Disassembled Canon Lens

What does this picture of a completely dissassembled Canon 17-85mm lens say? It says "Not user serviceable," is what it says!

Thread [Fred Miranda forums via Gizmodo]

[#1 posted by knyghtryda , October 6, 2008 12:24 PM]

Now I can see why those great canon lenses cost a pretty penny... the engineering on the inside is pretty crazy. Still on the lookout for a used 70-200mm F4 L for a good price though.

[#2 posted by technogeek , October 6, 2008 12:25 PM]

I'm sure there are hobbyists who could reassemble that from parts, just as I'm sure there are folks who can reassemble a watch from parts. But most folks don't want to go that deep... and the nice thing about reliable products is that you generally don't have to think about doing so.

[#3 posted by Jake0748 , October 6, 2008 12:48 PM]

Pretty high-tech, doesn't use any glass.

[#4 posted by dculberson , October 6, 2008 1:53 PM]

Flux containment of light is a proven tech.

[#5 posted by Gary61 , October 6, 2008 1:55 PM]

"These are not the lens parts you are looking for."

[#6 posted by michaelportent , October 6, 2008 3:11 PM]

Are any modern camera lenses user serviceable?! I know a lot of DIY nerds, and I can't think of anybody that services their own camera lenses. Clean them, perhaps.

[#7 posted by Dean , October 6, 2008 3:45 PM]

That gentleman took some gorgeous photos of his lens. I almost sent this to Joel earlier, I'm glad you guys caught it on your own.

[#8 posted by Patrick Austin , October 13, 2008 8:02 AM]

Don't forget that 90% of making the lens function is getting the thing calibrated to focus properly. Canon itself has trouble figuring that out. I've had to send camera bodies and lenses back to them numerous times to get a problem corrected.

A hobbyist has absolutely no hope of servicing a lens.