need a more sturdy E-Mount? metal replacement kit!

Surely there's a reason for the plastic... Why wouldn't Sony make the mount all-metal in the first place?
 
A designated part of failure, like an electrical fuse? To protect other, far more expensive parts of the camera to be broken, if a heavy lens like the Dude below causes trouble?

DA560mm__Custom_.jpg
 
Last edited:
For the record, the FS7 also has an all metal mount. It's visible in photos of the body without lens, and it's listed as a feature in the sales literature.

If it was imperative that the plastic part act as a "fuse" to prevent damage to the body as people on other fora have suggested, then I would consider it highly unlikely that Sony would chose to outfit their top end video cameras (A7s, FS7) in the under $10K bracket with all metal mounts.

I'd guess this was done to give a more solid experience for the 28-138 f4 power zoom, and the 70-200 f4 tele on these bodies (and of course all the other big lenses mounted via adapters)...
 
i have all three A7, A7r and A7s. I don't see the lens get wiggle a lot like the video. Could be Fotodio marketing method to scare people. It is COMMON SENSE that if you're going to use heavy/big lens, the mounting point is at your lens, not your camera.
 
Actually, the thing that bugs me most about the e-mount is the rotational slop. On every camera from the cheapest NEX3 to the FS700, all e-mount lenses have a bit of rotational wiggle to them, even after the locking pin engages. This just doesn't happen on Canon on Nikon...

To me, this seems like sloppy milling of the locking pin receiving hole on the lens... not a problem with the bayonet of the mount itself. As such, it does not seem that the Fotodiox mount would solve the rotational slop of e-mount lenses.

I emailed Fotodiox for comment on this, but they don't bother to respond.

I suppose for 40 bucks it might be worth a try, but it seems like they might just be making a big deal out of nothing to pick up some sales.


Anybody out there ready to "take one for the team", try it out and report back???
 
I'd be concerned about the quality of this new adapter, how do we know that *it* is a perfect consistent thickness. If there are any issues with this adapter it would affect everything you put on it. Then of course there's the installation of it and what can go wrong there.

I see the idea of it but i've never had a problem with any of the emounts i've used but i am also aware that there is flex and torque issues but that means being careful about mounting lenses with extra support underneath.

I'd love to see more of a quantative analysts of this, some real world examples

cheers
Paul
 
JuanDiaz said:
Actually, the thing that bugs me most about the e-mount is the rotational slop. On every camera from the cheapest NEX3 to the FS700, all e-mount lenses have a bit of rotational wiggle to them, even after the locking pin engages. This just doesn't happen on Canon on Nikon...

To me, this seems like sloppy milling of the locking pin receiving hole on the lens... not a problem with the bayonet of the mount itself. As such, it does not seem that the Fotodiox mount would solve the rotational slop of e-mount lenses.

I emailed Fotodiox for comment on this, but they don't bother to respond.

I suppose for 40 bucks it might be worth a try, but it seems like they might just be making a big deal out of nothing to pick up some sales.


Anybody out there ready to "take one for the team", try it out and report back???
Click to expand...


I have use many e-mount cameras (mostly pro/consumer-end like vg20/30, ea50, 5n) and all of them do seem to have a very slight amount of that rotational sop. However, after using the a7s, the metal mount seems to make a big difference. The lens fits more snug and has no slop at all. Not even with the very cheap lens adapters I've tried. So I'd have to say a metal mount could very much fix that issue.
 
I am very critical to these cheap manufacturers. I bought 3 c-mount to m43 and none of them had a perfect fit. They were to loose or to tight. Wasted time & wasted money. Maybe it works with fotodiox maybe not but I will not run the risk.
 
From the standpoint of optical performance, rotational tolerance around the z axis has zero effect on image quality. The disturbing condition is rotation around the x or y axis, which increases, coma, CA and defocus. With a plastic mount, I'd me more concerned with distortions coming from flexing of the plastic mount.
 
as paul already stated.. i also would be concerned about the quality of fotodiox, since they really have put out some super-shitty products in the past (the "defocus adapter" for example).

i always use heavier lenses with a lens support bracket, some added stability won't hurt though - not sure if this ring will provide that.
 
I'm waiting for the diamond-milled mount. ;)

Until then, I'm not investing into any products who's maker have little R&D and questionable track record. IE, fotodiox.

Additionally, the metal on the mount needs to match the metal on your lenses or else you might get corrosion (galvanic cell).
 
cuervo said:
uhhh....wow, now there's an unlikely proposition...unless you routinely get it wet and leave it on for months.
Click to expand...
no, this doesn't matter if wet or not, if you have two pieces of metal, the more the galvanic characteristics differ from each other, the more corrosion or oxidation you will get. The effect will of course be greater if you pair aluminum with steel, but it is still present with combinations where both parts are made from aluminum or steel or stainless steel. Moisture will of course speed up the corrosion process.
 
No one uses aluminum parts that are not anodized since it will oxidize almost immediately. The anodize is controlled oxidation will not react with any metals so you don't have to worry much about that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top