Sony 16-80mm - how much slop, twitch, clunk?

[_Oliver_]

Ok, thanks all for your replies and the warm welcome

Seems I should bite the bullet and send mine in for service. Unfortunately, my purchase is longer than 2 weeks ago, so I can't simply send it back to the online retailer where I bought it. Oh well.

Thanks again!
Oliver

[artington]

I suspect that the manufacturing process is such that the "clunking et al" is par for the course on this one and that the Zeiss element is down to the glass and design and not much more than more than that. It seems to me that there is a fairly large degree of manufacturer complacency here (ie Sony) which, I hope, will change in the difficult period that lies ahead for consumer demand (in my view running into years rather than months). Unfortunately, such an environment is likely to lead to increased sloppiness so the answer may well be to buy now or find an alternative. As an aside, this should create an opportunity for non OEMs such as Sigma and Tamron unless they are silly with their pricing (as Sigma is with it's 24-70 HSM lens).

[artington]

PS. Until a day or so ago I was all for buying the 16-80 CZ having a lot of respect for Zeiss and having owned a number of their fine lenses for the Contax G2. But after reading all the comments about sample variability I thought "What's the point? Life is simply to short to mess around in this way and suffer unrequited angst!". If Sony / CZ want our money then they should earn it and not force us into a lottery - nothing is that good. When they get their act togetehr I may think again but right now i am stunned by the breathtaking arrogance of it all.

[Winston]

PS. Until a day or so ago I was all for buying the 16-80 CZ having a lot of respect for Zeiss and having owned a number of their fine lenses for the Contax G2. But after reading all the comments about sample variability I thought "What's the point? Life is simply to short to mess around in this way and suffer unrequited angst!". If Sony / CZ want our money then they should earn it and not force us into a lottery - nothing is that good. When they get their act togetehr I may think again but right now i am stunned by the breathtaking arrogance of it all.

Amen.

[PhotoTraveler]

The good-ness in side is trying to break free of its constraints, and the badness outside is trying to get into the goodness.

Far as the Zeiss bit. I think this again all goes back to who does what. The Zeiss part might just be the glass, and it very well is in spec. If Sony was lead on the mechanics of it, then it's their issue. The 16-80 looks a heck of a lot like an re-incarnated minolta 24-105. And from playing with the 16-80s in stores, the lens it most reminds me of mechanically is the 24-105, which also had a rumbly focus ring like the 16-80. So the mechanic issues very well are coming from Japan, not Germany.

Always remember, the lenses are Sony-Zeiss. Not just Zeiss.

Zeiss probably only has a bit to do with the mechanics far as what drives lens mounting, and what lenses move and how. Much the rest is probably Sony. I suspect Sony basically gives Zeiss a bit of an interface kit to hook into the Sony concept and Sony does the rest. If we ever get something like TS lenses, maybe then Zeiss will do the whole thing. But right now, I think Sony does the mechanics/integration and that looks to be where the problems are.

1. Someone over at Sonyforum.de had dust behind the front lens of a brandnew Zeiss 24-70
2. One reviewer had to get several copies of the Zeiss 24-70 because of decentering problems
3. Several people have complained about a sqweaking noise the plastic ring on the 24-70 makes when turning
4. Several people have reported the front part of the Zeiss 135 lenses falling apart!
5. I myself could not get Sony to respond to my questions about the problem with my lens which is an excessive wobble of the zoom part (at least 4 other users have reported this too, I browsed also french and german fora).
6. Here and on dyxum there are many complaints about the Zeiss 16-80.

And all Zeiss says is that according to them "all is well and within bounds of tolerance". Well as far as I am concerned Zeiss is no longer Zeiss. It used to be a company on a par with Leica as far as optical excellence and consistency was concerned. Now, whereas the optical design may still be excellent, the final product need not be because of tolerances and a lack of quality control. It has become a gamble to buy such a expensive piece of equipment. Oh, and Sony... deafening silence is the only response to emails with questions and/or complaints.

[picman]

Far as the Zeiss bit. I think this again all goes back to who does what. The Zeiss part might just be the glass, and it very well is in spec. So the mechanic issues very well are coming from Japan, not Germany.
Always remember, the lenses are Sony-Zeiss. Not just Zeiss.
Zeiss probably only has a bit to do with the mechanics far as what drives lens mounting, and what lenses move and how. Much the rest is probably Sony. I suspect Sony basically gives Zeiss a bit of an interface kit to hook into the Sony concept and Sony does the rest. But right now, I think Sony does the mechanics/integration and that looks to be where the problems are.

1. Someone over at Sonyforum.de had dust behind the front lens of a brandnew Zeiss 24-70
2. One reviewer had to get several copies of the Zeiss 24-70 because of decentering problems
3. Several people have complained about a sqweaking noise the plastic ring on the 24-70 makes when turning
4. Several people have reported the front part of the Zeiss 135 lenses falling apart!
5. I myself could not get Sony to respond to my questions about the problem with my lens which is an excessive wobble of the zoom part (at least 4 other users have reported this too, I browsed also french and german fora).
6. Here and on dyxum there are many complaints about the Zeiss 16-80.

And all Zeiss says is that according to them "all is well and within bounds of tolerance". Well as far as I am concerned Zeiss is no longer Zeiss. It used to be a company on a par with Leica as far as optical excellence and consistency was concerned. Now, whereas the optical design may still be excellent, the final product need not be because of tolerances and a lack of quality control. It has become a gamble to buy such a expensive piece of equipment. Oh, and Sony... deafening silence is the only response to emails with questions and/or complaints.

I wrote that message quite some time ago. If I were to write it now I would have to add 7, 8, 9, etc ... Again, it suffices to browse all forums (also the french, dutch and german ones). I agree with all your points though. These lenses are indeed Sony-Zeiss and not Zeiss ( and the glass part of it is actually Cosina isn't it ?). I come from, and still have, Contax RTS with nothing but German made Carl Zeiss lenses, so I know the difference. But you know what is not different: the price isn't different and the PR and commercials aren't different. These lenses are presented as Zeiss and priced as Zeiss. For that reason alone they should have the consistent quality of Zeiss. Unfortunately they don't. I might still end up buying some of them though, I just wonder how many copies it will take to get a good one.

Cheers, Bob.

[Dusty]

The messages here and elsewhere seem to indicate that Zeiss' quality control is not up to standards. Either that, or that the lenses are in such high demand that they are willing to take the PR hit just to get more out.

There are items that quality manufacturing of is so difficult that they end up with a very high rate of rejection. While lenses (glass) themselves may be such an issue, nothing else in the body manufacture or cementing of lenses should be outside the ability of these companies. After all, they've been doing that part for over 100 years!

This may go back to our thread about Chinese production. Where are these lenses put together?

Dusty