zoom mechanism replacemen")? And if I were to pay this huge price, then would the problem or any other pricey problem come up in the future? Because if the answer is no, then I would consider paying for repair. If the answer is yes, then a sad goodbye to this lens.

I repaired my 70-200 f4 twice with the same problem of being not able ot AF or even MF. Paid twice 350USD to Canon. For replacement of barrels, the same problems happened again and again. One year after 2nd repair, problem shown up again. Finally switch to 70-300L several years before switched to RF now. Honestly I think that is the only Canon lens I owned such unreliable.

SteveHU89 wrote:

jcr67 wrote:

SteveHU89 wrote:

How all this started. Long story short: bought the lens used many years ago, it's been mostly sitting in its Canon pouch for years. Finally upgraded to FF camera and noticed that lens not always focuses accurately. I believed that camera and lens need to be focus calibrated to each other, so I sent it to Canon service center.

Turns out camera is fine and the lens needs "zoom mechanism replaced" (quote from service person). They quoted a price of 400 euros for this. My jaw hit the floor. I love the lens and its output, but does it worth repairing it for 90% of its current price on the used market? How much could I sell it for? I'm completely devastated.

I had the 70-200 F4L IS version 1 and had the auto focus issue which is fairly common with this lens. Auto focus and manual focus doesn't work when lens is pointed up or down. I had to pay to have the USM system replaced. It cost $300 for the repair and I went ahead and had it done, here's why. I decided even though the resale value is pretty low now, the image quality from the lens was worth $300 as opposed to the lens being worth nothing. I made that decision based on the fact that I may never recoup that cost. So if I were you, I would make the decision to repair based on whether or not I will use the lens, not on resale value.

P.S.

I recently traded the lens through MPB and they gave me $425 credit for it. (MPB was informed of repair, I included invoice for repair work done.) With this said, I would still not count on recouping that cost.

I agree, at least that the sentimental value of the lens is priceless. When it decided to work and focus properly on subject, I got breathtaking results. Basically if I couldn't use this lens, then there would be no point for me to use FF as this is the lens I wanted to use like 99% of the time.

But I have to wonder if we are talking about the same issue ("zoom mechanism replacemen")? And if I were to pay this huge price, then would the problem or any other pricey problem come up in the future? Because if the answer is no, then I would consider paying for repair. If the answer is yes, then a sad goodbye to this lens.

It may be possible it is the same issue, my repair was not done through Canon and maybe the shop just used different terminology. As for the future durability, not sure. I remember reading somewhere (maybe here) that Canon revised the part that was failing and it should not happen again, but I can't verify that. If it were me and I thought I would get enough use from the lens, I would pay $400.

Busleung wrote:

I repaired my 70-200 f4 twice with the same problem of being not able ot AF or even MF. Paid twice 350USD to Canon. For replacement of barrels, the same problems happened again and again. One year after 2nd repair, problem shown up again. Finally switch to 70-300L several years before switched to RF now. Honestly I think that is the only Canon lens I owned such unreliable.

Now after reading that you had the issue repeatedly I would definitely not pay for the repair, I guess the rumors I read about a fix were false. Also a coincidence, I traded the lens towards a Canon 70-300L.

jcr67 wrote:

Busleung wrote:

I repaired my 70-200 f4 twice with the same problem of being not able ot AF or even MF. Paid twice 350USD to Canon. For replacement of barrels, the same problems happened again and again. One year after 2nd repair, problem shown up again. Finally switch to 70-300L several years before switched to RF now. Honestly I think that is the only Canon lens I owned such unreliable.

Now after reading that you had the issue repeatedly I would definitely not pay for the repair, I guess the rumors I read about a fix were false. Also a coincidence, I traded the lens towards a Canon 70-300L.

This is depressing to say the least...

SteveHU89 wrote:

jcr67 wrote:

Busleung wrote:

I repaired my 70-200 f4 twice with the same problem of being not able ot AF or even MF. Paid twice 350USD to Canon. For replacement of barrels, the same problems happened again and again. One year after 2nd repair, problem shown up again. Finally switch to 70-300L several years before switched to RF now. Honestly I think that is the only Canon lens I owned such unreliable.

Now after reading that you had the issue repeatedly I would definitely not pay for the repair, I guess the rumors I read about a fix were false. Also a coincidence, I traded the lens towards a Canon 70-300L.

This is depressing to say the least...

Mine works great and has never had a repair.

If the the lens was so prone to failure and repair also failed frequently, it would be common knowledge.

First I've heard .

So yes , some lenses will fail , some repairs will fail .

It's a statistical fact for anything.

Type of use , handling and storage play a bigger part on how long an item lasts .

A little bits luck of the draw .

neilt3 wrote:

SteveHU89 wrote:

jcr67 wrote:

Busleung wrote:

I repaired my 70-200 f4 twice with the same problem of being not able ot AF or even MF. Paid twice 350USD to Canon. For replacement of barrels, the same problems happened again and again. One year after 2nd repair, problem shown up again. Finally switch to 70-300L several years before switched to RF now. Honestly I think that is the only Canon lens I owned such unreliable.

Now after reading that you had the issue repeatedly I would definitely not pay for the repair, I guess the rumors I read about a fix were false. Also a coincidence, I traded the lens towards a Canon 70-300L.

This is depressing to say the least...

Mine works great and has never had a repair.

If the the lens was so prone to failure and repair also failed frequently, it would be common knowledge.

First I've heard .

So yes , some lenses will fail , some repairs will fail .

It's a statistical fact for anything.

Type of use , handling and storage play a bigger part on how long an item lasts .

A little bits luck of the draw .

Not sure how common it is, but it is a known issue with this lens. I am including a link to a video that shows the issue I am referring to.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIl5a1fT8Ow

Little update: Canon service explained this "zoom mechanism replacement" issue a bit clearer. So the problem manifests itself with sometimes front- or back focusing, rarely nails the focus on subject. The whole internal of the lens needs to be replaced. As to why this would happen, the service employee replied confidently that the lens has been dropped before.

I'm going to sell my aps-c gear to fund the repair cost. Drastic step, but those who used the 70-200 F4L IS before and saw the output will understand. By the way, the lens always looked pristine since I bought it from ebay. The owner must have dropped it in its pouch or camera bag etc. as there is no sign of damage on the outside. Be very careful when buying used and don't be fooled by the exterior appearance.

I bought my 70-200 f/4 L IS Version 1 brand new in 2009. Still works to this day. I did buy the 70-200 f/4 L IS Mark II in 2019 for a trip to Greece. Although the Version 1 hasn’t seen much action lately, it’s too good to let go.  
My Greek Trilogy just returned from Europe on Sunday, the 16-35 f/4 LIS, 24-70 f/4 L IS and the 70-200 f/4 L IS Mark II. 
Love the f/4’s for reduced weight while still maintaining great image quality.