Mark Ransom
Veteran Member
Didn't know you could only use Olympus tripods with this camera.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
E-M5iii tripod mount/bottom plate failure
- Thread starter Joe Lynch
- Start date
A
AllFlawed
Guest
You are hearing as always in a time of crisis standard script from lawyers corralling the wagons rather than addressing any specific concern about the subject in hand.Joe - Maybe I should not have, but I did send Olympus Support the following:This one goes back to Olympus for a new bottom plate. I guess a couple of days of 60mm macro lens on a tripod was too much for it. I've treated this camera exactly like I treated my E-M5ii. No large lenses, no bumps, some time on a belt strap, lots of time me manually focusing the 60 mm macro lens. The design is not robust enough for my normal usage.
No more tripod use unless Olympus goes to a redesigned bottom plate.
"Just to let you know - Your camera OMD EM5 III is getting a continued bad rap over failed tripod mount. On DP Review, (see E-M5iii tripod mount/bottom plate failure). This is the third one that has been reported with pictures. Unless you (Olympus) takes some action on this, it will impact sales of this camera adversely. Do something! Just trying to be helpful. If no action nor acknowledgement by Olympus I may have to sell mine."
They replied today"
Thank you for contacting Olympus Technical Support.
"And thank you for your inquiry. Olympus Service and Support addresses every inquiry with great attention and care. Many variables come into play while addressing product concerns, so each case is unique. The concern you are bringing to our attention includes 3rd party products, which is challenging since we are unable to test products in a multitude of conditions, so these few cases have been individually handled. That said, if you ever have a product in need of repair, know that Olympus will work with you towards an appropriate solution.
Also I encourage you to call me at the number below if you need further information or have an issue we can help you resolve."
Phone: (484) 896-5174
[email protected]
www.olympusamerica.com
Sorry if I'm out of bounds here. It looks like they need to hear from you (1st person) rather than me (3rd person). They also said in the email that the contents were intended for my use only, but this is a significant problem so I'm posting it here to you.
Peace.
John
Last edited:
John,
Not out of bounds at all. On Thursday, I went to the US repair website, filled out the information, got a case number back from them with all the instructions on sending the 5iii body in to the New Jersey repair center. I'll keep the contact information you provided just in case, however.
Olympus might want to replace this 5iii body with another one of the same design, in which case I won't be using the tripod mount. That is a temporary solution, as far as I'm concerned, not much better than If they simply returned my broken body, since I could just add some duct tape over the hole and continue using the camera (in dry weather).
I'm thinking Olympus has already seen many similar failures and already knows they have to come up with a fix of some kind. The best case scenario is that Olympus already has a permanent fix in the works and they send me a new body with the changes. Even if that takes a few months, that will be fine with me.
I'll let you all know how it is resolved. I am not inconvenienced at all as I have plenty of time and camera bodies to entertain myself with. The 5iii is still an excellent travel camera, just skip the tripods and focus stacking and use the strap eyelets or a full cage.
Joe
Not out of bounds at all. On Thursday, I went to the US repair website, filled out the information, got a case number back from them with all the instructions on sending the 5iii body in to the New Jersey repair center. I'll keep the contact information you provided just in case, however.
Olympus might want to replace this 5iii body with another one of the same design, in which case I won't be using the tripod mount. That is a temporary solution, as far as I'm concerned, not much better than If they simply returned my broken body, since I could just add some duct tape over the hole and continue using the camera (in dry weather).
I'm thinking Olympus has already seen many similar failures and already knows they have to come up with a fix of some kind. The best case scenario is that Olympus already has a permanent fix in the works and they send me a new body with the changes. Even if that takes a few months, that will be fine with me.
I'll let you all know how it is resolved. I am not inconvenienced at all as I have plenty of time and camera bodies to entertain myself with. The 5iii is still an excellent travel camera, just skip the tripods and focus stacking and use the strap eyelets or a full cage.
Joe
Jan Chelminski
Veteran Member
From my perspective.
I changed brands from Ricoh to Olympus, back in '78, or '79.
My reason? A broken bottom camera plate, of plastic construction. It occurred while using a std zoom on the camera while it was mounted onto a Tiltall (I think) tripod.
While it did represent some level of failure on my part, to evaluate the reliability of the equipment to be used in that manner, the outcome was one I found totally unacceptable. My confidence in the Ricoh brand was undermined, and there could be further use of it for me. Enter the OM-2.
It is quite clear, that the selection of insufficiently specified plastic material, at a location that requires a particular level of mechanical reliability, is a technical blunder of colossal proportions.
The ONLY acceptable response by Olympus, would be to publicly acknowledge the mistake, and disclose the plan to correct. It could be a new plate, made of high specification fiber reinforced plastic, a hybrid, metal/plastic replacement plate, or one of fully metal material. It simply, must be a reliable one.
If I was running things in the Olympus Japan camera division, I would order an immediate inquiry, as I would be desperate to learn how such a costly and fundamental mistake could have ever taken place, who had responsibility (summary dismissals for some), and how to change the organizational structure, so as to prevent such a blunder from ever reoccurring in the future. Then, I would reorganize the management structure of Olympus Camera US, as they are SIMPLY AWFUL, which has been a major, festering long term issue, in great need of correction and improvement.
Pretty pssd off by this bs.
Rgds,
Jan
I changed brands from Ricoh to Olympus, back in '78, or '79.
My reason? A broken bottom camera plate, of plastic construction. It occurred while using a std zoom on the camera while it was mounted onto a Tiltall (I think) tripod.
While it did represent some level of failure on my part, to evaluate the reliability of the equipment to be used in that manner, the outcome was one I found totally unacceptable. My confidence in the Ricoh brand was undermined, and there could be further use of it for me. Enter the OM-2.
It is quite clear, that the selection of insufficiently specified plastic material, at a location that requires a particular level of mechanical reliability, is a technical blunder of colossal proportions.
The ONLY acceptable response by Olympus, would be to publicly acknowledge the mistake, and disclose the plan to correct. It could be a new plate, made of high specification fiber reinforced plastic, a hybrid, metal/plastic replacement plate, or one of fully metal material. It simply, must be a reliable one.
If I was running things in the Olympus Japan camera division, I would order an immediate inquiry, as I would be desperate to learn how such a costly and fundamental mistake could have ever taken place, who had responsibility (summary dismissals for some), and how to change the organizational structure, so as to prevent such a blunder from ever reoccurring in the future. Then, I would reorganize the management structure of Olympus Camera US, as they are SIMPLY AWFUL, which has been a major, festering long term issue, in great need of correction and improvement.
Pretty pssd off by this bs.
Rgds,
Jan
i would love to see the tripod plate you used. Can you post a pic of it? Was it an Acra style plate or was the tripod one that directly accepts the camera onto a plate built into the head?
Looking at the broken part it doesn't seem to be much support behind it.
A large plate that distributes the load across a larger part of the camera bottom can help to some degree with problems like this. Certainly with what has been shown it would be wise for users to only use the EM5 III with a large plate that distributes the load as much as possible and avoid any large lenses in tripod usage.
Seems to be a rather poor design unfortunately. Only thing one can do is use a plate that distributes the load as much as possible and avoid large/heavy lenses.
Hope Oly makes this right and repairs your camera at no cost.
--
Jonathan
Looking at the broken part it doesn't seem to be much support behind it.
A large plate that distributes the load across a larger part of the camera bottom can help to some degree with problems like this. Certainly with what has been shown it would be wise for users to only use the EM5 III with a large plate that distributes the load as much as possible and avoid any large lenses in tripod usage.
Seems to be a rather poor design unfortunately. Only thing one can do is use a plate that distributes the load as much as possible and avoid large/heavy lenses.
Hope Oly makes this right and repairs your camera at no cost.
--
Jonathan
Last edited:
Hopefully you do get it fixed asap. However, which belt strap did you use? Is it mounted based on the tripod thread? If not, your's would be the first case reported of it failing just based on tripod use.
Last edited:
Other than this one (although there is question of what belt strap was used), the other two failures were with usage of a PD clip and a camera strap that hangs using the tripod thread. So while PD clip may not necessarily take all the blame, it certainly is a factor (especially when used with a strap that hangs using it, not just clipped sideways).
If the belt strap used does not involve the tripod thread, then this would be the first case that failed only with tripod usage.
From the same thread, it looked like the E-M5 III had a black metal plate also (and same metal underneath for the chassis, but the OP's picture makes it seem like plastic.Bellow is image of plastic EM10.3, posted by cba_melbourne in one of previous threads. Seems that model has much more robust wide metal plate for tripod socket.
So Olympus even knows how to design for plastic body, just for EM5.3 they decided to go different way.
https://1.img-dpreview.com/files/p/TS560x560~forums/63554059/91bde3f55de74be6860bfa3be3b34ae0
I guess cba_melbourne needs to disassemble further to see how the thing is assembled.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/63554059
One thing is certain though, which is that the base plate is similar in both designs, what is different is what's underneath.
LightCameraAction
Leading Member
- Messages
- 725
- Reaction score
- 944
I agree, particularly for a tripod mount. How many people use an Olympus tripod or monopod? Does Olympus even sell one?
EZGritz
Veteran Member
They sell a third party shoulder strap that clips on to a fixture that screws into the tripod month so what's the excuse? They sell third party attachments for it.
I ended up buying the RRS plate, more because it added just enough to the height that it improved my grip immensely. I think it would really help the situation and may prevent it from happening due to the tight tolerance, the wrap-around design and the pin that keeps it from turning. So I think it would help with tripod work. However, I don't think it would help with something where the camera is hanging down from the tripod mount (a clip or sling). That would still be vulnerable. I mostly do hand-held and will probably do some tripod work, so I don't expect to have problems. But this is something Olympus really should deal with. I love the camera otherwise!
R
Raist3d
Guest
The way that broke doesn’t say “metal”
I am not an engineer and should not be giving gratuitous advice.
But I am a home tinkerer and make various attachments for “things” from time to time - an example:
Making a mount for an attachment on a tractor fascia where it is going to take some load and the fascia itself is made of some sort of heavy duty plastic material with the ability to take some flex. I don’t just make a wide outside plate and throw a bunch of self tapper screws at it to take the direct load on the screw threads but make a suitable size internal plate and sandwich the plastic by through bolting between plates. Seems to work for me - but my technical competence is just “look and judge” what is necessary.
Maybe (obvious) that Olympus could somehow re-design the inner mount plate and if necessary cut and modify the external bodywork to take suitably positioned screws with wider screw heads? With some thought the rigidity of the tripod mount (surely) could be improved.
Just replacing like with like will get like response. How they do this I do not know - they are the engineers but it seem to me that something needs to be done - at least to broken mounts if not a formal fix to new made camera bodies.
I have every confidence that a way could be found to do this neatly and professionally.
--
Tom Caldwell
But I am a home tinkerer and make various attachments for “things” from time to time - an example:
Making a mount for an attachment on a tractor fascia where it is going to take some load and the fascia itself is made of some sort of heavy duty plastic material with the ability to take some flex. I don’t just make a wide outside plate and throw a bunch of self tapper screws at it to take the direct load on the screw threads but make a suitable size internal plate and sandwich the plastic by through bolting between plates. Seems to work for me - but my technical competence is just “look and judge” what is necessary.
Maybe (obvious) that Olympus could somehow re-design the inner mount plate and if necessary cut and modify the external bodywork to take suitably positioned screws with wider screw heads? With some thought the rigidity of the tripod mount (surely) could be improved.
Just replacing like with like will get like response. How they do this I do not know - they are the engineers but it seem to me that something needs to be done - at least to broken mounts if not a formal fix to new made camera bodies.
I have every confidence that a way could be found to do this neatly and professionally.
--
Tom Caldwell
Last edited:
gary0319
Veteran Member
Does anyone know if there have been similar failures that don’t involve the PD plate... I can’t find if the OP in this thread stated what plate was used. Just curious.
It was a square arca dimensioned plate that overlapped the edges of the bottom plate. It doesn't matter what plate is used whether on the tripod or the belt clip. There is not enough strong material tying the tripod mount to the rest of the frame and lens mount to keep the tripod mount from catastrophically pulling through the bottom plate with just normal loads. I've used the kit 14-150 and the 60 macro on this body and that is it.
I appreciate everyone's concern over the details but the only evaluation that makes any difference is Olympus'. I have advanced aerospace and engineering mechanics degrees and 47 years engineering experience. I know what a slide rule is.
I think I can handle discussions with Olympus OK without me having to run a finite element stress analysis on their geometry and materials. They'll take care of it. This isn't a big deal to me, in the overall scheme of things, as we have plenty of other concerns right now.
Give Olympus some time to respond. I've had a great day today playing with my 1iii and 1X and even put my old FT 50f2 macro lens on the 1X on a tripod. Rock solid and lots of fun.
Just be very gentle with your 5iii when using the tripod mount for now, that's all. It is not as robust as a 5ii.
Joe
I appreciate everyone's concern over the details but the only evaluation that makes any difference is Olympus'. I have advanced aerospace and engineering mechanics degrees and 47 years engineering experience. I know what a slide rule is.
I think I can handle discussions with Olympus OK without me having to run a finite element stress analysis on their geometry and materials. They'll take care of it. This isn't a big deal to me, in the overall scheme of things, as we have plenty of other concerns right now. Give Olympus some time to respond. I've had a great day today playing with my 1iii and 1X and even put my old FT 50f2 macro lens on the 1X on a tripod. Rock solid and lots of fun.
Just be very gentle with your 5iii when using the tripod mount for now, that's all. It is not as robust as a 5ii.
Joe
gary0319
Veteran Member
So, just so I got this right. The plate was not a Peak Design plate. Not looking to dig deeper, just curious as I have an E-M5 III and sometimes might want to use a small Arca Swiss style plate with it. (Not PD).
Mark Ransom
Veteran Member
I don't doubt that they COULD find a way to fix this. But first they must admit there's a problem. It's probable at this point that the upper echelon doesn't even realize there's a problem yet - it's unlikely they'd even care until it makes a measurable difference in sales figures or warrantee costs.
In certain cultures it is more difficult to admit to mistakes. My understanding of Japanese companies is that this is very tough for them.
In certain cultures it is more difficult to admit to mistakes. My understanding of Japanese companies is that this is very tough for them.
Mark Ransom
Veteran Member
It's entirely possible that the less that is said, the more likely the OP is to get a favorable outcome.
Impulses
Veteran Member
If hanging it from a clip puts it in a more vulnerable position then so does using the portrait drop slot on any modern ballhead tbh, heck so does working against a ballhead's friction... The camera should be able to withstand any of that with ease IMO since none of it really diverges from the tripod mount's intended purpose. However swinging it from a strap from that mount does introduce a more dynamic load, that's different.
I'm still on the fence about the RRS plate, had one for the mk II and really liked it but I dunno how much it'd help vs a large plate in general, and I've got other issues with RRS. I so appreciate them having put one out and even answering an early email I sent asking whether they would (they were considering it at the time, late last year).
doady
Veteran Member
I thought the all-plastic construction of E-M5 III odd, especially for the price, and it seems to go against the OM retro aesthetic anyways. Still, I was considering it versus E-M1 II this past Boxing Day, and ultimately I found E-M1 II better balanced with 12-100mm F4 than E-M5 III with 12-40mm F2.8. Maybe a more robust body would have been balanced combination with the 12-40mm.
My C-7070WZ is a point-and-shoot camera, but it still has an all-metal body that did not break apart after I used it with a tripod so many times over the past 14 years. Body of $450 USD camera breaking apart would already be unacceptable, but for that to happen to a $1200 USD weather-sealed, IPX1-certified camera body is just embarrassing and unnerving. To think I almost chose a camera like that. My dad's old Nikon F-501 has plastic body too and it is not lacking robustness, and E-M5 III should have been the same.
My C-7070WZ is a point-and-shoot camera, but it still has an all-metal body that did not break apart after I used it with a tripod so many times over the past 14 years. Body of $450 USD camera breaking apart would already be unacceptable, but for that to happen to a $1200 USD weather-sealed, IPX1-certified camera body is just embarrassing and unnerving. To think I almost chose a camera like that. My dad's old Nikon F-501 has plastic body too and it is not lacking robustness, and E-M5 III should have been the same.
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum