A Bad Day for SEL70200G

[mkg3]

So I had my lens attached to a7rii in the boot and after driving over a speed bump bit too fast, I heard a thump back there.  Once we got to the destination, I opened the boot to grab the camera and....

 

Not clear if something hit it or the bump itself (no obvious external damage) but in either case, I would never have expected this to happen.  I have had my Nikon with AFD80-200/2.8 mounted knocked over from a tripod and survived without any issue.

 

Hope its repairable or its $1500 down the drain.

 

Did not realize just how fragile Sony is....

 

 

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[1950n]

Is this all plastic ?!

 

 

Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

[mkg3]

Looks like some metal but mostly plastic.  A quick search online shows several cases of similar break at the exactly the same spot.  Between the focal length ring and lens control switches.  The switches section of the barrel is metal whereas zoom portion appears to be plastic (at least internally and where the two connects).  Clearly an engineering shortcoming in its design and material choice.

 

Talked to Sony today and they, of course, tells me that its not covered under the warrantee. But they said they'll evaluate it once they have it to inspect.  Estimated repair cost is around $300 but its better than throwing it away....

 

Hope the 2.8 GM version is much better made than this one but it is most likely that this 70-200f4 will be one and only Sony lens I'll be owning.  

[VTC]

Seriously? You throw the camera in amongst the spare tire and who knows what else and this is somehow Sonys fault? I dropped the very same lens from waist high directly onto concrete at a fire scene and the thing survived. And if the drop had trashed the lens I wouldn't go soiling my pants on a forum trying to shed the blame elsewhere and demand someone else clean up the mess in my pants that I myself made. Be an adult and own your carelessness.

[Golem]

Very possibly the reason that all reported incidents

seperated in the same neat way at the same place,

and that the repair guestimate is fairly low, is due to

intentional preventive engineering. Good work Sony.

[Guest all8]

Very possibly the reason that all reported incidents

seperated in the same neat way at the same place,

and that the repair guestimate is fairly low, is due to

intentional preventive engineering. Good work Sony.

 

 

Yep, would make sense. Without that, an all metal lens, if such a thing could exist, might just bend or dent ... and then it would be much more difficult to repair.

[mkg3]

Seriously? You throw the camera in amongst the spare tire and who knows what else and this is somehow Sonys fault? I dropped the very same lens from waist high directly onto concrete at a fire scene and the thing survived. And if the drop had trashed the lens I wouldn't go soiling my pants on a forum trying to shed the blame elsewhere and demand someone else clean up the mess in my pants that I myself made. Be an adult and own your carelessness.

 

 

I get what you're saying but there is no spare tire or anything heavy in the boot.  The boot is essentially empty.  It was placed carefully in the corner and the only thing that could have hit it was another light, empty plastic container.  The thump I'd heard probably came from the plastic container hitting the boot lid and landing back onto the the floor.

 

How nice and lucky of you to not have suffered a similar incident.  

 

To be clear, I'm not whining about it.  Rather, simply sharing the event and hope that others take extra care handling this particular lens.  Sounds like you're not used to carrying multiple gear and having to get to one place to another quickly with camera equipment. Besides, how unusual is to leave a lens attached to a body.  

 

As for shedding blame is not the issue.  The issue is product integrity and design.  Based on my experience with this lens, it is lacking lateral force protection compared to other lenses of similar size.  Its probably a tradeoff between robustness vs weight, given the whole premise of a7/E mount mirrorless cameras.  

 

I normally don't respond to your kind of comment but wanted to set the record straight that there was nothing heavy that impacted the lens to have caused the damage, especially given that couple of posts thereafter assumed the same, based on your post.

 

Probably not a good idea to assume things and jump to the conclusion.  As for your choice of words, well.....

[Wesley]

What is boot? Some British term for car trunk?

 

I'm sure there is a lot of shock and vibration going on for the equipment when a vehicle is moving. You don't have a pelican case or something?

[Golem]

The boot/trunk is behind the rear axle.

This multiplies impacts such as speed

bumps etc as compared to the interior 

space between the axles. Plus a boot/ 

trunk compartment is generally far less

padded than the cabin interior. Being

in a hurry is risky bidnez and therefore

you increase the chances for trouble.

If one is sufficiently well paid for such

risky activity, all well and good ... but a

portion of that pay hasta go for backup

gear so as to maintain work flow when

the risky behavior leads to damage. It's

just bidnez as usual. 

  

There's a video online [somewhere] of

one of the monster white Canon teles

neatly splitting in the same manner due

to player-photographer collision at the

sidelines of an NFL match. According to

Canon/Nikon mythology, "Pro Support"

angels should then instantly arrive from

the press box and replace the lens ...

altho this is not seen to happen in this

particular video :-\ 

[Guest Peter Kelly]

I get what you're saying but there is no spare tire or anything heavy in the boot.  The boot is essentially empty.  It was placed carefully in the corner and the only thing that could have hit it was another light, empty plastic container.  The thump I'd heard probably came from the plastic container hitting the boot lid and landing back onto the the floor.

 

How nice and lucky of you to not have suffered a similar incident.  

 

To be clear, I'm not whining about it.  Rather, simply sharing the event and hope that others take extra care handling this particular lens.  Sounds like you're not used to carrying multiple gear and having to get to one place to another quickly with camera equipment. Besides, how unusual is to leave a lens attached to a body.  

 

As for shedding blame is not the issue.  The issue is product integrity and design.  Based on my experience with this lens, it is lacking lateral force protection compared to other lenses of similar size.  Its probably a tradeoff between robustness vs weight, given the whole premise of a7/E mount mirrorless cameras.  

 

I normally don't respond to your kind of comment but wanted to set the record straight that there was nothing heavy that impacted the lens to have caused the damage, especially given that couple of posts thereafter assumed the same, based on your post.

 

Probably not a good idea to assume things and jump to the conclusion.  As for your choice of words, well.....

 

I think VTC was probably a little harsh in his tone, but I do agree with his position and find it very odd to just put an expensive camera and lens unprotected in a car boot.

 

Despite this often mentioned vision of a professional camera being used and abused, withstanding every knock that man can throw, it is, for the most part, a myth. These are precision devices and should be treated with a degree of care. There is nothing to prevent using them in a tough environment, but it is a case of knowing the best way to handle them. Even 'paparazzi' will return their kit to a bag once the assignment is complete.

 

That said, I concur this is a 'designed' failure and would imagine a repair is entirely likely. The price is another matter! Of course, fixing just the lens is bound to be cheaper than having to have the mount of your camera repaired too, which would have been the consequence of a more solid lens barrel.

[Dale Matson]

Is this a design flaw in the lens that it breaks consistently in this spot or a kind of "fuseable link" designed into the lens to protect it from worse damage? I owned this lens and it is made in Japan not China. 

[mkg3]

Despite this often mentioned vision of a professional camera being used and abused, withstanding every knock that man can throw, it is, for the most part, a myth. These are precision devices and should be treated with a degree of care. There is nothing to prevent using them in a tough environment, but it is a case of knowing the best way to handle them. Even 'paparazzi' will return their kit to a bag once the assignment is complete.

 

That said, I concur this is a 'designed' failure and would imagine a repair is entirely likely. The price is another matter! Of course, fixing just the lens is bound to be cheaper than having to have the mount of your camera repaired too, which would have been the consequence of a more solid lens barrel.

 

 

Perhaps so.  But having been shooting SLR/DSLR Nikons since I was a kid in 1970's, I have never encounter this problem with any of my cameras or zooms.  Not saying Nikon is better; rather this is my first Sony experience and have not treated my equipment any different than I have for the past 40 yrs. 

 

Since my primary shooting activity is sports, almost all of my lenses are zoom and they've all been handled the same way.  I've never had a mount or lens issue before.

 

Since we have many switchers on the forum, myself included since last September, its worth noting that a different care is needed for Sony's.  I still have all of my Nikon gear so its not a problem but it is annoying inconvenience to have to send the lens off to be repaired.

[mkg3]

Is this a design flaw in the lens that it breaks consistently in this spot or a kind of "fuseable link" designed into the lens to protect it from worse damage? I owned this lens and it is made in Japan not China. 

 

I do not believe the breakage is by design nor is it supposed to be a mechanical fuse; rather is a design flaw but its only my opinion. Only Sony engineers would know.  It is true that bodies are more complex, electronically to repair than lens but is more often replaced.

 

Since we're speculating, others most likely will disagree with my opinion about the design flaw, so I would, and will once my lens returns from repair, treat it with bit more care regardless of where the lens is made and whatever is the reason.

[JL-Y]

Not being a troll and I have a Sony A3000 and lenses and a Sony A7 (to use my old manual Nikon lenses) but after seeing your white lens I would never buy a similar lens from Sony. Sony's lens prices are exorbitent, Plus the A7 eats the tiny batteries and the lens release is on the wrong side of the body and the A7 body plus grip simply does not fit my hands.

 

I suppose I keep the A7 now for the sensor and because it was cheap to buy new. 

Having said that I recently bought a Canon 70-200mm f4 white lens from a pawn shop for £250 and the lens is 100% mint. Can you imagine a Canon white lens behaving like the Sony? 

 

It's horses for courses. Fast sports need IMO Canon or Nikon. Almost anything else I guess could be shot on an A7RII but the small batteries are killers. Even with 2 in the grip they are simply not man enough for the job so I will keep my A7 for the time being but I won't switch from Canon any time soon. 

Oh yes and I bought a mint Canon 70-210 mm FD zoom absolutely mint from a charity shop for less than £20 recently. Let 's see how it performs on the A7. Could be fun. Regards

[dcisive]

I've owned many thousands of dollars of top digital camera gear since 1999. Never dropped one nor had any piece I've owned damaged for any reason. Why? Because I'm cautious and take the thought to make sure my equipment is secured in proper bags or pouches and such. It just saddens me to see people that don't give a rats butt and their attitude is it's just a camera or a lens and don't take care not to drop or scratch it. To each their own. It's certainly NOT the way I was brought up. One reason why things of mine that are years old look brand new. Make NO mistake they ARE used but maintained to the hilt and kept clean.

[Guest Peter Kelly]

I've owned many thousands of dollars of top digital camera gear since 1999. Never dropped one nor had any piece I've owned damaged for any reason. Why? Because I'm cautious and take the thought to make sure my equipment is secured in proper bags or pouches and such. It just saddens me to see people that don't give a rats butt and their attitude is it's just a camera or a lens and don't take care not to drop or scratch it. To each their own. It's certainly NOT the way I was brought up. One reason why things of mine that are years old look brand new. Make NO mistake they ARE used but maintained to the hilt and kept clean.

 

You are a man after my own heart.

 

What I find curious is probably the only scenario I haven't used a camera professionally is in a war zone, but I don't even suffer the paint loss that some describe!

I don't baby my gear and I see it as tools to get a job done, but it's not difficult to take care. Even when things are beyond your control, because of being surrounded by others, you just need to be aware.

I've had rare accidents and incidents, but because of using common sense the only things I've ever suffered have been a couple of broken lens hoods.

 

As to this particular breakage, I said before it was 'designed' failure, but I think that was the wrong expression. I believe Sony have made this lens to be 'strong enough', rather than make it virtually indestructable.

The consequence is that it is not too heavy, or too expensive, but is suited to the task. Of course, the point of breakage here must be the weak spot. Whether Sony have made it marginally too weak is open to debate; they are certainly not infallible. That said, I see no reason to question that it is perfectly suited to the purpose and should be treated exactly for what it is: a precision instrument.

[illogict]

I also try to be very cautious with my stuff, but sometimes you don’t have the choice but to have your lens take some hits. That happened twice to me:

– my FE 2,8/35 fell to the ground on a parking lot when a friend grabbed my bag from my car upside down, and the zipper wasn’t closed ;

– my FE 4/16-35 hit the road when someone bumped into me while I was changing lenses, and I had to react very fast to grab it before it was run over by a car at 70km/h – and believe it or not, it is *impossible* to buy or even order a replacement hood from Sony or any retailer in France/Europe.

Moreover, it definitely seems that it was supposed to be a breaking point. And unlike others, as an engineer myself, I will for sure buy a lens that has that kind of crumple zones designed in, as it means that it is well designed and accounts for repairs. It is way better to pay a little bit ($300 doesn’t seem that much) for an easy repair, than having to fix a bent barrel with lenses out of alignment, which would be way more expensive.

[Singingsnapper]

I can see the breakage to be like a crumple zone in a car.  As some have said, better a $300 repair bill to put the two parts back together than a larger bill for repair to lens and camera parts on the mounts.  

 

My cameras look used.  Because they spend much of the time on a strap, my 645Z is quite shiny in places because of where it rubs against my rucsac/bag as I walk.  I shoot and walk at the same time, and taking it out of a rucsac constantly would be a pain...

[mkg3]

Few of things.

 

1) $300 is a blind estimate from Sony - it can be much more or less.  Will tell you what it really cost to repair once they have it and communicate with them.

 

2) To equate having a camera with a lens attached without putting into a bag to not taking care of equipment as a whole is an over generalization and a leap.  

 

That said, I can understand how anyone would come to this assumption as it is the most obvious.  Like all things in life, it is often the case the obvious is not the root cause.  

 

In my particular case, having a first mishaps in over 40 yrs hardly is a case of "....that don't give a rats butt and their attitude is it's just a camera or a lens and don't take care not to drop or scratch it....."  It was a simply an accident but it points out the weakness in design.

 

3) Crumble zone on a lens - really?? The zone is established on vehicles to save lives/lessen injury to the occupants by absorbing the kinetic energy of an impact. Its a bit dramatic comparison and assumes lens is more expendable than the camera body to save the damage or that barrel deformation is worse than breakage.  It depends.

 

If the lens was mounted on A6000 or a7, instead of a7rii, then the lens is valued more than the body so which would have been better to take the damage?  The answer depends on the circumstance. 

 

Frankly, I see camera body like PCs and needs to be replaced far more often than lenses.  Buy quality lens and keep it, whereas sensor technology and capability change on the body is expected.  The mentality of buying Leica M film camera and keep it for lifetime is gone in a digital sensor realm (yes I know, film buffs and collectors still do this).   So yes, I do expect the lens to be durable - not because of abuse or lack of care - but accidents happens over time.

 

The notion of having the lens break is better than denting or breaking the body maybe a right value proposition of some, and not for others.  In either case, this particular break shows limitation/constrain of the lens, when handling it.  Different things require more or less attention to care.

 

 

[Smorton]

In this instance it  "Snapped in two like a graham cracker when it swing into my foot from the strap."  http://www.amazon.com/review/R2R8K71AZMG1QV/ref=cm_cr_dp_title?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B00I8BICEO&channel=detail-glance&nodeID=502394&store=photo

[Guest all8]

I do not believe the breakage is by design nor is it supposed to be a mechanical fuse; rather is a design flaw but its only my opinion. Only Sony engineers would know.  It is true that bodies are more complex, electronically to repair than lens but is more often replaced.

 

Since we're speculating, others most likely will disagree with my opinion about the design flaw, so I would, and will once my lens returns from repair, treat it with bit more care regardless of where the lens is made and whatever is the reason.

 

 

Looks a bit like this is the place where the final step of assembly occurs? Joining the two halves. Does it seem to clip to gather somehow, i.e. no broken screws or screw mounts, just broken plastic.

 

I own this lens too, I find it kind of funny to imagine that the front could just fall off so cleanly after a knock, so I tend to agree, not robust enough. Interesting, reminds me of the A7 mount, hopefully the 70-200 GM is getting more robust (and not just more expensive).

[Smorton]

Timde

 

Would you buy it again knowing this?  I tried it out and really liked it and was going to buy one while they are on sale.

 

Thanks

 

Smorton

[Guest all8]

Timde

 

Would you buy it again knowing this?  I tried it out and really liked it and was going to buy one while they are on sale.

 

Thanks

 

Smorton

 

 

Yes, but I would not take it Snowboarding!!!

 

I accept that if I drop any large lens/camera its more or less finished, if its not the lens that breaks then probably the mount would be deformed.

[Smorton]

Thanks. 

 

Smorton

[mkg3]

Just a quick update on repair.

 

The cost to repair is just under $450 and initially they said it was covered under the warrantee but because its broken in half, by Sony's definition it is considered "an impact damage" - meaning that it doesn't fall apart by itself.

 

The repair is done at US east coast, and I'm in US west coast.  5~7 business days to repair and ship it back.

 

They readily have the parts to put it back together and I was told these lenses are very fragile and was not uncommon problem with Sony lenses.