|
|
| Welcome to World Photography Forum! | |
 | Thank you for finding your way to World Photography Forum, a dedicated community for photographers and enthusiasts. There's a variety of forums, a wonderful gallery, and what's more, we are absolutely FREE. You are very welcome to join, take part in the discussion, and post your pictures!
|
|
|||||||
| Cameras Discussion on Cameras of all types |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
#1
18-09-07, 08:37
|
||||
|
||||
Loose lenses on D80
I was wondering if anyone has experienced the following problem with a Nikon D80. When I mount a lens on the camera - I have tried the Nikon 18-135, Nikon 300 f4 and Tamron 200-500 - the lens can move a few mm left or right with the lens locked in position. The camera is just under 1 year old so I am leaving it in for repair anyway while still under warranty. I am almost sure it was not like this when I bought it. Is this normal or is it a problem
Thanks Michael 
|
|
#2
18-09-07, 13:19
|
||||
|
||||
|
There is nothing wrong with your camera or lens. Its normal with the Nikon F-mount. I have two bodies and several lenses and the longer ones tend to have a greater play. I have read elsewhere its to allow thermal expansion but I remain sceptical!
__________________
http://www.aviation-photography.co.uk/
|
|
#3
19-09-07, 15:37
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I have just measured all the locking pins on the mounting flange on my Nikon bodies. This is 2mm. I have done the same for all my lenses ( 11 ), extension tubes (2) and Kenko Pro & Nikon converters (3), and measured the notch on the mounting flange that engages the body locking pin. These measured a consistant 2.03mm. The 0.03mm difference on the lens flange is required as clearance for the locking pin on the camera mounting flange. As the body mount is sprung any slight rotational movement will have no effect as the mating surfaces will be in perfect contact. I have an old independant converter on which the locking pin on the lens mount end is 1.95mm and the locking slot is 2.05mm so giving a total clearence of 0.10mm and that does allow a bit of twist in the lens. Nothing as drastic as your post though. Any thermal expansion of the lens mount would be taken care of by the sprung body bayonet mount itself. Don
|
|
#4
20-09-07, 23:02
|
||||
|
||||
|
From memory when I used an F3, FA and FM2, they all had a little bit of play on the lens to body mount, more so than a few other mounts (ironically one of the nicest was the old now defunct Canon FD mount), but on my old Nikons I'm sure it wasn't as severe as you descibe...in fact there was always more play on my Tamron adaptall lens to adaptall mounts!
|
|
#5
23-09-07, 21:21
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Joe, Easy for me to tell as I have Nikkormats, an F2, F3, D100, and D2X. All are the same hence my surprise at the movement described. Don
|
|
#6
23-09-07, 22:12
|
||||
|
||||
|
Don,
Most of the cameras I've had in my life have all been ones that've looked, or ended up looking quite battered...which probably meant the lens mounts also got rather worn (zoom lenses, what are they? lol)! Glad you still got yours for on-hand reporting and comparisons 
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
