Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 04 Oct 2010 (Monday) 13:57
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

70-200mm 2.8 NON-IS Bayonet Repair Question

 
sabianq
Senior Member
Avatar
292 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: arlington virginia
     
Oct 04, 2010 13:57 |  #1

hi all..
well, long story short..
i purchased a used 70-200mm 2.8 NON-IS a couple of weeks ago.
There is some rotational play in the lens/body connection.
upon closer inspection, it is aparent that the locking hole where the pin from the body inserts into the lens is worn causing the play in rotation.
The rear Bayonet Mount needs to be/should be replaced.

So i contacted Canon tech and discussed the issue.
apparently, my suspitions about heavier lenses causing wear at this point in the camera body to lens connection are valid.
(a heavy lens can cause wear at the bayonet maount.

since the lens is out of warranty i can do the replacement myself.
the part number for the bayonet mount is CY1-2497-000-xxx
the (xxx) number on the part number is a measurement that describes the thickness of the bayonet mount. and that thickness comes in a range
from 1.5mm to 2.8mm in 1/10 mm increments.

i was told by canon that i have to remove the bayonet ring and measure the thickness to determine the replacement part number..

not a problem.

anyway, i have to wonder if that thickness affects the back/front focus of the lens.
Why would there be such a range in thickness for a standard production lens?
Does anybody have any insight into the raminifactions of changing the distance (via bayonet thickness) of the lens element to the sensor?

I am thinking about sending the lens to Canon for a calibration.
does anybody have a suggestion as to me either have canon replace the ring when i send it in or if i should replace the ringn before i send it in.

on a side note,
when i looked for the ring online, there is an EBAY seller selling the ring for $125.00 bucks.
when I contacted Canon Parts (1 866 481-2569) i was quoted the price of the mount at $31.77

thanks fo your insight!
cheers!


Enjoy the Silence, it does not come very often...
Brian Larson
Datsbrian@Gmail.com (external link)
(Creative Solutions & Paradox pix) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
ben_r_
-POTN's Three legged Support-
Avatar
15,893 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
     
Oct 04, 2010 15:52 |  #2

Cant Canon just send you the same one the lens shipped with? Perhaps they can reference it via serial number?


[Gear List | Flickr (external link) | My Reviews] /|\ Tripod Leg Protection (external link) /|\
GIVE a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. TEACH a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
msowsun
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,237 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 267
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Oakville Ont. Canada
     
Oct 04, 2010 18:15 |  #3

I have seen this in the parts diagrams and always assumed that the mount is how they fine tune the front/back focus on a lens. I wouldn't want to try and use a different size from what was originally installed.

I would let Canon replace the mount. They sometimes do a repair like this for free, even outside the warranty period.

This is from the 50mm 1.4

IMAGE: http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17/msowsun/photo%20stuff/Photo4/_1shim.jpg

Mike Sowsun / S110 / SL1 / 80D / EF-S 24mm STM / EF-S 10-18mm STM / EF-S 18-55mm STM / EF-S 15-85mm USM / EF-S 18-135mm USM / EF-S 55-250mm STM / 5D3 / Samyang 14mm 2.8 / EF 40mm 2.8 STM / EF 50mm 1.8 STM / EF 100mm 2.0 USM / EF 100mm 2.8 USM Macro / EF 24-105mm IS / EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS Mk II / EF 1.4x II
Full Current and Previously Owned Gear List over 40 years Flickr Photostream (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sabianq
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
292 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: arlington virginia
     
Oct 04, 2010 23:23 |  #4

i would think that you are correct.
i have a football game to shoot on friday then i might need the camera for the weekend.
on monday im gonna send in both the body and the lens.
the body is only 3 months old but has banding issues in the red pixels at high ISO (3200 and above)
there is also 3 bright red pixels in the field. they said they can be "re mapped" and the banding issues should not be there..
id be happy to spend some cash to get the lens back to factory spec.


Enjoy the Silence, it does not come very often...
Brian Larson
Datsbrian@Gmail.com (external link)
(Creative Solutions & Paradox pix) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RL.
Goldmember
1,040 posts
Joined Apr 2010
     
Oct 04, 2010 23:34 |  #5
bannedPermanent ban

interesting I also thought that my 70-200 might cause strain on the mount but I hoped it wouldnt...guess i have to be more careful


Canon > Nikon

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sabianq
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
292 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: arlington virginia
     
Oct 05, 2010 00:45 |  #6

here are some photos


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Enjoy the Silence, it does not come very often...
Brian Larson
Datsbrian@Gmail.com (external link)
(Creative Solutions & Paradox pix) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sabianq
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
292 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: arlington virginia
     
Oct 05, 2010 00:59 |  #7

thanks for that very useful information mike.
Cheers!


Enjoy the Silence, it does not come very often...
Brian Larson
Datsbrian@Gmail.com (external link)
(Creative Solutions & Paradox pix) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
philwillmedia
Cream of the Crop
5,252 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Nov 2008
Location: "...just south of the 23rd Paralell..."
     
Oct 05, 2010 05:42 |  #8

I wouldn't worry too much, that's normal.
All my lenses, both "L" and non "L", show some wear like that and have a small amount of rotational play.
I've never found it to affect image IQ.
The only thing I would be concerned about is if the lens is not locking into place.


Regards, Phil
2013/14 CAMS Gold Accredited Photographer | 2010 & 2011 V8 Supercars Aust. Accredited Photographer | 2008, '09, '10 South Aus. Rally Photographer of the Year | Catch Fence Photos - 2009 Photo of the Year (external link)Finallist - 2014 NT Media Awards
"A bad day at the race track is better than a good day in the office" | www.freewebs.com/philw​illmedia (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lacks_focus
Goldmember
Avatar
1,025 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2006
Location: Coventry, CT
     
Oct 05, 2010 05:56 |  #9

philwillmedia wrote in post #11036833 (external link)
I wouldn't worry too much, that's normal.
All my lenses, both "L" and non "L", show some wear like that and have a small amount of rotational play.
I've never found it to affect image IQ.
The only thing I would be concerned about is if the lens is not locking into place.

A big ditto. They all have some play. I just looked my 70-200’s mount. It looks just like yours. No issues... It would have to be pretty severe, like the pins not able to make proper contact sever, for this to ever be a problem. I think all you will accomplish by sending it in is a cleaning and calibration. If you need that, cool, go for it, but I wouldn’t send it in if all it needed was this mount addressed. You will very likely still see some play, less yes, but soon it will be right back to where it is now.


1D MKIII | FujiFilm X10 | 24-70 f/2.8 | 70-200 f/2.8 | 135 f/2 | 85 f/1.8 | 580EX |
lacks-focus.smugmug.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ben_r_
-POTN's Three legged Support-
Avatar
15,893 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
     
Oct 05, 2010 11:37 |  #10

Wow, thats crazy! NONE of my lenses have any play that I have ever noticed. They really shouldnt. There should never at any time be the entire weight of the lens on the camera body. You always hold the camera by the lens which takes the weight off the camera or use a tripod ring mount which also takes the weight off the camera. After several years, all my lens mounts look EXACTLY as they did when they were brand new.


[Gear List | Flickr (external link) | My Reviews] /|\ Tripod Leg Protection (external link) /|\
GIVE a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. TEACH a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
msowsun
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,237 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 267
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Oakville Ont. Canada
     
Oct 05, 2010 11:50 |  #11

I don't understand how the weight of the lens would have any factor in wear on the locking pin hole.

Can someone explain that?


Mike Sowsun / S110 / SL1 / 80D / EF-S 24mm STM / EF-S 10-18mm STM / EF-S 18-55mm STM / EF-S 15-85mm USM / EF-S 18-135mm USM / EF-S 55-250mm STM / 5D3 / Samyang 14mm 2.8 / EF 40mm 2.8 STM / EF 50mm 1.8 STM / EF 100mm 2.0 USM / EF 100mm 2.8 USM Macro / EF 24-105mm IS / EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS Mk II / EF 1.4x II
Full Current and Previously Owned Gear List over 40 years Flickr Photostream (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ben_r_
-POTN's Three legged Support-
Avatar
15,893 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
     
Oct 05, 2010 12:00 |  #12

msowsun wrote in post #11038575 (external link)
I don't understand how the weight of the lens would have any factor in wear on the locking pin hole.

Can someone explain that?

I was kinda wondering that too, but I was taking their word for it...


[Gear List | Flickr (external link) | My Reviews] /|\ Tripod Leg Protection (external link) /|\
GIVE a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. TEACH a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jra
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,565 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Ohio
     
Oct 05, 2010 13:00 |  #13

My 70-200 has had a bit of play in it since brand new (along with some of my other lenses). As long as it locks in, a small amount of play seems to be normal and shouldn't affect IQ.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnf3f
Goldmember
Avatar
4,083 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 647
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wales
     
Oct 05, 2010 17:03 |  #14

Got and used a number of Canon cameras and normal + L lenses ( currently got 5 L's and two normal), the ONLY combinations I ever had that fitted perfectly were the EOS IX7 and 500n with the 50mm F1.8 ii - all PLASTIC MOUNTS!


Life is for living, cameras are to capture it (one day I will learn how!).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joeseph
"smells like turd"
Avatar
10,071 posts
Gallery: 137 photos
Likes: 2166
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
     
Oct 05, 2010 17:22 |  #15

msowsun wrote in post #11038575 (external link)
I don't understand how the weight of the lens would have any factor in wear on the locking pin hole.

Can someone explain that?

best I can come up with is the inertia of the twisting motion (mounting the lens) is greater when the lens is heavier and results in more force being applied when the pin clicks in and stops the lens rotating further.

I'm very dubious that in reality it'll cause increased 'wear" though, and assumes the lens is mounted on the body & not the other way around. Does the pin actually stop the lens rotating further? Guess we could test by holding the release button in and see if it moves further round...

Had a look at my 70-200 and 100-400 and they both look similar to pics posted above. So does my 16-35.

On a side note, the 1.4x TX has an "insert" around the locking pinhole - wonder if they found problems at some stage and use a harder material to overcome it.


some fairly old canon camera stuff, canon lenses, Manfrotto "thingy", 1D MK II converted for IR, and now an M5
TF posting: here :-)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

15,094 views & 0 likes for this thread
70-200mm 2.8 NON-IS Bayonet Repair Question
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is umerbilal
1093 guests, 225 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.