So you think that the Oly 12-40 is built of metal?

[Rick_Hunter]

Is this mockup your only evidence that the lens is plastic? While in Yodobashi (west Shinjuku) a couple of weeks ago, I picked up an e-m1 with 12-40 lens mounted and thought it was remarkably light. I asked the sales person about it and she said, no, the real lens is quite a bit heavier; the one in my hands was a mockup. That makes me wonder whether the cutaway mockup you saw was made in the same way? . . . ?

--
'And only the stump, or fishy part of him remained'
http://www2.gol.com/users/nhavens
A Contemplative Companion to Fujino Township

No, it's not the only evidence. On another board a E-M1 user had his 12-40 with the mount ripped off after a modest fall from a couch onto a carpet. He has posted pics of the damaged lens and you can see that the innards are plastic just in the same way as the cutaway model, and that the mount is screwed onto plastic posts.

 

[harold1968]

Is this mockup your only evidence that the lens is plastic? While in Yodobashi (west Shinjuku) a couple of weeks ago, I picked up an e-m1 with 12-40 lens mounted and thought it was remarkably light. I asked the sales person about it and she said, no, the real lens is quite a bit heavier; the one in my hands was a mockup. That makes me wonder whether the cutaway mockup you saw was made in the same way? . . . ?

 

[exdeejjjaaaa]

You are obviously not a materials scientist. Those three words in quotes mean many different things, none of which seems to be clear to people who don't understand the science of materials, or how it has progressed in the last 50 years.

Just one example -- no "metal" tennis racket would survive the abuse that pro tennis players give to their "plastic" ones.

apparently you forgot that all plastics and all metals are different

Exactly my point, ex-DJ.

the point was the plastic used for rackets that top players play with is a way better... the one in lens is cheap one... for a change try to throw that racket on a ground and then try to do the same w/ 12-40... which one breaks ;-)

 

[exdeejjjaaaa]

We all prefer the touch of metal lenses because the weight and firmness gives a feel of quality, but in reality high grade plastics are more suited to surviving impact damage.

the issue is that the plastic used in screw mounts is not a high grade plastic...

 

[harold1968]

Well... It's not, look at this cutaway:

It's all plastic, except for the lens mount and the "bodywork". It actually is a plastic lens wrapped in a thin external layer of metal, so that it looks like metal from the outside.

I would also like to point out that the screws holding the lens mount to the lens are screwed onto plastic and the zoom helicoids are plastic too.

Oh well, I'll be getting one anyway, there is no doubt it's an optically superb lens, but I'm a bit sad that at this pricepoint (and with a PRO monicker printed on the lens barrel itself) we are getting a dressed-up plastic lens instead of a (real) metal one like the 75mm 1.8 (check lensrental's dismantling of the 75 and you will see it is much better built)

Thanks

actually you couldn't have metal screw clamps in a plastic body, as the clamps would fall out under stress.

it seems that the metal shell might also be connected to the mount, in any event the weight is held by the base of the metal shell against the camera.

whats more interesting to me is the inside of the camera. Wow, what a work of art and science, amazing compression.



--
harold.co.il

 

[Rick_Hunter]

There was a discussion like this a week or so ago regarding a broken 12-40 with the 'plastic mounts'. Then people posted a Nikon pro lens with similar damage showing the same type of construction.

This appears to be completely normal these days.

What makes it 'pro' is it's weather sealing and overall build quality.

--
John Mason - Lafayette, IN
http://finestimages.zenfolio.com/favorites

Well Roger Cicala says bigger lenses have internal metal mounts. (read my post)

Even the Olympus 75mm 1.8 has the lens mount screwed onto metal, not plastic. (And in fact Roger praises its construction) Please check this lensrentals article:

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/07/the-olympus-75mm-f1-8-is-expensive-because-its-worth-it

Even my modest 400$ Nikon 50mm F/1.4 (which has a plastic exterior, weighs only 300 grams, and is shorter than the 12-40) has the mount screwed onto metal: I just took out one of the lens mount screws... and there's a metal thread inside the lens.

Fujifilm X-lenses have plastic innards but have metal (seems like brass) inserts where the lens mount screws on.

So, no, plastic posts holding the lens mount is not the standard today. It's just the cheap standard. Luckily not all lenses are made so cheaply. I can tolerate plastic innards, even though it irritates me that Olympus claims a false "all metallic construction"

But the lens mount being screwed in plastics is just poor build quality. They could have least gone the Fuji route and placed small metal inserts for the lens mount screws. Pity.

 

[Ontario Gone]

Now if only they can find a plastic equivalent to ED glass that provides equal IQ! Other than for the objective lens, I'd be all for that in exchange for lower weight for big "glass".

This, Sir Jonathan, is what we call graphene. It is not here yet, but it will be soon. The first graphene based phones are in developement, and other tech will follow. Graphene is clear, lighter than any material we know of, and stronger than steel per equal thickness (hundreds of x stronger). In time, everything except insulation will be made of graphene.

One of many articles on it, LINK .

 

[texinwien]

We all prefer the touch of metal lenses because the weight and firmness gives a feel of quality, but in reality high grade plastics are more suited to surviving impact damage.

the issue is that the plastic used in screw mounts is not a high grade plastic...

How do you know this?

 

[Rick_Hunter]

Is this mockup your only evidence that the lens is plastic? While in Yodobashi (west Shinjuku) a couple of weeks ago, I picked up an e-m1 with 12-40 lens mounted and thought it was remarkably light. I asked the sales person about it and she said, no, the real lens is quite a bit heavier; the one in my hands was a mockup. That makes me wonder whether the cutaway mockup you saw was made in the same way? . . . ?

 

[Ulric]

There was a discussion like this a week or so ago regarding a broken 12-40 with the 'plastic mounts'. Then people posted a Nikon pro lens with similar damage showing the same type of construction.

This appears to be completely normal these days.

What makes it 'pro' is it's weather sealing and overall build quality.

--
John Mason - Lafayette, IN
http://finestimages.zenfolio.com/favorites

Well Roger Cicala says bigger lenses have internal metal mounts. (read my post)

Even the Olympus 75mm 1.8 has the lens mount screwed onto metal, not plastic. (And in fact Roger praises its construction) Please check this lensrentals article:

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/07/the-olympus-75mm-f1-8-is-expensive-because-its-worth-it

Even my modest 400$ Nikon 50mm F/1.4 (which has a plastic exterior, weighs only 300 grams, and is shorter than the 12-40) has the mount screwed onto metal: I just took out one of the lens mount screws... and there's a metal thread inside the lens.

Fujifilm X-lenses have plastic innards but have metal (seems like brass) inserts where the lens mount screws on.

So, no, plastic posts holding the lens mount is not the standard today. It's just the cheap standard. Luckily not all lenses are made so cheaply. I can tolerate plastic innards, even though it irritates me that Olympus claims a false "all metallic construction"

But the lens mount being screwed in plastics is just poor build quality. They could have least gone the Fuji route and placed small metal inserts for the lens mount screws. Pity.

I'm not sure what is worse, having the screws break loose from the plastic, having the metal inserts break loose fram the plastic or having the screws firmly secured in the all-metal construction but something else break instead. Repairing the plastic mount seems like a pretty straightforward job, not DIY perhaps, but still.

 

[rrr_hhh]

Well... It's not, look at this cutaway:

It's all plastic, except for the lens mount and the "bodywork". It actually is a plastic lens wrapped in a thin external layer of metal, so that it looks like metal from the outside.

I would also like to point out that the screws holding the lens mount to the lens are screwed onto plastic and the zoom helicoids are plastic too.

Oh well, I'll be getting one anyway, there is no doubt it's an optically superb lens, but I'm a bit sad that at this pricepoint (and with a PRO monicker printed on the lens barrel itself) we are getting a dressed-up plastic lens instead of a (real) metal one like the 75mm 1.8 (check lensrental's dismantling of the 75 and you will see it is much better built)

I prefer a plastic lens to a very heavy one ! What maters is IQ and there it delivers. I have one on order. BTW, there are all kinds of plastic or synthetic materials, some of which are very resistant.

--
rrr_hhh

 

[Sho-Bud]

We all prefer the touch of metal lenses because the weight and firmness gives a feel of quality, but in reality high grade plastics are more suited to surviving impact damage.

the issue is that the plastic used in screw mounts is not a high grade plastic...

Maybe this is designed on purpose this way. Just imagine that the lens mount would be rock solid and the camera would fall. It might damage the lens mount on the camera, or bend or miss-align it.

?????

 

[Pixnat2]

If you worry like that about it, you shouldn't buy it. Plastic, cheap construction, too expensive are the words that likely will come to your mind each time you'll hold the lens.

You are likely not going to enjoy it, because you are already dissatified BEFORE buying it.

Buying it seems to be a bad move for you, IMHO.

 

[CollBaxter]

Well... It's not, look at this cutaway:

It's all plastic, except for the lens mount and the "bodywork". It actually is a plastic lens wrapped in a thin external layer of metal, so that it looks like metal from the outside.

I would also like to point out that the screws holding the lens mount to the lens are screwed onto plastic and the zoom helicoids are plastic too.

Oh well, I'll be getting one anyway, there is no doubt it's an optically superb lens, but I'm a bit sad that at this pricepoint (and with a PRO monicker printed on the lens barrel itself) we are getting a dressed-up plastic lens instead of a (real) metal one like the 75mm 1.8 (check lensrental's dismantling of the 75 and you will see it is much better built)

They have put metal where it is needed. On the outside to protect the lens. If this was a full metal lens it would be half as heavy again and more than twice the cost. The aloy parts would have to be die cast and then machined which adds to the cost. Plastic parts can be injection molded and on only some of the parts need to be machined.

Plastic is far more bend and bounce resistant. Plastic also has better thermal expansion and contraction capabilities ( They don't expand / contract that much) . Some types of plastics are self lubricating and do not require lubricants like metals do.

I would rather see the metal on the outside than in the inside.

I left a camera on a table with the strap hang over the edge. The dog ran past and put her head through the strap the camera fell on the dog. The dog took off with the camera entwined around her neck. I chased the dog and the dog ran faster with the camera bouncing around on paving etc . After about a minute i caught the dog. End result was one totally wrecked 11-22 . The E-500 had a few scuff marks on it. Changed the lens and every thing worked. The lens was a write off. Did not talk to the dog for a few weeks , damn lens murderer .

Modern Plastics are very tough.

I really don't see what the issue is.

Do you know that some of the elements in the lens are also probably plastic.



--

Collin
(Aficionado Olympus DSLR )

http://collinbaxter.zenfolio.com/

Galleries by Collin Baxter

www.pbase.com

http://www.outdoorphoto.co.za/gallery/showgallery.php?ppuser=21652&username=collin

Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away. (George Carlin)
New Seventh Wonder of the World.

http://www.pbase.com/collinbaxter/image/95297052.jpg

 

[Brian Wadie]

having spent my working life researching then developing non-metallic materials (plastic in simple speak ) I am delighted that the 12-40 is built using these excellent engineering materials

(I wonder how many people worry about how much "Plastic" there is in the aircraft they fly in, the cars they drive and in just about every other appliance in common use in the modern world?)

 

[Jolly Oly]

That's terrible, I don't know what to think now..

 

[boggis the cat]

The Oly is F5.6 equivalent to a Canon FF. A Canon or Nikon F5.6 is basically a kit lens, that you can buy for $150. Oh, those kit lenses are also made of plastic, and for $150 people still complain.

When are people going to get that M43rds is ripping people off on lens prices? Maybe 6 times what they should cost.

That's terrible! A 135 sensor based system has to be stopped down to f/5.6 to get the depth of field you can get from a FourThirds system at f/2.8! What is even worse is that you'll then have to increase the ISO setting two 'stops' to compensate!

Canon, Nikon and Sony are all ripping you off by making you pay much more for inferior lenses and large bodies that can't even properly use those over-sized sensors based on the old 135 film standard!

Oh, the humanity!

 

[Dheorl]

Now if only they can find a plastic equivalent to ED glass that provides equal IQ! Other than for the objective lens, I'd be all for that in exchange for lower weight for big "glass".

This, Sir Jonathan, is what we call graphene. It is not here yet, but it will be soon. The first graphene based phones are in developement, and other tech will follow. Graphene is clear, lighter than any material we know of, and stronger than steel per equal thickness (hundreds of x stronger). In time, everything except insulation will be made of graphene.

One of many articles on it, LINK .

I'm very curious as to how you think you'd make a lens out of graphene.

Also I bleeding well hope not everything is made out of it. It would be foolish beyond belief considering in a lot of applications it would have no benefit and cost a lot more.

 

[Brian Wadie]

look at all the seals too, its probably easier to match seal material to a non-metallic body than it is to a metallic one (similar coefficients of expansion etc )

The degree of engineering design involved in these lenses (whether metal bodied or not) is stunning

 

[Thorgrem]

There is no way in this world that any lens can be made only out of metal. It needs glass. Also if a m4/3 was only metal it would probably destroy the camera because short circuit. Modern lenses and camera's have active mounts. So there is need for plastic.

The Oly 12-40 is nicely build and has a good combination of materials to make it feel rock solid. You are whining because someone dropt the lens (attached to a body) and a few screws around the mount broke. That's by design. Just like creasing areas in cars. It absorbs the hit and is easily repaired this way.