Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 92 of 92

Thread: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

  1. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    363
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    3

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    What would you choose if Sony offered a special release series of accredited lenses for say $100 extra, in addition to the standard output lens? These could come with a certificate and test chart.

    So the FE 55mm might have a small run added to the general production line which could be offered for sale for say $1100 rather than the regular price of $1000? I chose that lens deliberately because I have lost count of the number of internet experts who would 'never pay $1000 for just a normal lens'. Sony is already up against buyer pressure to constrain costs, and is being kicked for making such a fine lens at a still quite fair price.

    I'd pay the surcharge in a heartbeat but that's me, living in splendid isolation here in Australia where we already pay much more for most photographics in a small market.

    Special series might be extended to lenses that have no cheaper counterparts, which is really what Zeiss and Leica do anyway. Zeiss already test each copy of the 15mm ZEF Distagon for MTF, they told Lloyd that. I bet the Otus is very well assembled and QA is very good.

    What is happening is that buyers range from folks like Tim and Zoran right through to folks who just start shooting with whatever they buy and get upset only at really obvious defects. The makers try to strike a balance with a wary eye on their bottom line.

  2. #52
    Senior Member Annna T's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Swiss Alps
    Posts
    1,444
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    3

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by philip_pj View Post
    What would you choose if Sony offered a special release series of accredited lenses for say $100 extra, in addition to the standard output lens? These could come with a certificate and test chart.

    So the FE 55mm might have a small run added to the general production line which could be offered for sale for say $1100 rather than the regular price of $1000? I chose that lens deliberately because I have lost count of the number of internet experts who would 'never pay $1000 for just a normal lens'. Sony is already up against buyer pressure to constrain costs, and is being kicked for making such a fine lens at a still quite fair price.

    I'd pay the surcharge in a heartbeat but that's me, living in splendid isolation here in Australia where we already pay much more for most photographics in a small market.

    Special series might be extended to lenses that have no cheaper counterparts, which is really what Zeiss and Leica do anyway. Zeiss already test each copy of the 15mm ZEF Distagon for MTF, they told Lloyd that. I bet the Otus is very well assembled and QA is very good.

    What is happening is that buyers range from folks like Tim and Zoran right through to folks who just start shooting with whatever they buy and get upset only at really obvious defects. The makers try to strike a balance with a wary eye on their bottom line.
    I think that certifying a perfect lens enters in the territory of diminishing returns and that a 10% price increase isn't enough to make it profitable for the manufacturer. And what would that mean with respect to the rest of the production ? If you don't buy a certified lens you are then certified to get soso ones ? For 10% all the people will want the certified and the manufacturers will end with too many rejects and increasing cost.. There is a reason why good lenses are much more expensive : tight tolerances, much more rejects and increasing production cost.

  3. #53
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    221
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    There is no lens that I have used and tested that didn't have a visible fault.

    I've been shooting with decent equipment for over 50 years, and 40 years professionally. Maybe 500 different lenses for all sorts of formats. I've used Leicas since 1961 (including about 75 of their lenses) and pretty much every manufacturer's products in almost every format. Failed QC has gone from missing elements (twice), inverted elements (twice) to hairs and other junk in the lenses to most commonly, decentering. The more expensive German offerings (Leica, Zeiss, Schneider and Rodenstock) have been a fair bit better in this regard than Japanese mainstream produces, but hardly immune to flubs. For about 10 years I used the Konica Autoreflex system for my SLR requirements, and it was the only system that never needed repairs, worked to -40 and where I only twice readily noticed a decentered lens, but I wasn't as fussy then and that's not statistically significant anyway.

    Whatever: all camera systems have problems at times, and when you have a 36mp sensor and can easily pixel peep every image you had better be prepared to pay close to five figure prices for every moderately complex lens if you want no easily seen decentering in every lens. Look at what cine lenses cost.

    I check equipment after I buy it, but I also keep in mind what I intend to do with it. A macro lens that I will use for copy work better not show any decentering at f/8 at any magnification that I'm likely to use. A portrait lens can show a bit of decentering at a couple of wider apertures. I have one Canon lens which was selected as the best out of 6 that still has very noticeable decentering, but which is useful enough that I've kept it and used it for 15 years.

    Professionally, I've always tried to be fussier than any of my clients. Being a huge amount fussier than your clients though isn't really worth it. For my own shooting, I can set my own standards, and those are often a lot higher, but I still try to keep realistic.

    Print something at 24x36 and see if the results bother you. Then decide how much more you're willing to pay for something better.

    Henning
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #54
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Well said and I agree. As much of a lens whore as I am I'm only willing to part with so much money and to pay thousands for incremental improvements sometimes seems hardly worth the effort. In short there always seems to be a alternate that works very close to your needs. I want great glass no question but I'm only willing to go so far anymore to get it. I have been down that road spending 7 k on one lens for optimum results. Great to have it but again clients don't always appreciate it either. There is a line in the sand and it's up to you to decide what's the true value of crossing that line. Like everyone else I love great glass but I find a good percent of the time if I go with a Zeiss lens I won't be disappointed. As I think they make some of the best glass around in old and modern mounts and they still are reasonable to purchase. The days of spending over 6k for a Leica R 35-70 2.8 rare as can be lens are over. I can look back and say I owned some of the best glass ever made like this one but again at what cost to get there is where I lost the interest. Buying lenses is a crap shoot anymore and sometimes buying three to get one great one is more the case than not but I have a hard time shelling out the big bucks as well. Maybe its a growing process many of us go through but in the end I am no worse off with less expensive glass than I was with 6 k per copy. When in doubt I always seem to find Zeiss glass at a reasonable cost plus great manual feel to boot that usually solves my quality standards. But until you print this stuff big it's really a unknown factor.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  5. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    590
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    So I went to the camera store today and tried out another FE24-70 doing comparison shots at different focal lengths and f stops, Strangely both seemed similar at 24 and 70 but at 35mm the 2nd copy was noticeably sharper near the edges especially on the left compared to my first copy. So obviously have have changed the lens and will now see how this one performs over the next few days

  6. #56
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by Viramati View Post
    So I went to the camera store today and tried out another FE24-70 doing comparison shots at different focal lengths and f stops, Strangely both seemed similar at 24 and 70 but at 35mm the 2nd copy was noticeably sharper near the edges especially on the left compared to my first copy. So obviously have have changed the lens and will now see how this one performs over the next few days
    HI David
    That sounds like a result - I'm with Tim about this lens - it's got some really nice characteristics, and some less likeable ones, but overall it seems to be producing nice shots for me, and that's the best one could expect.

    all the best

    Just this guy you know
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    HI Zoran
    Look at it this way -

    About 10 years ago I took 5 successive copies of the Nikon 17-55 lens back to a professional camera supplier in Cambridge - they quietly replaced them, agreeing with my samples that it was definitely not OK (I wasn't familiar with the term 'decentered' then, but I sure knew what 'soft' meant )

    When I finally got a good one, I asked their Nkon specialist if they often got lenses returned from customers - he said that I was the only person that year who had returned one.

    Of course, I can't prove it, but it seems likely that there were lots of sub-standard lenses going out (or at least less than optimal). It's just that people weren't looking, added to which, back then, most pros were using film, and it was less easy to realise.

    Whatever - I have quite a lot of statistics as well, and as N says - these are not statistical samples.

    In this case lots of people are buying these new lenses, and they have been warned about sample variation and are looking for it.

    Back to Roger Cicala's excellent article at lens rentals: All of these lenses vary quite widely in quality, and they are all going to be decentered to a greater or lesser degree - only you can decide what you find acceptable, but I'd be really surprised if Sony's QC was worse than others (especially since long personal experience (not statistically significant sadly) has shown me how reliable their cameras seem to be).

    all the best
    Hi jonoslack,

    #1 Let's agree to disagree.

    #2 This discussion was not about was Sony's QC better or worse than others, it was about personal experiences and what each individual feels about it.

    #3 IMHO if five random persons perceive issue with two out of three random copies chances are so will sixth, seventh, eighth ... person with two out of six copies.

    #4 Reliability of cameras has nothing to do with QC of lenses, those are two separate production lines.

    #5 Do you call number of reports of misaligned lenses on RX100 perceived issue with camera or perceived issue with lens, and can they be considered reliable?

    #6 Were you really expecting Nikon rep will admit there is an issue when you asked him? Have you ever seen any rep ever do that?

    Regards,

    Zoran

  8. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by philip_pj View Post
    What would you choose if Sony offered a special release series of accredited lenses for say $100 extra, in addition to the standard output lens? These could come with a certificate and test chart.
    #1 I would want to see does paying extra really deliver me that value.

    #2 I would gladly pay $200 if it does.

    #3 I would still check lens I receive. Manufacturer might have made it "perfect" before it left their hands but they have no control how that package was handled during transportation (you should have seen how poor packaging of some shipment I got from Amazon was) or did I get copy that was handled and returned by somebody else.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  9. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by henningw View Post
    Print something at 24x36 and see if the results bother you. Then decide how much more you're willing to pay for something better.
    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    But until you print this stuff big it's really a unknown factor.
    Can somebody please tell me what is the purpose of manufacturing/buying 36 MP bodies if one is not planning to use all of those pixels and is instead planning to reduce their gear to 12 MP or whatever is the lowest common denominator of the wekest link in their system chain?

    Isn't it like saying "I purchased 200MPH car that manufacturer offers tires for that are capable of doing only 90MPH and that's OK because I won't be going over 55 anyway"?

  10. #60
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by ZoranC View Post
    Hi jonoslack,

    #1 Let's agree to disagree.
    Certainly
    Quote Originally Posted by ZoranC View Post
    #6 Were you really expecting Nikon rep will admit there is an issue when you asked him? Have you ever seen any rep ever do that?
    It wasn't a Nikon rep - it was the Nikon specialist in KP pro, and I'd been dealing with him for years . . . . . and he had no possible reason to lie!

    Just saying

    Just this guy you know
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  11. #61
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Certainly

    It wasn't a Nikon rep - it was the Nikon specialist in KP pro, and I'd been dealing with him for years . . . . . and he had no possible reason to lie!

    Just saying
    Thanks for the clarification Did it ever cross your mind you could have been only one that complained about issue because others might have been oblivious to it, having one without realizing it is there?

  12. #62
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    98
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by ZoranC View Post
    N,

    #1 It is not a rant, it's a discussion, if I was actually ranting it would be very obvious, trust me.

    #2 I am glad to hear you are familiar with statistics, thus you should know why this is not a sample set of 5. You can also consider following: What is there to assure us sample set it not much bigger but we just didn't hear about it? What makes you confident that we didn't hear about it because owners do know how to test for it, did test it, and it did pass the test? Could it be that people are having them without being aware there is an issue? Wouldn't be the first time.
    ZoranC,

    It is not a sample set of 5, but a sample set of 5 complainers, even more restricted .
    I think i did not get the point across correctly. If there are opinions expressed online (social media etc.) a significant majority of them are negative, so it is traditionally (social media marketing) accepted that if there are negative opinions, then most of them will be from a small set of complainers. The companies typically compute the problem spread by looking at the amount of lenses sold to complaints.
    This anecdotal set of 5, that you keep referring is not only skewed, but it is also unverified that it wasn't the same lens (no serial #s, etc.) It is also an insignificant sample size. If 5 was a reasonable size then quality is the least of Sony's problems ...

    Cheers,

    N
    A and E mount Too many lenses.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #63
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by ZoranC View Post
    Thanks for the clarification Did it ever cross your mind you could have been only one that complained about issue because others might have been oblivious to it, having one without realizing it is there?
    Of Course - I'm certain that was the case - which was my whole point - if lens manufacturers can get away with selling lenses with widely varying quality, then they'll do just that (much more expensive to make them all perfectly). Reading Tim Ashley's experience with the Nikon 24-120 f4 zoom, they clearly still can get away with it.

    I wasn't condoning it (or condemning it) - until users all become much more critical things will stay this way - and if users do get critical then prices will go up (a lot).

    Just this guy you know

  14. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by BackToSlr View Post
    ZoranC,

    It is not a sample set of 5, but a sample set of 5 complainers, even more restricted
    I wouldn't think of it a sample set of 5 complainers, I would think as a 5 people that obviously did bother to test their lens. If you have a tumor in your body but are not aware of it because you didn't check for it / because symptoms are not obvious to you (yet) does it mean you are healthy?

  15. #65
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    39
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Zoran,
    Maybe people are happy with their lenses don't post.

    FYI, I've purchased the Sony 35/1.8, 50/1.8 and FE 55, tested them all for decentering and none of them showed any signs of a problem.

    Interestingly, I was looking through a Fuji thread and one of the early people to get their new 56/1.2 had to return the lens because of obvious decentering. There's a sample set of one.

  16. #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Kott View Post
    Zoran,
    Maybe people are happy with their lenses don't post.
    Jeff, when looking at technical things one has to separate his thinking from emotional arguments. Question in such case is not how many people are happy with some lens, question is what percentage of lens would pass certain tests. Quite a few people were very happy with their Toyotas etc (insert name of any brand that had same problem) not "posting" completely unaware there is an underlying issue that can, and did, result in accidents/injuries/deaths. Does that only "complainers" were "posting" and those happy with their cars did not mean there was no issue whatsoever and that it wasn't widespread enough?

  17. #67
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    39
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by ZoranC View Post
    Jeff, when looking at technical things one has to separate his thinking from emotional arguments. Question in such case is not how many people are happy with some lens, question is what percentage of lens would pass certain tests.
    I guess I shouldn't have said "happy." What I meant is that people who are discerning probably don't post when they get a lens, test it and it is satisfactory. For example, I did several tests of my new FE 55 on my A7r and I'm satisfied that it is not decentered in any way that will have a material impact on my images. I didn't feel like I needed to post "hey, I just got a new FE 55 and it's not decentered."
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  18. #68
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    98
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by ZoranC View Post
    I wouldn't think of it a sample set of 5 complainers, I would think as a 5 people that obviously did bother to test their lens. If you have a tumor in your body but are not aware of it because you didn't check for it / because symptoms are not obvious to you (yet) does it mean you are healthy?
    LOL, so you are surmising that there is a quality problem and all unreported lenses are untested and therefore faulty?

    Unfortunately statistics don't work like that. Public relations can work like that, but that has nothing to do with the quality itself.

    To add to that, my experience with Sony has been solid, 4 cameras, and 6 lenses :P

    N
    A and E mount Too many lenses.

  19. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Kott View Post
    I guess I shouldn't have said "happy." What I meant is that people who are discerning probably don't post when they get a lens, test it and it is satisfactory. For example, I did several tests of my new FE 55 on my A7r and I'm satisfied that it is not decentered in any way that will have a material impact on my images. I didn't feel like I needed to post "hey, I just got a new FE 55 and it's not decentered."
    Thanks for clarification, now I understand your point and it does make sense to a point. In cases of "happy" customers clinger can be on is amont of decentering some copy is exhibiting acceptable to that particular customer. If it is that doesn't mean that copy is not decentered nor it means amount of decentering on that copy would be acceptable to a more discerning customer.

  20. #70
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by BackToSlr View Post
    LOL, so you are surmising that there is a quality problem and all unreported lenses are untested and therefore faulty?

    Unfortunately statistics don't work like that.
    I am not surmising anything. From all I know statistics are neither optimist nor pesimist. Just like you say I can't be pesimist and say all unreported lenses are untested and thus faulty I can say that by same token you can't say that all unreported lenses would pass test. It goes both ways until something is proven as fact. In the meantime 2 out of 3 random lenses for 5 random customers sure isn't huge sample but it sure doesn't support optimism.

    Quote Originally Posted by BackToSlr View Post
    To add to that, my experience with Sony has been solid, 4 cameras, and 6 lenses :P
    I am glad to hear you are one of people that had positive experience. To quote you: Does that provide statistically big enough sample?

  21. #71
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    98
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by ZoranC View Post
    I am glad to hear you are one of people that had positive experience. To quote you: Does that provide statistically big enough sample?
    Me: If I look at the sample size you presented (5) then 1 sample is not very different (it is the same order of magnitude). I can say that 100% of samples are good, that was kind of the point i was trying to make with anecdotal sampling.


    Anyway this discussion has run its course, hope that you find a better sample.


    Good luck!

    N
    A and E mount Too many lenses.

  22. #72
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by BackToSlr View Post
    I can say that 100% of samples are good, that was kind of the point i was trying to make with anecdotal sampling.
    ... of course, if you say 100% of samples are good based on your single sample somebody might ask you to illustrate what your definition of "good" is.

    Quote Originally Posted by BackToSlr View Post
    Anyway this discussion has run its course, hope that you find a better sample. Good luck!
    Thanks for the wishes but I think I have indicated in my original post that I have given up looking for a copy of 35/2.8 that I would consider good. Plus this thread was not about my copy, it was about sharing the experience of others.

  23. #73
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    590
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Well after a day out shooting yesterday I can say I am seeing a marked improvement in my 2nd copy of the FE24-70

  24. #74
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by Viramati View Post
    Well after a day out shooting yesterday I can say I am seeing a marked improvement in my 2nd copy of the FE24-70
    David, that's good Do you feel it is the way it's supposed to be across the zoom and aperture range or it is "better than previous copy but still not as it should be"?

  25. #75
    Subscriber Member Chuck Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Studio City, CA
    Posts
    700
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Just for speculations sake, lets say there was a service available to test your lenses. What would it be worth to you to get your lens mounted on an optical bench, and see a printout of how your lens compared to the data for reference lenses on file? This service would also, of course, certify your lens was fine if that is how it tested out.

    Is this a service you would use? I would. Wondering now how much I would be willing to pay for the piece of mind, if nothing else?
    TheCameraForum.Com
    ChuckJonesPhotography.Com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  26. #76
    New Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    10
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    I have had numerous warranty issues with all of my Sony cameras. Never had an issue with a lens, and I am pretty anal.

    In my experience I would say having bought 3 cameras, with 2 that had issues right out of the factory, and one that developed over a span of time that was also in inherent defect, that Sony QC may not be up to spec on camera bodies either.

    That is just my opinion, from my own experience of course. YMMV.

  27. #77
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by NomadMark View Post
    I have had numerous warranty issues with all of my Sony cameras. Never had an issue with a lens, and I am pretty anal.

    In my experience I would say having bought 3 cameras, with 2 that had issues right out of the factory, and one that developed over a span of time that was also in inherent defect, that Sony QC may not be up to spec on camera bodies either.

    That is just my opinion, from my own experience of course. YMMV.
    I think everyone has some defects and early adopters tend to have more issues than those who by after product line maturation. The only Sony product I had issues with was my first Playstation 2 and a TV. They asked that I ship my PS2 with a $70 certified check or money order for labor to perform the diagnosis as it was more than likely a long wait for a replacement in store. Needless to say I returned it to the store for a refund. I took the same action for the TV - no questions asked from either.

    My cousin had issues with his first Canon 7D (he was an early adopter) and they replaced it. He still uses it today. I know some people that had issues with their Nikon bodies as well. The D600 would probably be the most notorious culprit seeing how Nikon dropped the model and released a replacement after originally denying the problem. Jonoslack notoriously had problems with Pentax lenses going through several copies of certain models sometimes never coming up with a functioning copy. Many people have trouble with Sigma's and Tamron's... Some don't.

    So the point is everyone can have problems from any manufacturer. Doesn't necessarily call for pitchforks and torches though as the regional HQ.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  28. #78
    Senior Member stephengilbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    2,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Add to the last post the internet effect: these aren't random polls of users, but forums where the most aggrieved (or most easily aggrieved) are more likely to post their experiences and opinions.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  29. #79
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by stephengilbert View Post
    Add to the last post the internet effect: these aren't random polls of users, but forums where the most aggrieved (or most easily aggrieved) are more likely to post their experiences and opinions.
    True and that passion comes with the nature of being a enthusiast of really anything. I get it and I admit I'd be 100% angry if I didn't get a satisfactory response from the manufacturer or the retailer. Otherwise it's just a minor annoyance for me but photography is only one of my hobbies.

    I don't think most successful professionals stake their professional reputation on a piece of new gear though either.

    One thing is always true in every professional circuit I've been in - you're only as good as the last job you did.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  30. #80
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    590
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by ZoranC View Post
    David, that's good Do you feel it is the way it's supposed to be across the zoom and aperture range or it is "better than previous copy but still not as it should be"?
    I am seeing a marked improvement in the the mid range of the zoom, my first copy seemed to be soft on the left hand side at around 35mm. I think it is also better on the edges at 24mm stopped down. Anyway i am happy with it as a zoom but primes will always be my weapon of choice for critical work

  31. #81
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by HiredArm View Post
    Jonoslack notoriously had problems with Pentax lenses going through several copies of certain models sometimes never coming up with a functioning copy.
    So the point is everyone can have problems from any manufacturer. Doesn't necessarily call for pitchforks and torches though as the regional HQ.
    Quote Originally Posted by NomadMark View Post
    I have had numerous warranty issues with all of my Sony cameras. Never had an issue with a lens, and I am pretty anal.

    In my experience I would say having bought 3 cameras, with 2 that had issues right out of the factory, and one that developed over a span of time that was also in inherent defect, that Sony QC may not be up to spec on camera bodies either.

    That is just my opinion, from my own experience of course. YMMV.
    Hmm - Sony -
    A55
    A65
    A77
    A900
    NEX 5
    NEX 7
    A7

    Too many lenses to list. I've never had a problem with anything - mind you, word on the street was that if you DID have a problem in the UK it was really hard to get it fixed, but apparently now that's all changed and sometimes they can manage a 5 day turnaround.

    . . . . and as HiredArm points out - I had terrible grief with Pentax lenses (not the cameras).

    Individual stories are always of dubious use . . . . . and of course, real statistical information simply isn't available.

    Just this guy you know
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  32. #82
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    39
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Jones View Post
    Just for speculations sake, lets say there was a service available to test your lenses. What would it be worth to you to get your lens mounted on an optical bench, and see a printout of how your lens compared to the data for reference lenses on file? This service would also, of course, certify your lens was fine if that is how it tested out.

    Is this a service you would use? I would. Wondering now how much I would be willing to pay for the piece of mind, if nothing else?
    I do three separate tests on my new lenses, but to have a pro do it on an optical bench I would pay up to US$100 plus shipping.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  33. #83
    New Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    10
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hmm - Sony -
    A55
    A65
    A77
    A900
    NEX 5
    NEX 7
    A7

    Too many lenses to list. I've never had a problem with anything - mind you, word on the street was that if you DID have a problem in the UK it was really hard to get it fixed, but apparently now that's all changed and sometimes they can manage a 5 day turnaround.

    . . . . and as HiredArm points out - I had terrible grief with Pentax lenses (not the cameras).

    Individual stories are always of dubious use . . . . . and of course, real statistical information simply isn't available.

    NEX 7 - Rubber Grip fell off.
    RX1 - Light leak in LCD, non-circular aperture blades, and very dirty sensor from factory
    A7R - Either oil on sensor, or defective coatings on sensor from factory


    the first two issues were resolved very well, though it took close too 2 months a piece. The last I am still living though, with little resolve. Was sent to Sony for repair and it came back looking the same (dare I say worse) than when it left.

  34. #84
    New Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    10
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by NomadMark View Post
    NEX 7 - Rubber Grip fell off.
    RX1 - Light leak in LCD, non-circular aperture blades, and very dirty sensor from factory
    A7R - Either oil on sensor, or defective coatings on sensor from factory


    the first two issues were resolved very well, though it took close too 2 months a piece. The last I am still living though, with little resolve. Was sent to Sony for repair and it came back looking the same (dare I say worse) than when it left.

    Just a note to say Sony address my issue with camera 3 today.

    While I have had some bad luck with lemon cameras, Sony has always stepped up and taken care of me. Amazing service.

  35. #85
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Jones View Post
    Just for speculations sake, lets say there was a service available to test your lenses. What would it be worth to you to get your lens mounted on an optical bench, and see a printout of how your lens compared to the data for reference lenses on file? This service would also, of course, certify your lens was fine if that is how it tested out.

    Is this a service you would use? I would. Wondering now how much I would be willing to pay for the piece of mind, if nothing else?
    I would most likely use it. How much I would pay for it? That's hard to say without knowing any specifics.

  36. #86
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by HiredArm View Post
    Doesn't necessarily call for pitchforks and torches though as the regional HQ.
    ... but it would be so much fun

  37. #87
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by stephengilbert View Post
    Add to the last post the internet effect: these aren't random polls of users, but forums where the most aggrieved (or most easily aggrieved) are more likely to post their experiences and opinions.
    Do people that have posted their negative experiences in this thread qualify as "most easily agrieved" to you? Not to me.

  38. #88
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by NomadMark View Post
    RX1 - Light leak in LCD, non-circular aperture blades, and very dirty sensor from factory
    A7R - Either oil on sensor, or defective coatings on sensor from factory
    Now that we are speaking of not just lenses but of sensors too, my A7 came with hairline scratch on sensor from factory. Once I noticed it it went back faster than one could say "RMA".

  39. #89
    New Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    10
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by ZoranC View Post
    Now that we are speaking of not just lenses but of sensors too, my A7 came with hairline scratch on sensor from factory. Once I noticed it it went back faster than one could say "RMA".
    Sent back to retailer or Sony?
    I had this same issue!! I had some small scratches as well.

  40. #90
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by NomadMark View Post
    Sent back to retailer or Sony?
    I had this same issue!! I had some small scratches as well.
    Retailer. It's interesting to hear I was not the only one.

    On the positive side I didn't have any such issue with my A7R.

  41. #91
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    5,672
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    I'm the equipment buyer the manufacturers hope for: I never test anything. A camera would have to be inoperable and a lens opaque for me to return it. Just kidding about the lens, but, I'm sure that I've happily shot with lenses that would cause others to freak out. The only camera that I've had recently that was clearly defective from the start was a Leica Monochrom. Although consistently locking up could have been a feature. No problems with Sony cameras or lenses (that I noticed).

    Cheers, Matt
    Zenfolio | Matt Driscoll
    Flickr | M_Driscoll
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  42. #92
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony's (lack of?) lens quality control

    Quote Originally Posted by m_driscoll View Post
    I'm the equipment buyer the manufacturers hope for: I never test anything. A camera would have to be inoperable and a lens opaque for me to return it.
    I, on the other side, come from environment that had very little means and every penny was as big as a house, hard earned money was respected and "throwing it away" was unimaginable. I work hard for money I spend on camera or lens. My employer doesn't pay me to deliver below expectations, they have every right to expect I deliver full value of my side of deal we struck when I got hired. Thus I expect full value of a deal when I am paying for something. Deal is a deal, fair is fair.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •