Jump to content

XF 90mm lens elements rattling

lv.xphotographer

By lv.xphotographer
in Fuji X Lenses

 Share

Recommended Posts

lv.xphotographer Rookie

lv.xphotographer

Posted
Posted

But why nobody discuss freaking play of lens elements inside while lens not mounted and powered on body? Such mechanical nonsense sooner or later will result in lack of sharpness due to mechanical misalignment because of constant lens element rattling inside lens barrel during transport in your camera bag.

Such Japanese steel will become dull rather soon, hopefully during 2 year period of lens warranty in EU...

Link to post
Share on other sites
lv.xphotographer Rookie

lv.xphotographer

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Even if this relates to internal focusing element movement due new magnet motors being engaged only while camera has power on, it is hard to understand why this element is not being parked rigidly during power off similarly to heads being parked inside HDD. Anyone owns this lens? No concerns on this?

Link to post
Share on other sites
PeterG Rookie

PeterG

Posted
Posted

That sound gave me a flashback to a Canon lens, the 70-200 or 100mm with IS, that showed the same behaviour if you removed the lens with the camera on. Then it didn't park the element rig properly. So either it's constructed this way by Fuji or just a firmware slip, but I guess it's the way it's built.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest kbures

Guest kbures

Posted
Posted

The clunking and whirring noises of the 90mm were the first thing I noticed when I got the lens on July 10. I was very upset with what I take as a terrible piece of engineering. I reported on it in a post to the following forum: "xf-90mm-now-shipping-at-bhphoto..." and one other person also responded with similar comments. The current forum, rightly so, is devoted exclusively to this sad topic.

 

I agree with lv-xphotographer's comment in this forum that this should have been mentioned in the pre-release reviews. I never saw even a hint of it in any of them. Not mentioning such a serious issue has created a credibility problem with reviewers we trusted to be honest (perhaps if they say something bad, they won't get any more free lenses). We'll have to be especially careful when the much-hyped X-Pro2 arrives on the scene.

 

The clunking and whirring were enough for me to send the lens back to Adorama immediately for a refund. I actually never even took a photo with the lens. It may have good optics (I'll never know), but the mechanical design is unremittingly shameful. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dis Collaborator

Dis

Posted
Posted

That's why I buy products after some time they are out. I hope Fuji will do something with this so late samples will be better. They could not officially admit the problem but quitly fix it just like they did with x-t1's back buttons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Marc G. Collaborator

Marc G.

Posted
Posted

So much nonsense being written here...

 

Whether the lens rattles or not just simply doesn't matter up to the point where there is proof that the rattling causes wear and tear inside the lens. There is not a single proof for that, so all you people do is rant about... nothing.

 

There shouldn't be any dust inside the lens and the lens should work just as intended. As long as it does just that, the rattling might just be a nuisance for SOME people and a non-issue for most.

 

The biggest problem is that people think their lens is broken/faulty due to the rattling. But it's normal and calming down should be advised at this stage.

Link to post
Share on other sites
photog Apprentice

photog

Posted
Posted

I have noticed the same rattle/clunk noise in my 90... the same noise the 50-140 makes when it is not on the camera. Both lenses make incredibly sharp images when on the camera and Fuji says the noise is normal behavior. As long as the image quality continues to be so outstanding, I'm not going to worry. 

 

As a long time professional photographer who has used Canon for the better part of the last 25 years and has suffered through numerous QC issues, 1D variant body focus issues, weather sealing issues, lenses that were back/front focused on one side and not the other,  repeated IS motor failure issues, just to name a few, I have been very pleased with the high quality of the Fuji bodies (X-T1's) and the glass and how well they work right out of the box. 

 

As far as reviewers "warning" readers about the noise, if it how the lens is supposed to operate and does not compromise image quality, there wouldn't seem to be a need to warn anyone. 

 

I am really loving the 90... clunk and all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Marc G. Collaborator

Marc G.

Posted
Posted

Absence of proof is no proof of absence.

For it to be an issue, there has to be proof that it actually is an issue. Otherwise I can call any lens on the market faulty and just say "Absence of proof is no proof of absence."

 

If you can provide a link or other reference to that statement, then the issue will be moot as far as I'm concerned.

I myself called Fujifilm Germany when I got the 50-140 to make sure it is a non-issue. I'm terribly sorry I cannot provide an mp3 file of the call...

Link to post
Share on other sites
c0ldc0ne Enthusiast

c0ldc0ne

Posted
Posted

For it to be an issue, there has to be proof that it actually is an issue. Otherwise I can call any lens on the market faulty and just say "Absence of proof is no proof of absence."

I think that most of us who spoke up about this issue considered it to be a concern, not necessarily proof that the lens is "faulty".

 

If one of my lenses behaves distinctively different than anything I've ever owned or used, I try to gather information on that behavior to ascertain whether or not it is by design or something to be concerned about. I'm not sure why that bothers you.

 

I myself called Fujifilm Germany when I got the 50-140 to make sure it is a non-issue. I'm terribly sorry I cannot provide an mp3 file of the call...

I honestly don't understand why you feel that all this vitriol is required.

 

It's funny though that you called Fuji over the same issue that you then accuse other people of ranting and writing nonsense about.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Marc G. Collaborator

Marc G.

Posted
Posted

I called them because I was curious, not because I found it to be an issue. They let me ask the question, handed the phone to a technician and he answered me properly. So please don't try to interpret my actions without a proper understanding of why I did it.

 

It's not you I have a problem with. But this pessimistic and negative way of interpreting certain hardware behavior is something I cannot understand. This all seems to me as if we lived in times where people believed the earth was a disc...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dis Collaborator

Dis

Posted
Posted

I've tried a sample yesterday. The rattling was present but it's not as serious as I thought. Also this only happens when lens is turned from face up and down at ange more than 45 degrees which is not very often action while carrying.

 

The thing I didn't like was huge AF ring range. It takes more than a full turn to get from infinity to close focus. This is definitely made for precision so one has to get used to it. Maybe I'll change my opinion after using.

 

I really liked the aperture ring. IMO it has the perfect stiffness. It's both hard to kick off position and easy to operate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tom Enthusiast

Tom

Posted
Posted

I'm assuming that's based on more than just dust in a single lens?

 

It's not 'just dust'. More like small chips. Since the XF90 is weather resistant, I guess it's abrasion from internals. My XF56 has the same problem and is currently in service. And I had to send back my TCL X100 twice before I got one without chips inside. On the other hand I have 30-40 years old Zeiss lenses without any any traces of dust.
 
I love My Fuji gear. But this is annoying. 
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
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • thelostkiwi
      Looking for Full Frame lenses to adapt to GFX

      By thelostkiwi · Posted

      I also use a Nikon to GFX Fringer and it works very well.  24mm f/1.8 vignettes so best used on 35mm mode.  50mm f/1.8 covers the entire frame very well with no issues and is a superb little lens. 105mm Sigma vignettes slightly but is perfectly usable. 300 f/4 likewise the 105.  I have a 70-200 f/20+.8 incoming to test so will report back but I'm expecting a little vignetting.  Even in 35mm mode the image is still 60MP and if you're prepared to manually crop and correct you can get 80-90 MP images.  I also have a C/Y to GFX adapter.  The 24mm Sigma Superwide vignettes strongly. Ditto 28-80 Zeiss Sonnar. 80-200 f/4 Sonnar is perfectly usable. All work fine as 35mm mode lenses.  I also have an M42 adapter which I tried with the Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f/3.5 with good results. 
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Thank you. I will research it.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Jerry Thank you very much. That is extremely helpful. It seems that the camera and the lens have the latest firmware update, so it appears that the corrections should be applied automatically. The lens arrived this afternoon and I took some quick test shots, in which the correct lens information appeared in the EXIF files, so that sounds good. I used Adobe DNG converter to convert the Raw (RAF) files, and then opened the DNG files and saved them in PSD format. However, with a beautiful, clear, cloudless blue sky, there were no lines near the edges to check if distortion had been corrected. Another day I plan to photograph a brick wall. Thank you for your help.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Typically you need to make sure the lens is compatible with the camera, i.e. check the lens compatibility charts for your camera, then make sure the respective firmwares are updated so older issues are resolved. After that, each lens has a manufacturer’s profile which will be embedded into the raw file meta data for the images captured using that lens. From there, it is up to the raw conversion software to apply the lens correction to the image. Different converters do that differently, some automatically, some only if a setting is turned on. For in-camera jpegs, the on-board converter does the corrections automatically, assuming the camera recognizes the lens, it applies a generic profile otherwise. I do not know if that can be turned off or not.
×
×
  • Create New...