# EF 24 105 manufacturing location switch...



## TeT (Nov 5, 2014)

Is it significant that the 24 105 L is now being made in Oita?

Through 2013 this lens was being made in Utsunomiya. Saw my first 2014 model and it had an OCxxxx code on it...

Regardless of significance, why would they make that switch?


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 5, 2014)

TeT said:


> Is it significant that the 24 105 L is now being made in Oita? Through 2013 this lens was being made in Utsunomiya. Saw my first 2014 model and it had an OCxxxx code on it...



I'd like to hear some input from the engineering people around here like Mt. Spokane, but I doubt switching japanese plants makes much of a difference concerning lens quality. I'd be more concerned if lenses turned up with origin of china or even more low-cost countries which at least affects the qc.



TeT said:


> Regardless of significance, why would they make that switch?



Production capacity, production price, maybe they use their Utsunomiya for the upcoming 100-400L2, 35L2 and 50L2  ?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 5, 2014)

I've not heard of lens date codes starting with anything but 'U' until now. Might be a strategic decision not to have all their lens production at one plant, spurred by the 2011 tsunami and the proximity of the Fukushima nuclear plant (date to which affected the Utsonumiya area). The timing would be about right to start seeing lenses from a second plant.


----------



## Bennymiata (Nov 5, 2014)

It's also possible that the change in the manufacturing site might lead to some improvements as the processes and assembly line must have been cleaned and updated.


----------



## wtlloyd (Nov 9, 2014)

OR, my first thought is that lens is going to remain in the lineup just as it is for years to come, else why shift production of what is basically a loss-leader kit lens? Wouldn't you just introduce a new version and start up the production with fresh tooling?




Bennymiata said:


> It's also possible that the change in the manufacturing site might lead to some improvements as the processes and assembly line must have been cleaned and updated.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 9, 2014)

Canon announced plans to add lens manufacturing capacity in Oita several years ago. The opening of the Oita plant expansion was delayed a few times, but finally got running.

http://www.japancorp.net/Article.Asp?Art_ID=11634

http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/photography-news/canon-delays-opening-of-digital-camera-factory/

http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/photography-news/canon-manufacturing-plant-hit-with-second-delay/


----------



## TeT (Nov 10, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Canon announced plans to add lens manufacturing capacity in Oita several years ago. The opening of the Oita plant expansion was delayed a few times, but finally got running.
> 
> http://www.japancorp.net/Article.Asp?Art_ID=11634
> 
> ...



and the winner is Mt Spokane...

Thanks for the answer....


----------



## dgatwood (Nov 10, 2014)

wtlloyd said:


> OR, my first thought is that lens is going to remain in the lineup just as it is for years to come, else why shift production of what is basically a loss-leader kit lens? Wouldn't you just introduce a new version and start up the production with fresh tooling?



Just speculating, but I'd imagine that it would be a lot easier to start up a new plant building a known entity, rather than a new product with unknown manufacturing quirks. Shifting manufacturing of a thoroughly well-understood lens would be a great test case.

By using the existing dies and other similar hardware with new equipment at a new factory, you'd be able to instantly compare those lenses with existing lenses from the old factory and be absolutely certain that the new equipment was working within tolerances, because you would get comparable or better results.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 10, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> wtlloyd said:
> 
> 
> > OR, my first thought is that lens is going to remain in the lineup just as it is for years to come, else why shift production of what is basically a loss-leader kit lens? Wouldn't you just introduce a new version and start up the production with fresh tooling?
> ...


 
The Oita plant has been making lenses for almost 40 years, but the new expansion was intended to vastly increase production. I had thought that the 200-400mmL was one of the first made in the newly expanded plant.

Canon had to expand because they were unable to keep up with demand for "L" lenses. They also made or make some lenses at Fukushima. The low cost lenses have been made at various plants over the years, but most come from Taiwan.

Cameras and Cinema lenses come from Oita, Canon has a very large facility there. I think their R&D is there as well. The fact that they moved production there (probably a expensive move) shows that they intent to keep making the 24-105mm L's.


----------



## dgatwood (Nov 10, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> dgatwood said:
> 
> 
> > wtlloyd said:
> ...



If their R&D is there, then I would actually suspect the opposite—that they are about to update the 24–105 L lens. I assume that their prototype manufacturing happens at the plant closest to their R&D team, and it would make sense to build new lens designs at that plant to allow for more careful testing and scrutiny, then shift production to other plants once the process is fully mature.

This, of course, assumes that much of the tooling for a 24–105 L is likely to be shared with a 24–105 L II. If that isn't the case, then they are probably just moving all of their high-volume lens manufacturing to the newer plant for cost reasons.

At least I *hope* this doesn't mean that we're stuck with the current 24–105 L for years to come. If I'm wrong, then our best hope for a great 24–105 involves pressuring Sigma to add weather sealing to theirs.... *sigh*


----------

