Dr Morpheus
Member
I am just wondering that what is the life of a lens? 150,000 clicks? more?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Life of a lens
- Thread starter Dr Morpheus
- Start date
JulesJ
Forum Pro
The shutter is part of the camera, not the lens and therefor the shutter count has little to do with the life of a lens. The life of your lens is more to do with the wear and tear of the lens itself. How often you put I on and take it off the camera, how I is used, focusses and zoomed. How you pack it nd carry I on expeditions, etc etc. not to do wih clicks.
Jules
Julesarnia on twitter
Jules
--
Julesarnia on twitter
willhall
Well-known member
with appropriate care, it's generally considered to be effectively unlimited. You will frequently see in these forums people talking about lenses that they've had for a decade or two still operating the same as the day they were bought.
--
-Will
- http://lifeinmegapixels.com
--
-Will
- http://lifeinmegapixels.com
Barrie Davis
Forum Pro
The diaphragm takes a hammering, Jules. In SLR cameras it operates twice for every shutter actuation, (closes, then reopens) unless you happen to be shooting wide open, of course.
Indeed, I have an ancient Nikon 55m Micro-Nikkor P (the good one, f/3.5, not f/2.8) that I can't bring myself to throw away, but it can't be used properly because its diaphragm doesn't hit the same aperture three times together... (sigh)
And it isn't just auto diaphragm mechanicals, either....
In LF cameras, where the aperture is operated manually, the wear seems to be concentrated in the diaphragm's click-stop mechanism, which becomes increasingly inaccurate at the smallest apertures (f/45, f/64). I have found Copal shutter/aperture assemblies due for replacement after about 4 years of use within the main studio shooting lens of a pro.
--
Regards,
Baz
"Ahh... But the thing is, they were not just ORDINARY time travellers!"
JulesJ
Forum Pro
JulesJ
Forum Pro
I have just started using an old Nikon lens (50mm 1:1.4) on my Canon with an adaptor that I bought in the 70s and it's still going fine. I must have shot 100s of 1000s of shots on it.
Julesarnia on twitter
--
Julesarnia on twitter
jeffsvisions
Senior Member
One of the biggest problems I found was mold . I had several old lens from the 60's that I pulled out and found mold inside on the lens elements.. so watch where & how you store your camera gear. I do have several that seem to be just as good as the day I purchased them. But these were all manual lens don't really know about some of the elect. ones.
--
The best picture is the one you take.
Jeff
--
The best picture is the one you take.
Jeff
MrScary
Veteran Member
The BIGGEST problem I found was "Quality Control" with Sigma the worse culprit.
So far my cameras are outlasting my lenses.
--
MrScary (DennisR)
Swansea, Wales. UK
http://russ4tography.com/
http://copernob.jalbum.net/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/scarecrowdr
So far my cameras are outlasting my lenses.
--
MrScary (DennisR)
Swansea, Wales. UK
http://russ4tography.com/
http://copernob.jalbum.net/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/scarecrowdr
hotdog321
Forum Pro
Of course, the diaphragm does get some wear, but I've never had a lens "wear out" in 30 years of photography. Usually the lens suffers catastrophic damage or I simply upgrade to a far better lens after years of hard use. I'll go though two or three camera bodies before I even need to think about the lens.
As long as the optics are clean and the mechanical operation works smoothly and the electronics aren't fried, the life of the lens is essentially unlimited. That is one reason it is a good idea to buy the best lens you can afford.
I've got a couple of lenses I bought 20 years ago that are razor sharp and I wouldn't dream of replacing.
As long as the optics are clean and the mechanical operation works smoothly and the electronics aren't fried, the life of the lens is essentially unlimited. That is one reason it is a good idea to buy the best lens you can afford.
I've got a couple of lenses I bought 20 years ago that are razor sharp and I wouldn't dream of replacing.
BrettSD
Well-known member
I agree. A good quality lens will last basically indefinitely (and could probably be easily repaired if the diaphragm truly wore out). A junkie plastic lens will not last so long.
--
http://www.headshotsnyc.com
http://www.gothamfamilyphotos.com
http://www.nyweddingphotos.com
Mold and fungus seems to be a problem with glass. Sometimes the coatings will degrade and form a stained look.
Diaphragms often get gummed up from the lubrication vaporizing onto the blades or the oil from the helical grease runs over them and they can be slow to open causing random overexposure or just not shut down with more wear on the pivots.
Lack of focusing might cause the grease to congeal and the things will be hard to focus. With AF lenses, it puts a strain on the stepper motor. That is another thing that seems to go out on the AF lenses. The VR or IS system is another thing that can go bad with the newer ones. Either of those may be very expensive to fix over the older manual only lenses.
Switches and electrical contact surfaces often oxidize and may cause issues.
The lubrication can affect the plastics in a very bad way. I've seen it melt plastic inside of lenses and camera bodies when they are not compatible. If you recall, there have been issues with ethanol in fuel with some rubbers and plastics in cars and trucks. There are lawsuits against some motorcycle companies now whose plastic gas tanks warp due to fuel issues.
Lenses need to be exercised else they may gum up. The strain put by stiff under-worked grease can knock the roller guides out of their mounting holes in the slots in the helical assemblies and then you get that grinding sensation when you use it.
Sometimes the old manual stuff without electronics seems much better.
Mack
Diaphragms often get gummed up from the lubrication vaporizing onto the blades or the oil from the helical grease runs over them and they can be slow to open causing random overexposure or just not shut down with more wear on the pivots.
Lack of focusing might cause the grease to congeal and the things will be hard to focus. With AF lenses, it puts a strain on the stepper motor. That is another thing that seems to go out on the AF lenses. The VR or IS system is another thing that can go bad with the newer ones. Either of those may be very expensive to fix over the older manual only lenses.
Switches and electrical contact surfaces often oxidize and may cause issues.
The lubrication can affect the plastics in a very bad way. I've seen it melt plastic inside of lenses and camera bodies when they are not compatible. If you recall, there have been issues with ethanol in fuel with some rubbers and plastics in cars and trucks. There are lawsuits against some motorcycle companies now whose plastic gas tanks warp due to fuel issues.
Lenses need to be exercised else they may gum up. The strain put by stiff under-worked grease can knock the roller guides out of their mounting holes in the slots in the helical assemblies and then you get that grinding sensation when you use it.
Sometimes the old manual stuff without electronics seems much better.
Mack
CFynn
Veteran Member
Probably not the best example. Nikon 55m Micro-Nikkor is well known to have aperture diaphragm problems - I had two and both developed problems. Part of the problem is supposed to be due to the lubricant they used on that lens. OTOH I have other manual focus Nikkors, including several pre-AI lenses, which have seen much more use than either of those two 55mm lenses and never developed problems. I somehow doubt modern stabilized auto focus zoom lenses will last anywhere near as long - or take the same kind of abuse.
Another problem I've seen with some old lenses is the cement between lens elements decaying - I've particularly noticed this in some old Rollei TLRs
I think the spring mechanism is also a problem on leaf shutter lenses. There is wear and the timing also becomes inaccurate.
CFynn
Veteran Member
A decade or two? - I have an 85mm 1.8 Nikkor HC that I've been using for more than 40 years. The only thing that has ever been done to it is modification for AI, and that was at least 30 years ago.
That lens was built like the proverbial tank though, and I somehow doubt that many modern lenses will last as long.
Barrie Davis
Forum Pro
Yeah, well, I was hopeful of having the diaphragm replaced in my Micro Nikkor-P, (see earlier posting) but was disappointed.... parts not available, labour costs prohibitive.
--
Regards,
Baz
"Ahh... But the thing is, they were not just ORDINARY time travellers!"
Dr Morpheus
Member
I normally use my 18-105 kit lens with my Nikon D90, Just a thought passed my mind that since aperture is working and could be expired maybe. although I have taken about 50k pictures from it but its still working as new for me.
I need not to worry about it anymore.
I need not to worry about it anymore.
Most lenses fail from fungus or impact. It doesn't take much force to bind up a zoom.
Some lenses - the (old Nikon Micros and some zooms) had horrible problems with oil from helical getting on the blades. Double helical required fairly light lube to keep from being too stiff.
Some of the manual focus and early AF Nikon 300/2.8 lenses had major diaphragm failures due to a weak part. (replacement parts were gone 15 years ago or more)
Now there was a Korean lens line sold under a lot of names that brand new the diaphragm was so poorly made and erratic that we quit trying to fix as there was no way to adjust them accurately.
Some lenses - the (old Nikon Micros and some zooms) had horrible problems with oil from helical getting on the blades. Double helical required fairly light lube to keep from being too stiff.
Some of the manual focus and early AF Nikon 300/2.8 lenses had major diaphragm failures due to a weak part. (replacement parts were gone 15 years ago or more)
Now there was a Korean lens line sold under a lot of names that brand new the diaphragm was so poorly made and erratic that we quit trying to fix as there was no way to adjust them accurately.
hotdog321
Forum Pro
Early zooms were really wretched, both mechanically and optically. No comparison to modern zooms.
Mark Smith145430
Veteran Member
I have the same lens, and a sticky diaphram that was due to the lubricant 'melting' onto the blades. I has the lens cleaned Ai'd and modern lubricant applied.
I had my 1960 Rolleiflex done too, although that's less of an issue because the lens doesn't stop down with each exposure.
The 3,5 Nikkor works well on my DSLR and was well worth hanging on to.
Barrie Davis
Forum Pro
Thank you for posting, Mark. Looks like you are making good use of your macro lens. Long may you continue to do so.I have the same lens, and a sticky diaphragm that was due to the lubricant 'melting' onto the blades. I has the lens cleaned Ai'd and modern lubricant applied.
I had my 1960 Rolleiflex done too, although that's less of an issue because the lens doesn't stop down with each exposure.
The 3,5 Nikkor works well on my DSLR and was well worth hanging on to.
However, my own lens is genuinely worn, and will not respond to a simple clean-up. I have seen the pivot holes at the bearing ends of the diaphragm blades, and instead of being round, they are opened out to oval.
--
Regards,
Baz
"Ahh... But the thing is, they were not just ORDINARY time travellers!"
C
camperbc
Guest
I would think that with proper care a lens could have pretty much an infinite lifespan. I have some vintage (25+ years) Minolta lenses that have indeed captured hundreds of thousands of images, and yet are still functioning every bit as perfectly as the day they were made.
Glen
http://www.FocusOnNewfoundland.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fogoislanders/
Glen
http://www.FocusOnNewfoundland.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fogoislanders/
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum