"Tough E-Mount"

[Bob Janes]

David Kilpatrick over at Photoclub Alpha did a review - he liked the replacement part, but did find fit problems with some of his adapters.

The metal-and-plastic bayonet was around for some time in Minolta A-mount and is perfectly serviceable, so I would not replace while a camera was still under warranty (it will be invalidated). I understand the latest cameras (7s and 7ii) have a full metal bayonet.

 

[nandbytes]

i prefer to keep my warranty, instead of fixing things that aren't broken. I have owned A7 for nearly a year now and have put large a-mount lenses on it with no issues thus far nor have heard any reports of others having issues.

 

[Mohammad Pakuwbowo]

I bought two pieces of Edition 2015 TOUGH E-Mount from Fotodiox Pro for my Sony a6000 and a7. I have successfully installed the Mount Adapters onto both of my cameras. Initialy it did work well with original E and FE lenses, as well as lenses with Metabones, Fotodiox and Voigtländers Lens Adapters. The problem began when I tried to mount expensive Novoflex Lens Adapters for Minolta MD/MC, Olympus or Zeiss C/Y. It won't click and stay fixed on the camera, but sit loosely so that I apparently could'nt use them at all, because it will immediately fell down from the camera. I wrote several days ago to Fotodiox asking for suggestions to fix the problem. So far I haven't got any answer from them.

How strange. When you examine the mounts (original and replacement) do you see any difference between the two? Does the new one prevent the locking pin from moving freely? I have had no such problems, albeit with a sample of 1.

Ultimately, if the Sony FE lenses mount correctly, the replacement mount must be within the Sony spec, which suggests that the Novoflex adapters, in spite of high cost, are not.

It doesn't seem to be any diffrence between the old and the new mount adapters (except the brass colour of the new!). The locking pin can move freely, no problem there. Besides, I have one Novoflex lens adapter which work perfectly with the new mount. It is the Novoflex NEX/LEM (Leica M to E-mount). I thought that Novoflex adapters are the best compared to the others. Yes it is strange.

 

[Thomphoto]

I just installed one on my a600, and have ordered another for my A7r. Fixed the problem on the A6000. There seems to be a lot of opinionated quotes in this thread, from some who have not installed this fix. If you don't feel the need to upgrade, then don't. Simple as that. I'm only interested in hearing from people who have experience with whatever the thread involves. Bottom line, the Tough E-Mount fixed what was a problem for me. It's a very easy and simple install ascwell. Thanks.

 

[rjjr]

Hi All

I recently purchased a "Tough E-Mount" from Fotodiox in the US as I have always been disappointed by the amount of slop between the lens and camera body with my A7r. I could easily see a half mm of gap opening up with a heavy lens like the 24-70 on there and this has caused me to have concerns about potential long term alignment issues arising from using these heavier lenses (I know, the 24-70 is not even that heavy).

How are you holding the camera when you notice the slop?

I don't notice any slop on my A6000 when my Tamron 150-600 and adapter are mounted when I support it by the lens.

 

[MisterHairy]

Hi All

I recently purchased a "Tough E-Mount" from Fotodiox in the US as I have always been disappointed by the amount of slop between the lens and camera body with my A7r. I could easily see a half mm of gap opening up with a heavy lens like the 24-70 on there and this has caused me to have concerns about potential long term alignment issues arising from using these heavier lenses (I know, the 24-70 is not even that heavy).

How are you holding the camera when you notice the slop?

I don't notice any slop on my A6000 when my Tamron 150-600 and adapter are mounted when I support it by the lens.

For example, when the A7r & 24-70/4 FE are mounted on a tripod.

 

[rjjr]

Hi All

I recently purchased a "Tough E-Mount" from Fotodiox in the US as I have always been disappointed by the amount of slop between the lens and camera body with my A7r. I could easily see a half mm of gap opening up with a heavy lens like the 24-70 on there and this has caused me to have concerns about potential long term alignment issues arising from using these heavier lenses (I know, the 24-70 is not even that heavy).

How are you holding the camera when you notice the slop?

I don't notice any slop on my A6000 when my Tamron 150-600 and adapter are mounted when I support it by the lens.

For example, when the camera/lens is mounted on a tripod.

