Jump to content

SEL70200G


Recommended Posts

i have a SEL70200G and the tripod mount has broken it´s only 8 months old  it opens by it self when i use it with my rapidstrap 

..i got a email from sony that a new one coust about 400Eur

How can the mount be priced at 400Eur it seems extremly overpriced?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i have a SEL70200G and the tripod mount has broken it´s only 8 months old  it opens by it self when i use it with my rapidstrap 

..i got a email from sony that a new one coust about 400Eur

How can the mount be priced at 400Eur it seems extremly overpriced?

 

Is there no warranty on this lens anymore, or have you towed a car with it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

it´s bout from ebay ...and the company dont take any responsabillity at all.

No its normal wear and tear ..the mount opens by it self it dont stay closed..

so i dont trust carry the equipment around with the rapidstrap ( normally it attaches to the tripodmount)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This forum seems to be hacked and corrupted.

 

A Java script seems to include completely misleading commercial links to overpriced items in my above post and many other posts as well.

 

This violates heavily all agreed rules and common netiquette !

 

I do not want to have anything to do with the content of that post any more.

 

@Moderator: please remove this link, it is not in my name.

 

If something like that is possible in this forum, I will stop posting and would like to encourage all other members to do so as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Posts

    • Hmm that's pretty dreadful indeed... My 18-105 for sure is sharper than that. If I have time tomorrow I'll shoot an example with mine at 40mm f/8 side by side with the 16-55. Sold my kit lens when I bought the 18-105 so can't compare those anymore.
    • Thanks for the very useful information. The 16-55 tempts me, I can live with the absence of stabilisation, what holds me is the price tag. As always, there is not such a thing like a free lunch in life. The Sony gives performance at a reasonable size but with no stabilisation and higher price tag, the Zeiss is compact, stabilised and reasonably priced but lower performed, while the Tamron provides performance at very good price and stabilisation at the expense of bulkiness. 😀 All in all, I think I will give a try to the Tamron, once I have taken in my hands. Here are two cutouts taken close to the center of the picture. The sharper one is the kit zoom, the other is the 18-105 mm, at approximately the same lenght around 40 mm at /f 8. The difference is impressive and more impressive for me is that all the lenses in the shop had the same behaviour on two different cameras. At this point looks like a whole batch and not just a lens.  

      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!

    • That's a pity and certainly doesn't match with my experience with the 18-105: mine is definately on par with the 16-50 kit lens (which on its own was as decent as I could expect from such a cheap lens). Sure, dont expect sharp corners especially wide open, but in the center my 18-105 left little to be desired across most of the zoom range. The 16-55 does beat it in every regard except zoom range though. The Tamron 17-70 trades blows with the 16-55 and might be the better choice in some cases. I went for the 16-55 because of the smaller size (I also found the 18-105 too bulky most of the time) and slightly wider FoV. My camera has a stabilized sensor so stabilized optics was no requirement for me. As you noted, I kept the 18-105 on my old A6000 for the occasional video project.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...