# Lens Squeak - 24-70 2.8 USM II - Is this Normal?



## mshaw (Nov 26, 2013)

I've had my 24-70 for a few months now and its started squeaking when retracting the zoom barrel. I've sent it into cannon for repair (under warranty) and they've sent it back saying that this is normal. I'm not sold yet. 

Never had a lens do this before - looking for some advice on the issue. Links to video of squeak below. 

Canon 24-70 2.8 USM II Lens Squeak (2)

IMG 0036

Thanks!
Mark


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 26, 2013)

My 24-105 was worst. To me, it's normal. 

However, if your copy still within 30days return policy, then return it and ask for new one.


----------



## mshaw (Nov 26, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> My 24-105 was worst. To me, it's normal.
> 
> However, if your copy still within 30days return policy, then return it and ask for new one.



Thanks for the advice Dylan - but I'm past the 30 day return. Guess I'll have to trade it in for the Otus 

Here is what Canon service told me about the squeaking this AM. "some small amount of "squeak" or "whistle" is normal when this lens is zoomed in and out, especially when the lens is still fairly new. The sound comes from the dust and weather seals inside the lens moving against the lens barrel. This is normal operation of the lens, and not a malfunction. "

Sounds plausible, but I've never had any lens squeak before - let alone one this new/costly. When I first used the 24-70 there was no squeak - it has began to chirp only in the last couple months. Will have to see what the next few months/years brings. Appears, I may be stuck with the issue at this point.


----------



## takesome1 (Nov 26, 2013)

You could always send it to Canon and tell them you shoot video and you need the squeak fixed.
Or
You could accept the pacifier that Canon's service department gave you this morning.

Then there is the DIY method, possibly a bit of axel grease on the outside barrel might stop it from squeaking.
Or perhaps some light weight oil or a shot of WD 40 would do the trick.

I would stick with complaining to Canon, and adopt the old saying "the squeaky lens will get the grease".


----------



## mshaw (Nov 26, 2013)

takesome1 said:


> You could always send it to Canon and tell them you shoot video and you need the squeak fixed.
> Or
> You could accept the pacifier that Canon's service department gave you this morning.
> 
> ...



I've had it in to canon service two times within the last 2 weeks. The first run around no one could re-produce the squeak. I included directions on how to produce the squeak and re-sent the lens in for service for round two.

The second time the lens went through service - I was told it went to a 'Senior Technician' who was able to re-produce the squeak, but felt the squeak was 'normal.'

Not sure if they'd allow it a third time. Seemed stern in their stance that this was 'normal.' I'm all for the WD-40, maybe just shoot some graphite powder down the barrel  Wish Canon would just fix the darn thing. Does anyone else's 24-70 do this - I am just having trouble accepting that this is a 'normal' non-issue. Got my panties in a bunch over here!


----------



## Wiki Tango (Nov 26, 2013)

Ouch.
I would refrain from any greasing, oil, WD40 or other lubricants :

My 24-105 never did this, my 70-300 is a non-L and has no weather sealing.
Sorry that I have no lens to compare :-( 
but I would hope to get an answer from one of those lens rental guys, as they have a large amount of such lenses and maybe could underpin or disagree to Canon's opinion "that this is normal"...

And I totally agree: next time you should really tell them that you shoot video and the squeak is a NO-GO.
Good luck!!


----------



## Ruined (Nov 26, 2013)

I'll come out and say it. I think the 24-70 2.8 USM II has a faulty design and/or manufacturing issue affecting a multitude of lenses that Canon is refusing to fix under warranty, hoping they can sweep under the carpet. Likely whatever is causing the problem it is not cheap to fix, hence the reason it "does not exist."

REASON: You are not the only one with issues zooming this lens. Other people report clicking noises when zooming, creaking noises, etc:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=15231.0

They send their lens to Canon and often get the same baloney, that noise like that is normal. This is unacceptable especially since its frequently attached to cameras shooting video. Unless you shoot horror movies, I would think lens squeaking is undesirable.

I would call Canon once more and advise if they refuse to honor warranty you will file BBB action, see what your credit card company can do, file a report with the FTC that Canon is falsely advertising a warranty and not honoring it, etc:

CONSUMER PROTECTION RESOURCES:
http://www.bbb.org
http://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0341-file-complaint-ftc
http://consumerist.com/

You may also want to contact this guy, as he had similar problems with a defect that Canon said was normal:
http://www.nashyspix.com/
http://www.photocounter.com.au/2013/canon-warranty-dispute-leads-to-claims-of-fraud/


Others reading this thread, all the more reason to pass on this lens and wait for the inevitable 24-70 f/2.8 IS which hopefully will have this manufacturing/design issue fixed...


----------



## mshaw (Nov 26, 2013)

Ruined said:


> I'll come out and say it. I think the 24-70 2.8 USM II has a faulty design and/or manufacturing issue affecting a multitude of lenses that Canon is refusing to fix under warranty, hoping they can sweep under the carpet. Likely whatever is causing the problem it is not cheap to fix, hence the reason it "does not exist."
> 
> REASON: You are not the only one with issues zooming this lens. Other people report clicking noises when zooming, creaking noises, etc:
> http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=15231.0
> ...



Ha, IS would be nice! Maybe this is the universes way of telling us all that primes are better. Thank you for the wealth of information, at least I'm not the only one. I will write Canon Service back today and see what there response is. I'm just still surprised that something like this would be considered normal. I will keep you posted and I'll keep the WD-40 at arms length in the meantime ;D


----------



## Ruined (Nov 26, 2013)

mshaw said:


> Ha, IS would be nice! Maybe this is the universes way of telling us all that primes are better. Thank you for the wealth of information, at least I'm not the only one. I will write Canon Service back today and see what there response is. I'm just still surprised that something like this would be considered normal. I will keep you posted and I'll keep the WD-40 at arms length in the meantime ;D



No problem 

And, considering something like this "normal" is simply Canon's economical way of evading their warranty commitment. It is possible fixing the squeaks and other noises people are getting would be expensive, so Canon wants to avoid this by claiming it is normal and cosmetic. In reality, it is a serious concern if you shoot video (and just out of workmanship I would hope a $2200 lens does not squeak!)


----------



## takesome1 (Nov 26, 2013)

mshaw said:


> The sound comes from the *dust* and weather seals inside the lens moving against the lens barrel.



It was my thought that your barrel was dirty. Dirty seals.

But I wouldn't accept this response from Canon. Dust inside the lens isn't acceptable if it is new.
Tell them to clean the lens.


----------



## mshaw (Nov 26, 2013)

*Here is my response to Canon. I do mostly still work, but also video. Thanks to WIKI TANGO - I tried a bit of video and that squeak is wretched. It will have to go back in. The lens chirp sounds like squeaking breaks from a car.

Factory Service, 

I appreciate your continued and timely correspondence. Although you have deemed the squeaking 'normal,' it severely detracts from my ability to shoot video. I am a nature photographer. I may be able to work around the squeak for stills, although it is most definitely unnerving, but it proves to be unacceptable during filming. Each time I retract the zoom during filming - my audio picks up the squeak. To compound the issue, since the squeak occurs directly next to the camera body/microphone, it amplifies the sound. 

I can not shoot acceptable video with this lens in it's current state and therefore; I can not accept your response that this squeak is 'normal.' 

I have owned numerous Canon lenses, none of which have ever exhibited a squeak, even after 10 yrs of rigorious use under adverse conditions. I have subsequently owned many brand new canon lenses, none of which ever exhibited a squeak of any kind. 

Canon has continually made top tier products and stood behind them with top tier service - I sincerely hope that you will continue to do so.

There is a problem with this lens - I trust that you will address it. 


Thank you for your time,


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 26, 2013)

mshaw said:


> Canon 24-70 2.8 USM II Lens Squeak (2)



Surely I can't be the only one thinking that you are giving new meaning to the term "lens p0rn". 

Nice response to Canon, hope they step up. Good luck!


----------



## mshaw (Nov 26, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> mshaw said:
> 
> 
> > Canon 24-70 2.8 USM II Lens Squeak (2)
> ...



HA! Thats what my wife said after I had posted it - too late now I told her. My mind was other places, but there is something eh… unique... going on there. ???


----------



## takesome1 (Nov 26, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> mshaw said:
> 
> 
> > Canon 24-70 2.8 USM II Lens Squeak (2)
> ...



Well yes I thought it.
But I didn't want to be the one to point it out.


----------



## duydaniel (Nov 26, 2013)

takesome1 said:


> mshaw said:
> 
> 
> > The sound comes from the *dust* and weather seals inside the lens moving against the lens barrel.
> ...



No I think you misunderstood Canon's response. They meant the "Dirt and weather seal" caused this, not "dirt inside weather seal" caused this.

Back to the OP, I think the squeak that comes right before the lens is fully retracted indicating something pressuring onto the barrel to "fully close" the lens from moisture


----------



## takesome1 (Nov 26, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> takesome1 said:
> 
> 
> > mshaw said:
> ...



I did not misunderstand Canon's response. You drew a conclusion from a statement given to suggest a course of action, not an analysis of Canon's statements.

To separate dust and seal as completely separate issues wouldn't make sense. If it inside the lens it is inside of the part that is weather sealed. But which part of "inside" the lens doesn't apply? If there is dust moving against the lens barrel and the weather seals move against the lens barrel I guess we should assume that that the dust will stay separate from the seals?

To your comment, what would be pressured to "fully close" the lens from moisture? I must have missed the note from Canon that the lens must be "fully closed" to protect it from moisture.


----------



## mshaw (Nov 27, 2013)

Here is the latest from Canon in regards to the 'squeak.' Apparently a 'squeak' to me, is a mechanical sound to Canon. We live in a strange world… for reference I've posted a link to a video of the squeak er uh… I mean... mechanical sound. Most expensive mechanical sound I ever paid for! :
__________

Canon 24-70 2.8 USM II Lens Squeak (2)
__________

Dear Mark Shaw:

We appreciate your continued correspondence.

I understand your concern. The sound we are both referring to is not considered a "squeak". The lens as it moves will make a mechanical sounds, but not a squeaking sound. Squeaking to me would be a higher pitched sound. The lens was just returned from the repair facility. Regrettably, the only option we are left with would be sending the camera back to the repair facility for a repeat repair. If you would like to receive the shipping label, please provide the following information.

Product Serial Number: 
Date of Purchase: 
Address: 
City: 
State: 
Zip: 
Phone Number:

We look forward to your reply with the information we have requested regarding your PowerShot SD4000 IS.
-----------------------------------------------------

We look forward to your reply with the information we have requested.

Sincerely,

Ronald
Technical Support Representative

Special Note: Certain issues are very difficult to resolve via email. If you would prefer to speak to a technician for additional assistance, you may call our special toll-free number for email customers with unresolved issues by dialing 1-866-261-9362, Monday - Friday 10:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m. ET (excluding holidays).


----------



## takesome1 (Nov 27, 2013)

mshaw said:


> Here is the latest from Canon in regards to the 'squeak.' Apparently a 'squeak' to me, is a mechanical sound to Canon. We live in a strange world… for reference I've posted a link to a video of the squeak er uh… I mean... mechanical sound. Most expensive mechanical sound I ever paid for! :
> __________
> 
> Canon 24-70 2.8 USM II Lens Squeak (2)
> ...



In this video it sounds normal. I can't hear it either.

I could barely hear a squeak in the second video in your first post.


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 27, 2013)

Sounds like air pressure to me, not a mechanical squeak. Zoom it slightly slower allowing the air trapped inside the barrel to get past the weatherproofing sealing ring with less pressure and I am sure it will be gone. How often do you zoom that fast when shooting video?


----------



## mshaw (Nov 27, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> Sounds like air pressure to me, not a mechanical squeak. Zoom it slightly slower allowing the air trapped inside the barrel to get past the weatherproofing sealing ring with less pressure and I am sure it will be gone. How often do you zoom that fast when shooting video?



The first time i heard it chirp I thought it was air pressure too. Didn't pay much attention to it, until I realized it was beginning to consistently squeak. Unfortunately, the cause is not air. Unless I retract the zoom at the pace of a snail it will undoubtedly squeak. Something internally is causing it. I'm all ears if you can think of another cause though!


----------



## Invertalon (Nov 27, 2013)

Normal. Mine does it too. I figured it was the dust/weather sealing in the lens because if I wipe down the extending barrel with my cleaner I use for all my gear, it goes away for months. When it comes back, another wipe down and it goes away again. Makes sense, as it probably acts as a weak lubricant of sorts on the seals. 

To me, it sounded like a gasket/seal... So hearing Canon confirm that makes perfect sense. Again, once I wipe down the barrel, the sound goes away completely. Try doing the same?

I use Meguiars interior protectant for all my camera cleaning (external). Good for light rubber/plastic cleaning and without being greasy. I spray it on a microfiber very lightly and wipe down my equipment.


----------



## mshaw (Nov 27, 2013)

Invertalon said:


> Normal. Mine does it too. I figured it was the dust/weather sealing in the lens because if I wipe down the extending barrel with my cleaner I use for all my gear, it goes away for months. When it comes back, another wipe down and it goes away again. Makes sense, as it probably acts as a weak lubricant of sorts on the seals.
> 
> To me, it sounded like a gasket/seal... So hearing Canon confirm that makes perfect sense. Again, once I wipe down the barrel, the sound goes away completely. Try doing the same?
> 
> I use Meguiars interior protectant for all my camera cleaning (external). Good for light rubber/plastic cleaning and without being greasy. I spray it on a microfiber very lightly and wipe down my equipment.



Very interesting. I was planning on going to my local canon store this weekend to see if other copies had a similar issue. Both times the lens was serviced by canon, it was lubricated, so I would be hesitant to chalk this up to a lubrication issue. That said, I could see why using Meguiars would lessen the noise. Even if it is less greasy then ArmorAll, it would still get everything sliding nicely I'm sure. 

I appreciate the advice, but I'm not certain I'll go down this road as I'm a bit concerned about using Meguiars on my gear. From my experience with any car care products of that nature it tends to attract dust/dirt act in the long run. It sounds like you have not had this issue though?


----------



## Invertalon (Nov 27, 2013)

Nope, I have been using the stuff for years. It absolutely does not feel greasy one bit, nor does it attract dust or cause any other issues. Again, I just lightly mist a microfiber and wipe down everything. It does not get "wet" or anything. It acts as a very mild cleaner/protectant, and has been my go-to product for choice as it is safe on almost all rubber/plastic surfaces. 

It is NOT the protectant product they sell, but the interior cleaner. Here is a link to the one I am talking about on Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/Meguiars-Interior-Detailer-Cleaner-16-oz/dp/B000AMLWH8


----------



## M.ST (Nov 27, 2013)

The lens IQ is very good but:

1. Canon has massive production problems not only with the 24-70 2.8 II (I test a few 70-200 2.8 II IS L lenses with the new caps on it and all the testet lenses delivers a very bad IQ - compared to my two lenses the tested 70-200 2.8 II IS L lenses are totally junk - I tested a new 100 2.8 Macro IS lens and are the opinion that the plastic body feels more cheap as my Macro lens body)

2. After opening and looking into one of the latest 24-70 2.8 II lenses (new Cap on it) I was disappointed about the product quality inside the lens. The product quality of the version one (not the IQ) is a big step over the version two. 

Conclusion:
Send it back to Canon and demand a lens without problems or sell it and buy the 24-70 4.0 IS lens. The 24-70 4.0 IS has much better IQ (only if the objects is a few meters away). The 24-70 4.0 IS is now in IQ the sencond best Canon lens only a few points away from the 180 mm Macro lens.


----------



## mike921 (Nov 27, 2013)

Mine doesn't squeak, either fast or slow zooming. Serial #011500xxxx, came with the non-pinch type front cap.


----------



## Ripley (Nov 27, 2013)

"Squeaking" noises come from friction between two surfaces. That lens is known to have a tight assembly and stiff zoom ring. Something is probably just rubbing a bit microscopically and always has been. It will probably go away eventually. Would you prefer a loose assembly? 

I think you're obsessing (understandably). If the IQ is great and everything is functioning properly, I say let it go and enjoy your lens.


----------



## mshaw (Nov 28, 2013)

Ripley said:


> "Squeaking" noises come from friction between two surfaces. That lens is known to have a tight assembly and stiff zoom ring. Something is probably just rubbing a bit microscopically and always has been. It will probably go away eventually. Would you prefer a loose assembly?
> 
> I think you're obsessing (understandably). If the IQ is great and everything is functioning properly, I say let it go and enjoy your lens.



This idea would make sense except that the lens did not squeak out of the box. The squeak started as an intermittent problem after what I'd estimate to be 3 mo. of use and progressed until it became consistent. If the lens had started with the squeak, when it's tolerances would have presumably been the tightest - perhaps it would loosen up over time. If anything, after a summer of being lugged around the PNW the lens should be well on it's way to loosening up, but the squeak has gotten worse. Thanks for the input, any and all ideas are welcome. Looking into hiring a Witch Doctor in Portland to throw some chicken bones at it now. Amazing what you can find on craigslist!


----------



## Ruined (Dec 1, 2013)

Another downside to this is resale value. Buyers would likely return to you a lens that squeaks, and if you list the squeak in the ad you'd have to price it much lower than other sellers.


----------



## mshaw (Dec 1, 2013)

Ruined said:


> Another downside to this is resale value. Buyers would likely return to you a lens that squeaks, and if you list the squeak in the ad you'd have to price it much lower than other sellers.



Completely agree. Planning on going to my local canon store tomorrow to handle other 24-70's. Very confident other copies will not squeak. Will take another video, side by side, with my lens squeak and the other copies non-squeak and will be returning lens to canon for the #3 attempt, video included. Perhaps they won't be able to justify this as 'normal' if none of the other copies exhibit this 'normal mechanical sound.' 

Re-Sale Value is my #2 reason for pushing the issue, right behind decreased functionality for video. I would never buy a lens that squeaked. Not sure who the heck would want to unless it was ridiculously cheap. 

The saga continues…


----------



## OKO-SAN (Dec 1, 2013)

Clean and non-aggressive cleaning agent - water for injection ampoules. Purchased at your local pharmacy. Do not use large amounts of water. Fiber should be slightly moist. Do not mount the lens to the body to dry completely. Pure water does not leave sticky spots for dust.)))


----------



## bobby samat (Dec 4, 2013)

no squeak on mine. i zoomed as fast as you did in the video. i can hear air, no squeak.

it's a bummer to find out that yours is making a noise. it sounds like canon isn't going to help you and it's unfortunate to hear their ultimate conclusion. i've gotten to use lots of canon zooms. none of them squeaked. among them were zooms that extended from the lens body.

your main goal should be image quality. as long as the lens is sharp and the pictures look good, i would be happy and try to be more tollerant of the noise.


----------



## Ruined (Dec 5, 2013)

Threads like these, combined with the high price and lack of IS, is why I now refuse to buy this lens.

At $2200 the lens should be premium build Canon stands behind. It should have the latest technologies. It seems to have production problems, Canon appears to refuse to stand behind it, and it fails to have image stabilization while a competitor's lens half the price does.

It is amazing how much of a disappointment this lens is given its price tag! If you don't mind exchanging 5x you *might* get a good one - though in the OP's case a "good one" turned into a "bad one" over time - but for the pricetag that is just too much to ask IMO, again especially lacking IS.

Let's hope Canon does a do-over with a new version of this in 2014 with IS and none of the production issues.


----------



## bobby samat (Dec 5, 2013)

i've met four or five people with the 24-70 II over the last year and they all had nothing but praise. none of them mentioned noises like clicking or squeaking, so i'm guessing the problem isn't as widespread as suggested. 

i usually bring two bodies to shoot and the 24-70 II is almost always on one of them. bottom line - the AF is reliable and the pictures are very sharp. you can go from reasonably wide to near portrait immediately. 24-70 is a great focal length for me.

since there is supposedly a 24-70 2.8 IS coming out, then the price of the 24-70 II should keep coming down. BH has it for 1700 right now, which is a steal. if IS is important to you, wait. i'm interested in seeing how much the new lens will be.

i have mixed emotions about the necessity of IS until you get a little closer to 70mm, so spending the extra for IS on a lens with this focal range isn't something i would be willing to do currently. different story with the 70-200.

this has probably been mentioned, but if i had a newer lens that canon wasn't doing anything about, i would find a reputable lens/camera repair service and have them take a look.

anyone have an opinion as to if extreme humidity, or extreme lack of humidity, could make a zoom lens squeak?


----------



## mshaw (Dec 6, 2013)

So here is the latest update in the squeak that wouldn't die thread… 

Earlier this week I took a video of my squeaky lens next to a brand new 24-70 at my local can shop. Zoomed them both in/out and was able to clearly show squeak vs. no squeak. I sent the lens into canon for the 3rd time and provided a link to the video. I also kindly told them again, that this was not a 'normal mechanical sound,' as neither when my lens when new(er), nor with the new 24-70 in the video was the squeak present. Moreover, I re-iterated that the squeak made video a PITA, which is a basic function of the lens. Blah blah blah… with a few tears mixed in. 

Long story short, told Canon that if they can not/will not repair the lens, I do not want it back. New copy, credit, box of whitman chocolates, no matter to me - just don't want to deal with squeaky anymore and get the run around. Don't have the time to take on evil empires like I used to. Zeiss is looking very tempting about now. Pick your poison I suppose… 

I'll keep you all posted.


----------



## Ruined (Dec 6, 2013)

Good luck man. I'm not touching this lens until 2014, by then hope all this squeaking/clicking bs is sorted out! 

fyi someone got a June build on dpr that clicks :-/


----------



## mshaw (Dec 20, 2013)

So I took one last video of my squeaky lens side by side with a new 24-70 with no squeak. I then send the video and lens into Canon. Received the lens back today - squeak still present of course. But wait it gets better!

Turns out the lens was improperly packaged - the foam spacers were reversed allowing the lens to roll around in the box all the way from VA to WA. The lens cap even popped off from all of the jostling… 

I am at a loss here folks. Time to move on from my 10+ year love affair with Canon :-( 

Canon 24-70 f/2.8 USM II Squeak


----------



## Ruined (Dec 20, 2013)

Sorry to hear that man. I really advise you take the consumer protection steps I outlined in the post below before you give up for your own good and also the good of other consumers with this issue:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=18290.msg340286#msg340286

At least then you know you gave it your best shot and perhaps helped out others in the process.


----------



## mshaw (Dec 21, 2013)

Ruined said:


> Sorry to hear that man. I really advise you take the consumer protection steps I outlined in the post below before you give up for your own good and also the good of other consumers with this issue:
> 
> http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=18290.msg340286#msg340286
> 
> At least then you know you gave it your best shot and perhaps helped out others in the process.



I will have to head down that road. No other options left at this point. I just never thought I with have this sort of issue with Canon, but it is what it is.

I look like a crazy person on the initial youtube video image. Hope it's just my computer that stretches the image out like that - if not I apologize to everyone haha!


----------



## Invertalon (Dec 23, 2013)

Sucks on the packing job. I never send any gear in with the original boxes and put like 6" of thick bubble wrap around each item. If multiple items, each is done seprately and taped together in a big mass... Then put in a box with plenty of peanuts, packing paper, etc... I figure this cushions any shock better than the box it comes with.

Canon NJ has always returned each item back just as good... Usually plenty of thick bubble wrap, tightly packed. If multiple items, they usually put them in their own boxes.


----------



## mshaw (Dec 29, 2013)

Just got the below e-mail from Canon. They said they wanted to see the lens one last time to let an 'Engineer' take a look at it. Crossing my fingers on this one. Sent it back to Canon today - 12/28/13 - will keep you all updated. 


_____
Good Afternoon Mr. Shaw,

Thank you for contacting Canon regarding your concerns with your EF 24-70 lens. Your information was escalated to me for review and resolution. I regret to hear that the lens is not working as expected. In an effort to address and resolve your concerns regarding this matter, I would like opportunity to speak with you directly at your earliest convenience.

Can you please contact me at the telephone number below, Monday - Friday, 8am to 4pm EST. I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.

Sincerely,
--- 

Executive Response Representative
Canon Customer Relations
[email protected]
866-886-1901 ext. ---


----------



## Sabaki (Dec 29, 2013)

There was a similar post to this about 3 months back. 
Turns out there was a faulty batch of 24-70's made in late 2012 that had this issue. If I remember correctly and I may be wrong, the squeak was a a result of those electronic ribbons being housed incorrectly. I was also of opinion that those ribbons would wear out quickly due to the constant rubbing. 

I say fight my friend. You cannot spend $2000 on a defective item only to be turned away by manufacturers who refuse to do the right thing. 

Consumer protection or a civil case. I would.


----------



## Viggo (Dec 29, 2013)

I opened my box to check for the production series number, batch number, can't find anything that states those numbers. Maybe it's different in Europe. Mine is a 2012 edition with the old style lens cap, I had it swapped due to the ticking sound, this one however works perfect. I wonder if there are only the early ones that work and all the latest comes now with both squeak and tick. 

It's epic fail from Canon not to address the issue and replace yours and other peoples lenses directly , instead of keep wearing people out by 5-6 replacements through their dealers, it's sickening....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 29, 2013)

Viggo said:


> I opened my box to check for the production series number, batch number, can't find anything that states those numbers. Maybe it's different in Europe.



The '032' etc numbers people are talking about the beginning of the serial number. It's on the lens itself, the warranty card, and printed on the box (the last set of digits under the bar code - meaning it's often of the vendor invoice, too. 

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-Lens-Aging.aspx

Mine is (951) meaning Oct 2012, came with the old side-pinch cap, and is optically and mechanically perfect.


----------



## Viggo (Dec 29, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > I opened my box to check for the production series number, batch number, can't find anything that states those numbers. Maybe it's different in Europe.
> ...



Thanks! Mine is "940" making it a September 2012, if I read it right. A classic ! ;D


----------



## mshaw (Jan 7, 2014)

Update. Spoke with Canon on 1/7/14. Per the engineers - 'the noise did not occur under normal operating circumstances nor was the squeak able to be recorded on any audio equipment.' Lens will be shipped back with a smile from VA. 

My last recourse would be to record some audio of the squeak on my 5D3 and send it back in yet again - but for what? This would be its 5th trip in if I'm remembering correctly!

I give up - Canon has wore me down. Tired of the constant back and forth and being down a lens. I'll just take a hit and sell old squeaky…It almost lasted a year haha! Im seeing Zeiss in my future. Very dissatisfied with all things Canon, but looking forward to the great things I've been hearing about Zeiss. 

I miss manual focus primes... I know they won't squeak 

Thanks for following my story friends and I hope you have better luck than I!


----------



## Viggo (Jan 7, 2014)

mshaw said:


> Update. Spoke with Canon on 1/7/14. Per the engineers - 'the noise did not occur under normal operating circumstances nor was the squeak able to be recorded on any audio equipment.' Lens will be shipped back with a smile from VA.
> 
> My last recourse would be to record some audio of the squeak on my 5D3 and send it back in yet again - but for what? This would be its 5th trip in if I'm remembering correctly!
> 
> ...



Man, that is some pretty $h1tty treatment of a customer! So sorry to hear that...

I can absolutely recommend the Zeiss 50 f2 mp, wonderful lens that can do it all.


----------

