Mine has slight movement at full extension but not really noticeable unless you move it so as to check how much, I have it here in my hands, without using a rig to measure it I'd estimate 0.5 - 0.75mm but enough to produce a rattle if shook!
BTW email is tits up now. John ---------- Original Message ----------- From: "Don Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "PDML" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 18:28:13 -0500 Subject: Question for owners of FA 80-320/4.5-5.6 > -----Original Message----- > From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2004 5:49 PM > To: PDML > Subject: Question for owners of FA 80-320/4.5-5.6 > > I bought this lens about a week ago and am reasonably pleased with > it from 80 to about 200mm. > >From 200 on the forward-most section has A LOT of play. > With it set at 320mm and focused as close as possible (longest > extension) very gentle pressure on the very front by the filter > threads will deflect the front over 5mm. Just turning it from right > side up to upside down will allow the front element to "flop" a bit > over 2mm. Would those of you who own this lens please tell me if > this is normal or unusually "sloppy"? The images are OK but when > looking thru the viewfinder on the D this amount of movement is > clearly obvious to the eye. I had to mount the camera on a regular > Bogen 3030 panhead because my favorite, the 3025 "3D" head actually > let the front of the lens "shiver" when the shutter fired. This was > using "mirror prefire" mode with the self timer! This was clearly > evident as image blur. The narrower AOV on the D makes it even more apparent. > > I am trying to sort out the lenses I will actually use from those I simply > won't be able to trust when it really counts. > I've just purchased a Sigma EX 50/2.8 Macro and a Tamron Di 28- > 75/2.8 zoom. > (Bought the Sigma from a list member and it is awesome, the Tamron > was purchased at the recommendation of several PDML folks and though > I don't have it yet I'm sure it will be a joy to use also.) Compared > to these and some of my other "better" lenses the 80-320 seems > awfully sloppy. > > TIA > Don ------- End of Original Message -------
