-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
40,000 shot limit for Tamron lens built quality - my experiences
- Thread starter barri
- Start date
The plastic gear on my Sigma 70-300 broke after 13 months / ~ 5000 shots, even though it was used only on the weak motored A100.
I haven't bothered getting it "fixed", and have it break in another year. Instead, I've bought the Tamron 70-300, with which I'm just as happy.
The problem lies 100% with the lens, and not with the focus motor (although a strong motor probably speeds up the stripping). Sigma should have recalled those defective-by-design lenses long time ago.
PS. Even though the HSM would have complemented the A100 well, I bought the Tamron 70-200/2.8 instead of the Sigma, because I don't want to deal with a company that knowingly continues to sell lenses that IMHO are defective. (are you listening Sigma!?)
I haven't bothered getting it "fixed", and have it break in another year. Instead, I've bought the Tamron 70-300, with which I'm just as happy.
The problem lies 100% with the lens, and not with the focus motor (although a strong motor probably speeds up the stripping). Sigma should have recalled those defective-by-design lenses long time ago.
PS. Even though the HSM would have complemented the A100 well, I bought the Tamron 70-200/2.8 instead of the Sigma, because I don't want to deal with a company that knowingly continues to sell lenses that IMHO are defective. (are you listening Sigma!?)
I don't foresee the focus or zoom rings on my Sony 70-300G lasting very long. I think the Tamron 17-50 actually has a better design with regards to longevity.
--
My flickr page
http://www.flickr.com/photos/33412421@N08/
--
My flickr page
http://www.flickr.com/photos/33412421@N08/
Chad Marek
Senior Member
I think this is an important issue.
however, I do not think it is the number of actuations that has an effect on the life of the lens but the method of use.
I think prims are going to last a long long time. Aperture mechanisms are very mature designs and are very robust. Those are the things that really get used with every actuation.
Zooms go through heavier use with more moving parts. If you work the zoom heavily, and if you are constantly hitting the end of the zoom travel (and hard like I do) you can probably expect the lens to last less time.
I also think the zoom mechanism plays a big part. If the lens is heavy (like the 70-300G) and not an internal zoom (again, like the 70-300G) the weight on the end of the lens when it is zoomed out to 300mm will put a lot of stress on the zoom mechanism. As these mechanisms loosen, elements become out of position tolerances and this can effect IQ.
Zooms with internal zoom, in my experience, tend to be more robustly made and able to handle these kinds of demands, either intentionally or unintentionally.
This may be why your 17-50mm has worn worse than your 11-18mm.
--
I don't chimp.
however, I do not think it is the number of actuations that has an effect on the life of the lens but the method of use.
I think prims are going to last a long long time. Aperture mechanisms are very mature designs and are very robust. Those are the things that really get used with every actuation.
Zooms go through heavier use with more moving parts. If you work the zoom heavily, and if you are constantly hitting the end of the zoom travel (and hard like I do) you can probably expect the lens to last less time.
I also think the zoom mechanism plays a big part. If the lens is heavy (like the 70-300G) and not an internal zoom (again, like the 70-300G) the weight on the end of the lens when it is zoomed out to 300mm will put a lot of stress on the zoom mechanism. As these mechanisms loosen, elements become out of position tolerances and this can effect IQ.
Zooms with internal zoom, in my experience, tend to be more robustly made and able to handle these kinds of demands, either intentionally or unintentionally.
This may be why your 17-50mm has worn worse than your 11-18mm.
--
I don't chimp.
AFAIK, the Sony 18-250 has a different rubber zoom ring than the Tamron. The Sony and Tamron only share the overall lens design, but they are not made in the same factory and don't have been made from identical materials, or am I mistaken?
Anyhow, I have still to test one of my Zeiss or Sony G lenses to the full extent of 40,000 shots and beyond. I admit that I can't state the Zeiss and Sony G lenses to be better.
But for consideration: I used to own a Tokina 2.6-2.8/28-70 and used it for many years as my walkaround lens, and that lens never showed the slightest built problems.
--
Sony Alpha 900 user...
Zeiss 2.8/24-70 SSM, Minolta 2.8/100 macro, Sony 1.4/50, Sony 2.8/70-200 SSM, Sony 1.4x TC, Minolta 4.5/400 HS, Metz 54 MZ-4, Vivitar 285HV
see some of my images at
http://christianriedel.com
Frenske
Senior Member
Well I think that Tokina's should be banned since they can be used as a potential murder weapen. After the evil deed you still can use the lens once the red splatters are removed.
http://frenske.zenfolio.com/
--
http://frenske.zenfolio.com/
WaltKnapp
Forum Pro
The Sony fixed repair charge in the US is $226, which includes shipping it back to you. I get stuck with the charge as I'm not the original owner of my lens. I'm sending mine in and do hope they fix it.
Front tube wobble is the primary symptom I have. In my case it's enough to shift both framing and focus. And came on in the space of just a few weeks use. It can shift while the camera is firing, so totally untrustworthy in use. In mine the focus ring is pretty loose too, that may be connected with the other problem.
Walt
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum