70-200 2.8 VR - Rotational "Slop" When Mounted

obajobaobajoba Posts: 206Member
edited March 2013 in Nikon Lenses
I've tried searching with various "terms" but haven't found much, hoping someone that has owned the 70-200/2.8 VR can chime in on this. I noticed today that when the lens is attached to my D4 there is a small amount of rotational sloppiness. When I say small, I mean roughly the width of the white mounting marker (or less.) I also attached it to my brand spankin' new TC-17 and it has the same, though the TC-17 is tight to the body. My 24-70 also seems nice and tight.

Anyone else had this issue with this, or other, Nikkor lenses? Not sure if I need to be concerned and get it serviced, or if it's just because this lens weighs so darned much. The lens itself is practically new, the original owner used it about half a dozen times and I myself haven't used it all that much yet.
D4 | 70-200 2.8 VR | 24-70 2.8 | TC-17e II

Comments

  • obajobaobajoba Posts: 206Member
    Hmmmm. It's less than I originally thought, and I found that my 24-70 also does it. The amount it gives is very slight, but it does give. This normal? I can't remember if my D7000 also did this.
    D4 | 70-200 2.8 VR | 24-70 2.8 | TC-17e II
  • SquamishPhotoSquamishPhoto Posts: 608Member
    Mike
    D3 • D750 • 14-24mm f2.8 • 35mm f1.4A • PC-E 45mm f2.8 • 50mm f1.8G • AF-D 85mm f1.4 • ZF.2 100mm f2 • 200mm f2 VR2
  • obajobaobajoba Posts: 206Member
    Thanks Squamish! I could not find anything close when searching (I even tried Bing and that is committing treason in my world.) That thread is exactly the reassurance I was looking for.
    D4 | 70-200 2.8 VR | 24-70 2.8 | TC-17e II
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,396Moderator
    Yes, thanks Squamish...I have noticed this, but never gave it much thought. The 400mm f/2.8 does the same thing. And when TC's are added, it is even more...two flange tolerances rather than only one.

    It is so interesting how we worry about our stuff. And, I am at the top of the list in many cases. But, what I have found is I usually do not know exactly how things are supposed to be, re: tolerances, etc., so I just shoot the camera and hope for the best.
    Msmoto, mod
  • DJBee49DJBee49 Posts: 133Member
    I have the same phenomenon with my 300mm f4, especially when using a TC as well, on a D800. It is the only lens I own that does this and the rotation is much as Msmoto has stated. I have made sure that all the mount screws are tight (they are) and can only assume it is a manufacturing tolerance on the lens mount. If it was the body, it would obviously effect other lenses as well. This lens also has the same amount of movement on my F100.

    Does it matter? Not sure. If there was a slop of a couple of millimetres on a tripod mount, for instance, I would certainly not be happy. With one of the long lenses, like the 300mm, it is, of course, the lens that is mounted on the tripod. In this case would it allow the camera body to rotate slightly with the mirror banging up and down? I think it might, although the forces from this will be linear not rotational, so any effect on sharpness would probably be very small.
  • JJ_SOJJ_SO Posts: 1,158Member
    It's nor a phenomenon neither an "issue". Without those tolerances no bayonet could be mounted. If one wants tolerance free mounts, he/she needs to use the old M42 threaded mount. That can be tightened without play :D and has only slight disadvantages...
  • obajobaobajoba Posts: 206Member
    It is so interesting how we worry about our stuff. And, I am at the top of the list in many cases. But, what I have found is I usually do not know exactly how things are supposed to be, re: tolerances, etc., so I just shoot the camera and hope for the best.
    Exactly the reason I was asking, Msmoto. I don't know correct from incorrect in cases like these. I assume my D4 should function exactly how it does because I've not owned or used another, and my lenses mount the way they do because I've not used another identical lens.

    My biggest concern, of course, is that when on the tripod you can slightly move the body, and when handheld I may be losing my weatherproof seal (though the D4 + 70-200 + TC17 isn't "handhold friendly" to begin with). What put me most at ease is that the lens doesn't pull away from the body, it just turns that tiny bit rotationally - which shouldn't impact sharpness considering the glass is round :) Shooting MF on a tripod could possibly drive one bonkers, I suppose.

    D4 | 70-200 2.8 VR | 24-70 2.8 | TC-17e II
  • DJBee49DJBee49 Posts: 133Member
    JJSO.
    If they all did that I would agree. The point is that they don't. Out of the seven Nikon lenses I own, the 300mm is the only one that exhibits this movement. It appears to be the odd one or two only, which leaves the question as to whether or not it has any effect on sharpness.
  • obajobaobajoba Posts: 206Member
    @DJBee49 - is your 300f/4 doing more than rotating very slightly? I'm afraid to inspect the mechanics beyond a glance since I am a bit of a klutz, but I don't that mine would have any impact on the mirror. My best guess is that mine moves 1-2mm at absolute most but it is still sealed tight against the body. I do feel though that the pin which sticks out on the bottom half of the mount is exceptionally loose compared to how it was on my D7000 - though I'm unsure what role that would play in the grand scheme of things.

    Anyone have a link to a good explanation/diagram of the F-mount and how it works?
    D4 | 70-200 2.8 VR | 24-70 2.8 | TC-17e II
  • DJBee49DJBee49 Posts: 133Member
    obajoba.
    My 300mm f4 only has rotational movement (about 1mm.) and, as you have said of yours, there does not seem to be any forward/backward rocking movement. In other words, it is 'tight to the body' as well. I have thought of taping it to the body or something to stop any movement and doing comparative tests but never have. It is so sharp (when I get everything right!) that it has never seemed necessary. It just irritates me a bit!
  • obajobaobajoba Posts: 206Member
    I'm with ya on the irritated part. If I knew that it was truly intentional then I may not have an issue with it. But, I digress, I am a perfectionist and things like this dig at me forever.

    The only time I can see it impacting sharpness is if it moves post-focusing before you were to take your shot (more likely when on a tripod I think.) In this scenario, it's probably better to think in terms of the camera moving than the lens moving.

    I need to do some focus tests with both of my lenses, and with my TC-17, to make sure everything is properly tuned since I have never done this before. I haven't been able to do this because I don't own a tripod yet, though I will be ordering one this week. Perhaps I will check it out then and make some comparisons.
    D4 | 70-200 2.8 VR | 24-70 2.8 | TC-17e II
  • DJBee49DJBee49 Posts: 133Member
    obajoba.
    For what it is worth, I have already done this using Focus Tune and it was OK. If there had been a real problem it might have showed up here....... but of course, I was locking the mirror up for each shot, so maybe not!

    I tested the lens with and without my TC-17 and there was no more focus variation and scatter than with any of the other lenses. The worst was the 50mm f1.8; surprisingly I thought. I think you are right that the problem (if there is one) might be most likely to show itself on a tripod and would relate to the camera body moving. Perhaps I will repeat the tests without locking the mirror up and see what happens.

