The situation was covered by other responses I made.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
"Tough E-Mount"
- Thread starter MisterHairy
- Start date
-
- Tags
- sony a7r
pixelpushing
Senior Member
- Messages
- 3,279
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 1,894
Much of the 'Let me tell you why Sony sucks' testimonials lately come from people pushing products or their blogs.
pixelpushing
Senior Member
- Messages
- 3,279
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 1,894
Have you owned or used an A7?
pixelpushing
Senior Member
- Messages
- 3,279
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 1,894
My A7 had no problems with all kinds of huge lenses. 600mm, Pentax 400mm, etc. I didn't do stupid things like mount the camera to a tripod or carry it with the body, and there was a bit of flex there when purposely stressed to check, but no dire light leaks or snapping off the mount.
Just a test I did and wrote somewhere above:
So on my A7, the mount is able to resist of an all glass an metal lense of 2.3kg and 30cm long with adapter, tripod on the camera and not on the lense, and yes with this load it wobble but resists.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.
It just give an idea of what the mount is able, but I think it's really the max load.
You can have a try too.
Agree. Even if there is no degradation to IQ, every time I lift the camera up to my eye I feel the rotational slop in the lens. It's distracting enough to break my concentration. That alone is worth fixing it to me. Just ordered my tough e mount.
ProfHankD
Veteran Member
Did you read what I wrote? The need to properly mount on a tripod near the center of mass is independent of how robust (or not) the lens mount and body tripod socket are. This has to do not only with potential issues involving the lens mount and tripod socket, but primarily with stability of the tripod itself (especially if you have an ultralight tripod). Further, the fact that accessories change the center of mass means any supplied lens foot isn't necessarily in the right spot either, and lenses that are primarily expected to be handheld -- such as kit zooms -- often don't come with a tripod mount because it's expected that you'll rarely if ever be tripod mounting them: instead, they usually have an oversized hand grip (zoom collar).
Just to be clear, I believe the mount issue is a red herring; there's more than one valid approach, and I don't have a major problem with any of them. Change the mount if you wish, but I've never had a problem with mount stability for any of my 140+ lenses, from 8-1250mm, being used with my NEX-5, NEX-7, or A7. I have had minor issues with the so-called mount light leak, but only in very extreme cases (and other camera brands have similar problems). I also have had the minor annoyance of the A7II mount being too tight for some adapters (mostly Fotga)... which I do blame Sony for, because, despite announcing that they would freely release E-mount specs, they in fact imposed various constraints and it seems most adapters have had to be designed by reverse engineering -- designing adapters to be a very tight fit on the older mounts makes them not quite fit the A7II mount.
In sum, if you like the heavier aftermarket mount, feel free to install it; it's a cheap accessory. If you prefer to have the mount retain it's shock absorbing properties, stay with it. However, no matter what, don't mount your kit on a tripod in an unstable way. The only exception to this rule is for making stitched shots where the center of rotation is constrained to be the no-parallax point (which isn't exactly the lens nodal point, but that's a whole other story ;-) ).
MisterHairy
Senior Member
Yes, I did read it and muchof it was, at best, only tenuously linked to what I have been talking about so I addressed the parts which were relevant. We are not talking about how stable a tripod is, we are talking about whether it acceptable for a lens mount to permit a light lens to droop. I say it is not. You say that it does not matter and that one must purchase additional hardware to accommodate poor design
That is, of course, your prerogative but I choose to improve the poor design at source.
Last edited:
MisterHairy
Senior Member
while the camera might be able to support such a lens, it does not seem like a smart thing to do. Not smart at all and just imagine what effect that the sloppy mount is having on the alignment between the focal plane and the sensor. Not much point having a high res sensor if you are going to deform the camera.Just a test I did and wrote somewhere above:
So on my A7, the mount is able to resist of an all glass an metal lense of 2.3kg and 30cm long with adapter, tripod on the camera and not on the lense, and yes with this load it wobble but resists.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.
It just give an idea of what the mount is able, but I think it's really the max load.
You can have a try too.
MisterHairy
Senior Member
What, you mean the situation where a well made camera can support a heavy lens with no deflection and remain as solid as a rock? I don't see you addressing that anywhere. In fact I see you suggesting that for every camera, it is necessary to add extra support.
It is not (up to a point, whereupon, manufacturers start supplying their own tripod rings).
SLN001
Senior Member
I don't think your issues are related. The A7II has an all metal mount, like the one the OP installed in his camera. Any plastic/metal mount issues wouldn't apply.
A lens won't droop if it's properly supported no matter whether the mount is solid metal or part synthetic.
Last edited:
Are you being deliberately obtuse? I've mentioned the issue of applying unnecessary strain on either the lens mount or the tripod mount by using an unsupported heavy lens a couple of times, and this makes one more.
Last edited:
decentering happens only when interior lens elements are out of alignment with each other, not when the entire lens is tilted.
tilting the lens doesn't affect the interior elements at all, so there can be no resolution loss from decentering here.
that is totally wrong... "random out of focus in areas" is almost certainly caused by a lens defect.
lens drooping at the top is not a perfect example of the Scheimpflug principle, because that concept is based around the center of the rear lens element staying at the same distance to the sensor, while the edges of the rear element are tilted by opposite equal amounts.
when the lens droops at the top only, the bottom isn't moving inwards, as it would with a tilt mount, so the distance from the center of the rear element to the sensor has changed.
that will affect the back focus distance, which matters a whole lot with video zoom lenses, but probably not much at all with still lenses, because they are not parfocal.
i've never seen tests showing that the Scheimpflug principle lowers resolution, and changing the back focus distance through lens droop only changes the focus point of the lens, and adds a bit of tilt.
without before/after proof of resolution changes with this mount, it's hard to believe some of the claims in this thread... although the droop is definitely disconcerting, i wish that i had sent my a7r into sony before the warranty ran out, they replace the mount for free.
--
dan
Last edited:
MisterHairy
Senior Member
But on good, well designed cameras, the mount is specified and designed to take those loads without deformation. It is not unnecessary strain, it is acceptable strain.
Again, the 24-70/4 is not heavy.
Strain is strain.
Your entire argument is based on your statement that the 20-70/4 is heavy enough to cause your original mount to droop when the lens is unsupported so by your own definition the lens is heavy.
Last edited:
MisterHairy
Senior Member
yes, I know. "Put" was ambiguous as it does not convey tense well. I was using it in the past tense, as in "which I was previously putting down to alignment/decentering, before I tried the new mount." After trying the mount, it became clear that it was not decentering.
I realise that. However, shifting the plane of focus relative to the sensor can affect sharpness top and bottom.
why do you assert that the bottom of the lens mount is not deflecting as well? The Aluminium fascia and plastic ring seems quite prone to compression. Indeed, this seems to be the crux of the issue.
if I mount my camera on a tripod to photograph a piece of artwork, then I want toe plane of focus to be both parallel to the artwork and the sensor. If the lens droops, this becomes a problem.
so they concede that the mount is at fault?
do Sony cameras come under a lot of fire from users of other brands? I have never encountered such a sensitive bunch of camera users. Even Sony has taken steps to improve the mount in the A7 cameras so why do Sony users perceive comments about the poor mount on the A7r as a threat?
MisterHairy
Senior Member
Good design is good design. Engineers use material properties to ensure parts are fit for purpose. The lens mount cannot support a light lens, the only thing that it has to do, so it is not fit for purpos.
No. The mount is inadequate.
Totally agree, it was only a test (lense secured), and I really feel it as the limit,while the camera might be able to support such a lens, it does not seem like a smart thing to do. Not smart at all and just imagine what effect that the sloppy mount is having on the alignment between the focal plane and the sensor. Not much point having a high res sensor if you are going to deform the camera.Just a test I did and wrote somewhere above:
So on my A7, the mount is able to resist of an all glass an metal lense of 2.3kg and 30cm long with adapter, tripod on the camera and not on the lense, and yes with this load it wobble but resists.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.
It just give an idea of what the mount is able, but I think it's really the max load.
You can have a try too.
It's fine if the lens is supported properly, even with my massive Tamron 150-600 and adapter mounted on it, the mount is fine because I support the lens properly.
Last edited:
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum