Sony 16-105 or CZ 16-80 - can't decide!

LAbernethy wrote: neilt3 wrote: I seem to remember some of the Minolta lenses in the 1990's having plastic flanges on the lenses , amongst other parts , plus on cameras. Not so much the high end ones , but all the same , there thirty years old already . Just saying ... true. wait aren't those the crappy lenses that no one likes. Well i will admit I have a silver 28-100mm konica minolta lens with a plastic mount, that truly is a piece of crap. I concede, let crap rule. Why isn't the mount in the A1 this fantastic material?

You spend that much on a camera , you want something shiny , and I don't mean tinfoil covered plastic !

All my heavy lenses have metal mounts ( mostly Minolta ) , my lightweight ones have plastic ( Sony ) neither have given me any problems .

I've a lot of cameras , film and digital , who have a both metal and plastic lens mounts .
I haven't had any problems or failures with them either .

I tend not to drop my gear on the floor .
( Though it has happened )

Make of that what you will .

Metal, covered with plastic, plastic, composite - I think all these mount materials can be used. For cheaper, easier and light gear mount can surely be made from plastic. One can't drop the lens, if for switching are proper possibilities and bags, or if not, zooms are the lenses to use in these conditions.

I think none of mount materials can't save contemporary automated lens from serious damages. Only fully manual and light lenses can be subjekt to hope that.

Actually, I have never (jet) droped a lens DSLR-mirrorless era (53 years) , so my opinion can be too much conservative. But so I feel.

Thank you Lee - I was forgetting about the first generation Minolta AF lenses. Lenses like the 50/1.7, 50/1.4, 100/2 etc. have plastic bodies. The 70-210/4 is plastic near the mount, metal further out. Minolta clearly thought about what material was best in which place on the lens. My lenses are fine, same goes for the MD-lenses I have. Like I said again and again, there are different kinds of plastics and some are really good, others less so.

You make an interesting point, Arnold. When I was a student at a polytechnic school, we tested airplane glues. The material never broke on the glue part, that was extremely strong - much stronger then welded or bolted connections.

Well done Aavo TBH I only once did drop it and broke a camera and lens. I had a 200/2.8G on my Dynax 9 in a bag and I tripped. I broke both the lens and the camera
And I broke a plastic mount Canon EF 50/1.8 II - the mount did not break, the lens did:

So in case anyone’s interested, I just purchased a “Mint-“ condition Sony 16-80 from Robert’s Camera. The 30 day return period plus the warranty is what sold me on it. Looking forward to trying it out!

Great!

Rambler358 wrote: The Sony CZ 16-80 lens just arrived today from Robert's Camera (UsedPHotoPro.com) and wow - this looks and feels like a brand new lens! Complete with everything in the box, just as if you were to buy it new. I'm super impressed with Robert's Camera. No scratches, dings, or marks of any kind - and none of the infamous zoom creep. Though who's say it won't develop in the future. At any rate, time to go and test this out!

Congratulations. Sounds like it is a new one. I was very pleased with mine as well when I just bought it. Today it still is a superb lens, optically. Mechanically it shows far from brand new.

I did enjoy mine for about 10 years, and got some great pics with it along the way. It was also an ever reliable travel lens.

Sadly the internal gearing gave up recently and the cost of repair was greater than it was worth, especially with my E-mount move.