Is an Extended Lens Warranty Really Necessary?

I think most are familiar with the Mack Warranties for cameras and lenses, and for a complex computer like a 5D2 or a 1Ds3, I have no problem buying a Mack Warranty since there are so many things going on in the camera body. In fact, I did for my 5D2. But what about lenses? It seems like the higher end lenses are built so well that a warranty might be a waste there. Monday I finally got my Canon 16-35mm/2.8 (sticker shock still following me a little )... is it worth $50 for a 3-year warranty extension, or does a lens like that pretty much work all the time (barring no drops, etc)? Whattya think?

Hi Paul,

While I can't make a valid comment on Canon lenses (I'm a Nikon guy), I can tell you that one of my favourite pro Nikon lenses just had an AF failure 4 years and 355 days after purchase date and while the lens was heavily used, it was NEVER abused (dropped or anything of the like). Thank god it came with a 5-year warranty from Nikon Canada as it would have cost $7200 (CDN) to replace (and who knows what to repair). So...good lenses can fail...

Cheers...

Brad

Extended warranties are basically an additional profit source for the seller. Don't waste your money.

I never buy them. I especially wouldn't buy one for a digital camera, which are now virtually disposable anyway.


Kent in SD

If your lens will have a problem, the odds are that it will occur during the 1 year warranty period.
On the other hand, after laying out $1400 for a camera lens, then what's an extra $50?

Man, the arguments are strong on both sides... wild subject, isn't it?

John, I kind of thought that about lenses, anything wrong would show up in the first year, but look at Brad's situation. I think for me and my "after work and weekend" use, the lenses will hold up fine. I don't regret buying the 5-year for the 5D Mark II though, because there's a LOT going on in there that can surely fail in the next 5 years (and I'm actually planning to use the same camera that long... I'm going broke with all the upgrades!).

Alex, other than my 5D2, I do agree about the extended warranty saga, I NEVER buy them for any consumer electronics, and like Kent said, so much is disposable (like an inkjet printer for instance) and therefore the warranties are mostly a waste of money. I'm thinking that the 5D2 isn't exactly disposable though...

Thanks guys!

PS: My question is, why is the Canon warranty on a $1400 lens only one year???

I got one on my trusty 1D MK2 about 5 years ago. I never needed any warranty or out of warranty service so I wasted my money. I don't think I would ever buy one again. I'll gamble that the cost of repair after the expiration of the warranty will be about the same or less than the Mack Warranty.

Yeah, maybe I didn't need the Mack warranty for the 5D2, but I won't be buying any warranties for my lenses. The one time a warranty paid off was last September when the 5D2 was announced. I posted my original 5D that same week on eBay, and I had 2 years left on a 3-year warranty for it and it was free to transfer the warranty to the new owner. The body sold for $1739, and the buyer did state that it was the warranty that attracted them. I think that's a one-time odd situation where I got back my $112 investment. I wouldn't get $1200 for it today if I still had it.

Anyway, good thoughts from all, and thanks!