    I have taken a number of shots on a tripod and have not noticed any sharpness problems so perhaps we should not worry too much. I don't think it should be like this though!
  • PhotoJoe55PhotoJoe55 Posts: 1Member
    A year later and this same issue keeps popping up. A search on google pulls up several discussions about it at various sites. To be fair, I have heard of this issue with Canon too. I use to think of the Lens/Body mount as extremely precision, like a firearm, but It's not. I guess (and hope) that it's close enough for that one shot that becomes the most important. We all experience that at one time or another whether it's Wildlife or a Wedding.
    As JJ_SO pointed out above, a threaded mount would have such precision, but for Nikon maintaining the F mount was a big reason that we stayed with them. I do find it strange that it's only with the longer lenses, for me it's the AF 80-200mm F2.8D ED & the AF-S 300mm F4 ED-IF mounted to a D700 but not to a D300S. I also found that F mount Sigma Telephoto and Zoom lenses do not have this play at all. I was planning on buying a Teleconverter but I hope to try it out first. It could, 1) Get worse, 2) Stay the same or 3) Go away. (probably in that order!) I read above that DJBee49 has experienced this with a D800 and a TC-17, I believe with and without the TC. I do hope that the readers continue to post their own experiences, so that we can monitor the issue. I don't think that we should have to worry about these things with the prices that we pay, but I don't think there is anything we can do to prevent it either. At least we can continue to communicate with each other so we are at least, well informed about it. I know some people that would sooner walk away, rather than get involved because it is shocking the first time you notice it. I'm not sure what I would do, but for us it's already too late!
  • DJBee49DJBee49 Posts: 133Member
    PhotoJoe55.
    I can update a little on this from my own experience. I recently bought a TC2.0 and a 300mm f2.8. Whilst I was in the shop, I tried several TCs from their stock. They all exhibited the rotational movement but not uniformly. Some were worse than others. More of a surprise to me is that the 300mm mounted directly onto the D800 also has some movement. It is not as much as on the TCs but is definitely there.

    When I get some time, I will do some sharpness tests on various combinations of this. It amuses me, in a very ironic way, that I, and many others, have spent large amounts of money buying rock solid tripods, tripod heads etc., being very critical of the slightest movement or play in any part of the set up. We then we have a camera that exhibits more than a millimetre of rotational slop on the lens mount! I also find it interesting that, as I said before, most of my lenses do not exhibit this phenomenon, only (in my case) the TCs and long lenses.
  • PyratPyrat Posts: 10Member
    +1. I was quite worried when mounting my used 70-200vII for the first time to feel the bit 'o slop in the mount. Felt the previous owner might have forgotten to mention it. But when shooting, on monopod, tripod or handheld, images are superb.....so, no problem? Was relieved to see this post, as this occurs in no other lens/body combination I work with, (but there is nothing I own that approaches the weight of the 70-200) so it made sense, but has always nagged me a bit. Having not purchased this lens new made me feel that this was likely an overuse/wear issue, I have a hard time believing this was a design feature, but as long as image quality holds up, I'm ok. Maybe we have some engineers that could provide some insight into why this is happening, or if this is a bit of a cock-up.
    D610, 11-16 Tok, 17-50 Siggy, 35 f1.4 Siggy, 70-300AFS, 24-120 f4, 70-200 f2.8 vII, 50 f1.4D, 85 f1.4D, 55 2.8AIS Nikkors. SB 900, SB 600, B&W, Lee filters
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,396Moderator
    Well, for those who are interested, my 400mm f/2.8 on my D4 has the same "slop" but this did not prevent me from carrying the entire unit, by the D4 "grip" in my right hand briefly. I think the important factor is to not jerk the camera/lens around in this way, but to gently hold the camera, lens hanging down, while adjusting hands is IMO OK. I would not hold the camera/lens up in shooting position by the body only with either the 70-200/2.8 or the 400/2.8 as this makes no sense and would severely strain the lens mount.
    Msmoto, mod
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,363Member
    edited March 2014
    The slop is there for a very good reason, to allow for expansion and contraction of the mounts. If it was tight you might end up with a lens stuck on your camera in hot/cold weather.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    +1 PB_PM, do you want some slop or a stuck lens... A bit of rotational slop shouldn't affect focus in any event as focus is determined by the distance from the sensor, not the rotation. Also the light field is circular, so no worries there. I wouldn't give it a second thought.
  • Vipmediastar_JZVipmediastar_JZ Posts: 1,708Member
    I would not hold the camera/lens up in shooting position by the body only with either the 70-200/2.8 or the 400/2.8 as this makes no sense and would severely strain the lens mount.
    I have the slop with the 70-200 and minor with 24-70.
    When it was at the college game I was scoping the photographers out and they seemed to not be too gentle with their gear. The 200mm+lens they would stand it up by the lens and some I think (this was novemeber) where grabbing it by the body.

    I always try to be gentle anyways and I feel a strain myself if it hold it by the bod with the 70-200.
Sign In or Register to comment.