24-105L problem....

[colintf]

Re: 24-105L problem....

Thanks for all the replies. I tried rubber for contact cleaning and then a soft cloth moistened with contact cleaning liquid (usually isopropyl alcohol?) all to no avail.
Contacted one of the approved repairers and, indeed, "sticky diaphragm" seems to be the diagnosis with a bill of around £211 (will seek other quotes) for a new diaphragm assembly (including a general clean, service and calibrate).
Is it worth it? Well, having used an old EF35-70 or an EFS18-55 for a few days the answer is a very definite yes! I think the 24-105 is an ace lens!
Cheers, Chris.

try Canon's own repair centre in Ellestree, they were considerably cheaper than the other Canon Approved repair centres for my 17-55f2.8 trepair

[slangford]

Re: 24-105L problem....

Sorry folks - most of the time cleaning the contacts won't do the trick - no matter what you clean them with. Typical symptoms of this problem also include the autofocus hunting back & forth, taking a long time to settle on a particular focus (and even then, not usually the right one). You might find that at some focal lengths the lens works OK, at others it has problems.

As some have mentioned, the 'cure' is usually a replacement diaphragm (aperture mechanism), but even that isn't the problem - the actual cause of the issue is the ribbon cable that connects to the diaphragm. To allow for zooming, Canon fold the cable back on itself, and a brass clip holds it at such a tight angle (close to a 180 degree fold), that as the lens is used so much stress is placed on the joint that the electrical conductors inside the ribbon cable fracture (I'll take a photo on the next lens I repair if I remember). Most zoom lenses are susceptible to this kind of failure, even L-series stuff. Usually, the ribbon cables on the new parts are more durable, so as long as it's repaired right, it'll last OK.

Anyway, the cost of the repairs is expensive because Canon don't sell the ribbon cable on its own (and unless you're a REAL expert at soldering, you wouldn't want to attempt to replace the cable!) - they make you buy a whole new diaphragm unit which comes with new ribbon cable already attached. These vary in price according to what else is in that particular assembly (some lenses have optics which are supplied in the same assembly, others only include the diaphragm unit and the cable). Beware of cheap repairers - the best way to repair these problems is replacing the diaphragm with a genuine Canon spare part - the other option is to buy a cheap 3rd party ribbon cable and just replace the cable - as I've already said, due to the delicate soldering involved, it's a tricky process. Even if it does work, how long will the ribbon cable last?

The diaphragm unit is at the very heart of most zoom lenses - to replace it you pretty much have to dissasemble the lens into as many pieces as possible! Hence there's quite a labour element in there too - these days, on a zoom lens that I've seen before, it usually takes me about 3 hours to strip down, replace the diaphragm, and rebuild the lens, obviously cleaning everything as I go. So, on a basic lens, you have to ask yourself if it's worth repairing, since you will inevitably incur a fair cost to repair it.

Best of luck - hope this has explained a few things!

[colin C]

Re: 24-105L problem....

Wow.

That's an explanation and a half .......................... I am impressed.

Colin

[Trevoreast]

Re: 24-105L problem....

When I had the lens it developed that same problem - in addition to that, it had "lens creep" - meaning when carried with the lens hanging angled down it zoomed out to 105, not a major problem.

I had this lens repaired - at Elstree and promplty sold it for £160 more than I paid for it new !
The 3yrs use and repair of the 24-105 F4L cost me nothing.

Trev

[Chris J]

Re: 24-105L problem....

Fixed and back in use!

Thanks, everyone, for the comments and useful information. Particular thanks to Bawbee and colintf for suggesting Canon for repairs - I thought they would be more expensive than the "independents", but they did it in 10 days, repair, service and clean for £104 against the £211 quote I had from one of the others....

And thanks, slangford, for the info about what's inside and can go wrong - your breaking flexible ribbon theory would explain the initial intermitent nature of the fault before total failure.

Cheers, Chris.

[colintf]

Re: 24-105L problem....

Fixed and back in use!

Thanks, everyone, for the comments and useful information. Particular thanks to Bawbee and colintf for suggesting Canon for repairs - I thought they would be more expensive than the "independents", but they did it in 10 days, repair, service and clean for £104 against the £211 quote I had from one of the others....

And thanks, slangford, for the info about what's inside and can go wrong - your breaking flexible ribbon theory would explain the initial intermitent nature of the fault before total failure.

Cheers, Chris.

thats about the same cost / saving when they replaced my front lens in the 17-55f2.8. I was amazed how much cheaper they were!! Glad it went well Chris

Cheers
Colin

[Woolley]

Re: 24-105L problem....

Fixed and back in use!

Mine too.

[Dave_S]

Re: 24-105L problem....

A bit late to the 'party' on this thread, but I only joined the forum yesterday.

The 24-105 L lens is one that I gave serious thought to buying, as it has an ideal spread of focal length to cover most everyday situations, and of course I thought it would be of 'L' class build quality.

However, a bit of research, both of 'customer reviews' on dealers websites, and the www in general, showed that this Error Code, due a faulty power diaphram is very widespread among users of this lens.

Having used Canon lenses for goodness knows how many years, and never once experienced any problems, it amazes me that Canon launced a lens with an apparent design or component deficiency, and even more so, that knowing it has become a widespread problem, have failed to address it.

The fact that it is an 'L' series lens, makes it even more of a concern.

Given the optical and environmental sealing qualities of this lens, it would seem that Canon have 'spoilt the ship for a happeth of tar'.

Needless to say, this lens is now off of my 'shopping list', which is disappointing.

Dave

[jonesgj]

Re: 24-105L problem....

Dave_S, sorry to hear how you feel. I really enjoy using my 24-105, and if it went faulty or was stolen I wouldn't hesitate to repair / replace it.

[tesarver]

Re: 24-105L problem....

Like jonesgj said, sorry you feel that way. I've had 24-105L for a few years now. It is the Lens that spends the most time on my camera. For the 5D it covers a range of focal lengths that make it IMO the perfect walkabout lens & with a f/4 across the focal length, once I meter for a shot (manual) I'm free to shot at multiple focal lengths without having to re-meter for each shot. If mine broke, it would be headed to Canon for repair that same day or next, cause I would not want to be without that lens.

Tom

[Dave_S]

Re: 24-105L problem....

if it went faulty or was stolen I wouldn't hesitate to repair / replace it.

I guess Canon know that, and that's why they are quite happy to ignore the problem, and not do anything about it in new production.

It is without doubt the quality of the optics. and usefulness of it's focal range that makes it a very desireable lens.

I have not heard of this power diaphragm problem in other Canon lenses, so they obviously know how to produce a lens without having this issue.

My Canon 75-300 f/4-5.6 USM is at least 5 years old, and probably nearer seven. It has travelled the world and been well used, but is still in perfect working order, and this is hardly an 'L' series lens.

The same goes for my Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 EX lens, which is five years old, and spends most of it's time attached to the camera. Sigma's EX series are their 'high end' lenses.

So yes, I would love to have the 24-105 Canon L lens, but can't bring myself to spend that sort of money on a lens knowing it is almost inevitable that it will develop this widely experienced fault, within an unacceptable time/ useage scale.

Much the same I guess would apply to any other product with a known and widely experienced problem.

Dave

[quadphoto]

Re: 24-105L problem....

A week after reading this thread my 24-105 packed in with this problem a few week later, it's six years old and had done a moderate amount of work, I had three quotes for repair from Lehmans, Fixation, and Canon Service Centre Elstree, i opted for the canon service centre with fixed price of £104 inclusive, compared with over £184 plus return postage form the other two. I am very pleased with the service that i received from Canon at Elstree and also very pleased to have the lens back on the camera.

[colintf]

Re: 24-105L problem....

I found Canon much cheaper as well, and they gave good sewrvice

[johnp]

Re: 24-105L problem....

My 24-105 just died. Took it to Johnstones in Glasgow and they diagnosed it instantly. They even showed me an iris assembly and the fiddly cable that seems to be at the heart of the problem. Certainly looked fragile to me!
John

[jonesgj]

Re: 24-105L problem....

I just had to open my mouth didn't I? :)

Er01 on 6D and on 7D. All other lenses fine.

Well it's better that it happened now then when we are away from home on holiday. So I need to send it back to Canon rather than a recommended third party, is what I have observed on this thread. So that's my job tomorrow lunchtime.