cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

LENS SERIAL NUMBER CANON 70-200 F2.8 IS 11

Countryside59
Contributor

Hi,

 

Have just purchased a 70-200 2.8L is 11usm lens from Ebay, seller stated only 6 months old and looks in mint condition, but would like to check date of manufacture, Is it the 10 digit serial no on the box, if this is so which site do I  need to check this out?

 

Thanks

 

13 REPLIES 13


@diverhank wrote:

This link will provide you with all the information you need to determine date of manufacturing:

 

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

 


After the OP reported today that Canon had told him that the date cannot be determined from the serial number, I checked my brand new 70-200 f/2.8L IS II (bought from B&H about a month ago) against the table provided by that link. If the table is correct, my lens was manufactured in February 2008. That strikes me as extremely unlikely, given the continued popularity of the lens. All copies made that long ago should have been sold almost as long ago. So I doubt the credibility of that table.

Bob
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA

RTF,

That is why I suggested you need the stamped on date code.  I didn't think the serial number is accurate.  Now I find that some or most of the 70-200's don't have the stamp or it has rubbed off.  Mine is gone.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!

"I checked my brand new 70-200 f/2.8L IS II (bought from B&H about a month ago) against the table provided by that link."

 

Back in the saddle again!

--------------------------------------------------------
"The right mouse button is your friend."


@Waddizzle wrote:

"I checked my brand new 70-200 f/2.8L IS II (bought from B&H about a month ago) against the table provided by that link."

 

Back in the saddle again!


Wellll... More like finishing my adjustment to being out of the saddle. The 70-200 that I had been using for the past several years belonged to the City I worked for, so I had to give it back when I retired. I had already concluded that doing without it was too painful to contemplate and had therefore accepted replacing it as an unavoidable cost of retirement.

Bob
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA
Announcements