Do you use a tripod collar with heavier lenses?

 

[MisterHairy]

Hi All

I recently purchased a "Tough E-Mount" from Fotodiox in the US as I have always been disappointed by the amount of slop between the lens and camera body with my A7r. I could easily see a half mm of gap opening up with a heavy lens like the 24-70 on there and this has caused me to have concerns about potential long term alignment issues arising from using these heavier lenses (I know, the 24-70 is not even that heavy).

How are you holding the camera when you notice the slop?

I don't notice any slop on my A6000 when my Tamron 150-600 and adapter are mounted when I support it by the lens.

For example, when the camera/lens is mounted on a tripod.

Do you use a tripod collar with heavier lenses?

You'll see that I edited my original post to be more specific about the lens, mentioning the 24-70/4 FE lens, for which no tripod collar is available (or possible).

 

[rjjr]

Hi All

I recently purchased a "Tough E-Mount" from Fotodiox in the US as I have always been disappointed by the amount of slop between the lens and camera body with my A7r. I could easily see a half mm of gap opening up with a heavy lens like the 24-70 on there and this has caused me to have concerns about potential long term alignment issues arising from using these heavier lenses (I know, the 24-70 is not even that heavy).

How are you holding the camera when you notice the slop?

I don't notice any slop on my A6000 when my Tamron 150-600 and adapter are mounted when I support it by the lens.

For example, when the camera/lens is mounted on a tripod.

Do you use a tripod collar with heavier lenses?

You'll see that I edited my original post to be more specific about the lens, mentioning the 24-70/4 FE lens, for which no tripod collar is available (or possible).

There are braces available to support a lens on a tripod. Manfrotto makes one.

Using a heavy lens on a tripod without supporting the lens is risky. Not only does it place unnecessary strain on any lens mount, it also puts unnecessary strain on the camera body at the tripod mount.

 

[MisterHairy]

Hi All

I recently purchased a "Tough E-Mount" from Fotodiox in the US as I have always been disappointed by the amount of slop between the lens and camera body with my A7r. I could easily see a half mm of gap opening up with a heavy lens like the 24-70 on there and this has caused me to have concerns about potential long term alignment issues arising from using these heavier lenses (I know, the 24-70 is not even that heavy).

How are you holding the camera when you notice the slop?

I don't notice any slop on my A6000 when my Tamron 150-600 and adapter are mounted when I support it by the lens.

For example, when the camera/lens is mounted on a tripod.

Do you use a tripod collar with heavier lenses?

You'll see that I edited my original post to be more specific about the lens, mentioning the 24-70/4 FE lens, for which no tripod collar is available (or possible).

There are braces available to support a lens on a tripod. Manfrotto makes one.

Using a heavy lens on a tripod without supporting the lens is risky. Not only does it place unnecessary strain on any lens mount, it also puts unnecessary strain on the camera body at the tripod mount.

LOL. I don't think that anyone would describe the 24-70/4 FE lens as particularly heavy. If the camera mount cannot handle the load from even a modest lens like that, then it is simply not up to the task. End of story.

70-200, I would not hesitate to use the tripod ring, but suggesting that one should purchase additional hardware to use modest lens like the 24-70 is laughable.

 

[rjjr]

Hi All

I recently purchased a "Tough E-Mount" from Fotodiox in the US as I have always been disappointed by the amount of slop between the lens and camera body with my A7r. I could easily see a half mm of gap opening up with a heavy lens like the 24-70 on there and this has caused me to have concerns about potential long term alignment issues arising from using these heavier lenses (I know, the 24-70 is not even that heavy).

How are you holding the camera when you notice the slop?

I don't notice any slop on my A6000 when my Tamron 150-600 and adapter are mounted when I support it by the lens.

For example, when the camera/lens is mounted on a tripod.

Do you use a tripod collar with heavier lenses?

You'll see that I edited my original post to be more specific about the lens, mentioning the 24-70/4 FE lens, for which no tripod collar is available (or possible).

There are braces available to support a lens on a tripod. Manfrotto makes one.

Using a heavy lens on a tripod without supporting the lens is risky. Not only does it place unnecessary strain on any lens mount, it also puts unnecessary strain on the camera body at the tripod mount.

LOL. I don't think that anyone would describe the 24-70/4 FE lens as particularly heavy. If the camera mount cannot handle the load from even a modest lens like that, then it is simply not up to the task. End of story.

70-200, I would not hesitate to use the tripod ring, but suggesting that one should purchase additional hardware to use modest lens like the 24-70 is laughable.

I even use a tripod collar on my 100mm macro. I don't find mitigating the risk to expensive gear laughable at all. Hopefully you won't have to to eat those words somewhere down the line.

As they say..."A word to the wise..."

 

[MisterHairy]

Hi All

I recently purchased a "Tough E-Mount" from Fotodiox in the US as I have always been disappointed by the amount of slop between the lens and camera body with my A7r. I could easily see a half mm of gap opening up with a heavy lens like the 24-70 on there and this has caused me to have concerns about potential long term alignment issues arising from using these heavier lenses (I know, the 24-70 is not even that heavy).

How are you holding the camera when you notice the slop?

I don't notice any slop on my A6000 when my Tamron 150-600 and adapter are mounted when I support it by the lens.

For example, when the camera/lens is mounted on a tripod.

Do you use a tripod collar with heavier lenses?

You'll see that I edited my original post to be more specific about the lens, mentioning the 24-70/4 FE lens, for which no tripod collar is available (or possible).

There are braces available to support a lens on a tripod. Manfrotto makes one.

Using a heavy lens on a tripod without supporting the lens is risky. Not only does it place unnecessary strain on any lens mount, it also puts unnecessary strain on the camera body at the tripod mount.

LOL. I don't think that anyone would describe the 24-70/4 FE lens as particularly heavy. If the camera mount cannot handle the load from even a modest lens like that, then it is simply not up to the task. End of story.

70-200, I would not hesitate to use the tripod ring, but suggesting that one should purchase additional hardware to use modest lens like the 24-70 is laughable.

Hopefully you won't have to to eat those words somewhere down the line.

As they say..."A word to the wise..."

Well, I replaced the camera mount with one fit for purpose.

Like I said, if the mount cannot support the load from a relatively lightweight lens like the 24-70, then it is not fit for purpose.

It is noteworthy that the second generation A7 cameras have solid mounts, don't you think?

It frankly amazes me when users want to support the manufacturer for selling them sub-par products, just to squeeze a little more profit. Still, you carry on.

 

[rjjr]

It frankly amazes me when users want to support the manufacturer for selling them sub-par products, just to squeeze a little more profit. Still, you carry on.

Interesting that all you have left is insults.

Still, I hope you won't have to eat your words down the line.

 

[MisterHairy]

It frankly amazes me when users want to support the manufacturer for selling them sub-par products, just to squeeze a little more profit. Still, you carry on.

Interesting that all you have left is insults.

Still, I hope you won't have to eat your words down the line.

Which insult is that, pray tell? The text which you have quoted is a valid observation and is in no way insulting.

And while we're on the topic of things actually said, rather than imagined to have been said, eat which words, exactly? That the replacement mount is superior or that the 24-70/4, at about 400g, is not a heavy lens?

 

[rjjr]

It frankly amazes me when users want to support the manufacturer for selling them sub-par products, just to squeeze a little more profit. Still, you carry on.

Interesting that all you have left is insults.

Still, I hope you won't have to eat your words down the line.

Which insult is that, pray tell? The text which you have quoted is a valid observation and is in no way insulting.

Yes it is and you know it or you wouldn't have tried to cover it with your telling smiley face.

And while we're on the topic of things actually said, rather than imagined to have been said, eat which words, exactly? That the replacement mount is superior or that the 24-70/4, at about 400g, is not a heavy lens?

Truth is handheld interchangeable lens cameras should be supported by the lenses if the lens is of any heft. Then the lens mount is supporting only a comparatively light camera body which puts minimal stress on the lens mount well within it's design parameters.

When mounted on a tripod those same cameras still need to be supported by the lens if it is of any heft.

It's just part of proper technique.

 

[le_alain]

I just installed one on my a600, and have ordered another for my A7r. Fixed the problem on the A6000. There seems to be a lot of opinionated quotes in this thread, from some who have not installed this fix. If you don't feel the need to upgrade, then don't. Simple as that. I'm only interested in hearing from people who have experience with whatever the thread involves. Bottom line, the Tough E-Mount fixed what was a problem for me. It's a very easy and simple install ascwell. Thanks.

I agree with you.

Personnally, I won't buy it for the moment for the following reasons:

- My A7 warranty is till 2018

- I don't have any wobble with lenses till 840g,

Though I see wobble when mounting my 2.3Kg Nikkor 50-300 f4.5, and not maintening it with my left hand (which is not a good idea, but a test, and it resists but wobbling.

BUT.

I can understand than some have the problem with lighter lenses, or want to be secure !

An easy "fix" exists, install it or not is every body choice, no need to be anxious, no need to be offensive.

 

[MisterHairy]

It frankly amazes me when users want to support the manufacturer for selling them sub-par products, just to squeeze a little more profit. Still, you carry on.

Interesting that all you have left is insults.

Still, I hope you won't have to eat your words down the line.

Which insult is that, pray tell? The text which you have quoted is a valid observation and is in no way insulting.

Yes it is and you know it or you wouldn't have tried to cover it with your telling smiley face.

So wondering aloud why it is that people defend a brand when that brand does not serve them as well as it might is insulting, is it? OK. And using a smiley to demonstrate amusement reinforces that insult? OK.

If you say so. <- that smiley is demonstrating amusement again.

And while we're on the topic of things actually said, rather than imagined to have been said, eat which words, exactly? That the replacement mount is superior or that the 24-70/4, at about 400g, is not a heavy lens?

Truth is handheld interchangeable lens cameras are meant to be supported by the lenses if the lens is of any heft. Then the lens mount is supporting only a comparatively light camera body which puts minimal stress on the lens mount well within it's design parameters. It's just part of proper technique.

When mounted on a tripod those same cameras still need to be supported by the lens if it is of any heft.

400g is not a hefty lens though. Not by any stretch. Even for a lightweight camera like the A7r.

Of course, one can argue that diligence must be employed and if the lens deforms the mount, then the lens is too heavy for that mount, but if that is the case, why then do Sony not provide a means to support the 24-70 or 16-35 lenses other than by the mount?

"Fit for purpose" is a key term here, I believe.

 

[rjjr]

"Fit for purpose" is a key term here, I believe.

Makes me wonder how strong the camera's tripod mount is because that's probably now the weakest link. Torque can create unnecessary strain on that point. Balance is the key, even if only for efficient/effective operation of the tripod head.

 

[MisterHairy]

"Fit for purpose" is a key term here, I believe.

Makes me wonder how strong the camera's tripod mount is because that's probably now the weakest link. Torque can create unnecessary strain on that point. Balance is the key, even if only for efficient/effective operation of the tripod head.

As mentioned, I would not hesitate to use the tripod ring with a lens like the 70-200/4 or even when using an adaptor with a SLR lens mounted (my adaptor has its own tripod foot and yes, I do use it) but the 24-70 is not a heavy lens. If Sony believed that it were too heavy to mount on the camera without additional support, then they would have provided a tripod ring for that lens. And the 16-35, which is heavier.

Gawld help anyone who wants to mount the new Zony 35/1.4 lens on an A7r without additional support. Presumably, that lens has a tripod ring.

 

[Rol Lei Nut]

I even use a tripod collar on my 100mm macro. I don't find mitigating the risk to expensive gear laughable at all. Hopefully you won't have to to eat those words somewhere down the line.

As they say..."A word to the wise..."

Doing so to "mitigate risk" is completely ridiculous!

I've been using longer, heavier lenses which didn't have tripod rings (typically 180/200mm or 80-200mm zooms) for over 30 years and have *NEVER* had either the camera body tripod mount stressed or the lens mount (except maybe the A7, more on that later). Such a combination isn't ideally balanced, so that is what tripod manufacturers produce supplementary brackets, for extra stability.

Back to my A7, yes, those lenses I mentioned do flex quite visibly at the mount when mounted on a tripod. Only camera I've ever had which did that. Not that I'm afraid of sudden catastrophic failure, but it makes an already unbalanced setup almost unusable, which is why I've now also ordered a "Tough".