Geek Articles

Completing the Teardown of the Sony FE 70-200 f/2.8 GM OSS: Part II

Published February 27, 2017

You probably shouldn’t read this article unless you’ve at least skimmed through Part 1. To summarize, we had a Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS lens that had been dropped and no longer would focus. We tore it down both to see if we could repair it and to see what-all was up inside there. In the first part, we did the initial disassembly of the major components and a complete disassembly of the back (mount) half of the lens. We found a few surprises and some different ways of doing things. But we didn’t find the problem with the lens.

The Rest of the Teardown

So after a snack break and some more caffeine, we tackled dissecting the front half of the lens. You can see the Southern Fairy Tale ring on top, with the black plastic zoom-link ring right underneath it (you can see a metal zoom key peaking out above it on the side away from Aaron’s hand).

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

We start by removing the lock-on ring that connects the front half to the back half of the lens. You can see the ring of 8 screws holding the ring assembly to the front of the lens. There are 4 additional screws in the little notches, two of which are by Aaron’s forefingers.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

Taking all of those out let us remove the lock ring from the front half of the lens.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

As you might expect, only the plate is fixed to the front of the lens, the locking ring spins freely behind the plate, threading onto the rear half of the lens to attach it.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

There’s also a shim under the plate. This would be a spacing shim either for backfocus adjustment or for optical spacing (probably the latter).

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

Here’s where we found our first problem with the lens. It didn’t prevent focusing; but it may well have caused an optical issue. Remember, this lens had been dropped. We were told the drop was only about 2 feet, and there was no external evidence of damage (no scuffs, dents, etc.)

When we looked at the attachment plate above more carefully, it became apparent that two of the screw holes on one side of the lens were bent downward slightly.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

Two holes on the opposite side were bent upward slightly. This plate is attaching two heavy lens-halves, and it’s fairly thin aluminum (or aluminium, if you have a non-U. S. plate). The picture below shows the thickness of the plate through one of the screw holes; we measured it as 1.2mm. That might be thick enough if it was stainless steel or titanium (I’m no materials engineer) but this is aluminum; we could bend it with our hands. If the screw holes were bent, we had to assume the rim of the plate was also.

Lensrentals.com, 2016

 

Some engineer with way more math than me obviously calculated that this plate was thick enough to hold the mass of the two lens-halves together. But I’m damn sure he didn’t consider the part about force and velocity squared and all, because this plate, the one I can bend in my hands, is not going to resist much force. At all.

While the plate did hold the lens together just fine despite these bends, we’re obviously concerned that the bent plate could affect the lens optically. There are strong elements on either side of that connection and a tilt of a few microns could cause some significant optical disturbance.

Anyway, while we aren’t happy about the plate, it certainly wasn’t preventing the lens from focusing, so we continued on with our disassembly after getting the parts department to order a replacement plate.

With the connecting ring out of the way, we can access the keys to remove the inner ring linking the zoom barrel you turn to the zoom mechanism inside the lens.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

Removing those keys lets us take off the connecting ring and then remove the front outer fixed barrel. Like the other outer barrels, it has weather resistant rubber strips; the blue one is a seal, the black fuzzy felt one further back goes under the rotating barrel.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

Looking inside the outer barrel, you can see the focus-hold button mechanisms and the flexes that connect them.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

Underneath we start to see the inner workings of the zooming groups and front focus motor. You might think ‘look at all the cool stuff in there’. We thought, ‘oh, crap, this is going to take forever’. If you look you can see a position sensor over on the left side, the big GMR unit hanging over the ring USM motor on the right side, and flexes criss-crossing every damn where. More and more, this lens looks like it’s got a lot of Nikon heritage.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

Rotating around to the other side, there’s another PCB, presumably doing some position processing since it’s connected to all those position sensors.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

The focusing ring was the next obvious removal and with the rubber taken off there was easy access to the screws and collars holding it in place, after which it slips off of the lens.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

This is at least partially a fly-by-wire-focusing lens so inside the focus ring is a magnetic strip. When you turn the ring a sensor reads the strip and sends a signal to move the rear focusing elements accordingly. The front focusing elements can be controlled mechanically by the ring or through the ring USM.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

And now we’re getting down to the inner workings of the front half of the lens. We were pleased to see an optical adjustment collar up here, too.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

I’m going to compress about an hours worth of work now, trying to keep this post a reasonable length. But that set of flexes and sensors you saw 5 pictures ago was removed.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

After that we spent 4 or 5 minutes colorfully discussing the parentage of the lens’ mechanical designer who saw fit to make the stacking of the ring USM an integral part of the disassembly. In a nice lens, designed with the thought that someone might actually repair it some day, you take out a couple of screws and take off the ring motor assembly. In this lens we (I’m using the Royal “We” here; Aaron does all the hard stuff) have to take the USM apart piece by piece to get further into the lens.

So after carefully marking the alignment, Aaron started counting turns to remove the pressure plate (because it has to go back to exactly the same point).

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

After which we unstacked all of the rings and the USM motor was off.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

With the motor off, the next ring is a clutch or transfer ring that translates focusing movement to the focusing elements. Well they would, if they worked. We were now able to see the front focusing group didn’t want to move very well since we could turn this ring by hand now. You can see the ring rolls on very robust bearings (red line) and moves the focusing keys connected to the internal group (green line).

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

Once we took the keys and one locking pin out, this ring came right off. We were grateful the tensioning springs underneath it came right off with it. Sometimes those spring out like a jack-in-the-box and we have to spend 15 minutes on hands and knees searching for them.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

The next ring down comes right off, too. It rotates on a beautifully made bed of 30 ball bearings, which is one of the reasons this focus ring is so nice and smooth. We both did another prayer of thanks, because none of the ball bearings escaped the disassembly table and made a mad dash for freedom. Ball bearings are the escape artists of the lens prison system.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

Just in case any of you want to know how we keep the ball bearings from running away during disassembly, they are corralled on a Dycem non-slip pad. Dycem is one of the great accomplishments of humanity, ranking slightly below the invention of fire and the wheel, but well above the printing press in my pantheon of most important advancements.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

Next, we took off the front (filter) ring, which like all other joints in this lens has a nice rubber seal. Right below the top ring you can see 3 of the 6 heavy rollers that the front focusing element slides up and down on.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

Then we removed the front group, which is two cemented elements. This, of course, could have been done at any time during the teardown, but we were doing most of our work with the lens face down, so it seemed best to leave it until near the end.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

Oh, Yeah. About that Focusing Problem

At this point we we had one piece left – the front group barrel assembly you can see in the picture above. This contained some zoom elements in the smaller part of the barrel, and the front focusing group in the larger part. Reaching through the slots with forceps we could tell that the focusing group was still grinding when we moved it up and down, with a lot of resistance. We could also see it was slightly tilted. This usually means a roller or cam was broken or bent.

We removed all 6 rollers, which by the way are some really robust, ball bearing containing, pieces of engineering. They were all working fine and even with them out of place the focusing groups was still scraping when we tried to move it.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

Looking through the slots where the rollers had been, we could tell there was some form of spring loaded plate system with the focusing element; three of the rollers above went into the actual focusing element, three into the plate below the spring. But we couldn’t find a way to open things up further.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

We decided to put the lens back together, bite the bullet and see if the service center could repair it. But being a suspicious person by nature I did some checking first and found out, in typical Sony fashion, this entire assembly was considered a single part. So if we sent it in they would replace this entire assembly at a repair cost of slightly more than half the price of a new lens. Needless to say, we switched into nothing-to-lose mode and went back to looking for a way into this assembly.

We could have removed the zoom groups from the small end, but that wasn’t going to give us access to the larger focusing area. The only way in appeared to be by removing the second group, which was held in place with  both a spanner ring and also with adjustable collars through the side of the lens.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

Oh, and lots and lots of silicone glue. So we (royal “We” again – Aaron did this while I made more coffee) position-marked and removed the collars and chipped out lots and lots of glue.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

Finally we got the element out and could actually look down onto the top of the focusing element. (And yes, we realize there’s more glue to clean up before reassembly. Don’t be snarky. You’re tired just from reading about it, so you can understand we were really sick of doing it.)

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

There’s another spanner ring down over the focusing element, so we took that out and then just about lost our minds. Because there’s another ring of beautiful ball bearings under it. We’ve never seen anything like this before and at this point really had no idea what we were seeing.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

Despite multiple cups of coffee and the resultant tremor, Aaron managed to get the focusing assembly out without spilling any ball bearings. (Notice how I use ‘we’ when I know everything’s going fine, and switch to ‘Aaron’ when there are 30 ball bearings that might spill onto the floor.)

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

So we made our second ball-bearing corral. We kept them separate on principle, but they’re the same ball bearings as the other set. What size you ask? Oh, 2mm, which is just a bit thicker than that connecting plate I’m obviously not happy about.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

We looked at the internal focusing assembly and saw there was a pressure spring at the bottom (red arrow), pressing up against the focusing element in a cage-like arrangement. It appeared to be out of position, creating a bit of a tilt of the element that was scraping the inner barrel when the focusing group moved.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

We (yeah, I’m back to taking credit now) reassembled it with the spring properly positioned back under it’s little latches like it should be.

Lensrentals.com, 2017

 

I won’t bore you with reassembly, except to add that we discovered that the spanner ring over the ball-bearings is like that for a good reason. Tightening the spanner compresses this bottom spring and you can ‘dial in’ the proper amount of tension for the focusing element. Too loose and it rattles around a bit. Too tight and it gets a little resistance to sliding up and down. It’s an interesting arrangement.

But if this spring comes out of position with any regularity the repair is going to be a royal PIA. This is just one dropped lens so let’s not run screaming about what may or may not happen again. We may never see this again. Or we might. Only time, and a few more dropped lenses, will tell.

Usually I end these posts by saying we’ve got the lens reassembled and it’s back in stock now. In this case we’ll wait for a new connecting plate, and then optically test and adjust the lens after final assembly, and really, really carefully check it before putting it back in stock. But we did reassemble it with the old connection plate to make sure the autofocus system worked properly.

So What Did We Learn Today?

Well, first and foremost, that lens repair is a miserable way to make a living. And lens repair on this lens will be miserabler than most.

Second, we learned that dropping your lens is bad, so don’t do that.

Third, 1mm thick aluminum plates maybe shouldn’t be used to hold two halves of a heavy lens together. And yes, Fanboy, I know the Sony engineers are smarter than I am. They designed 962 really great parts that I couldn’t have designed. But it doesn’t take massive engineering knowledge to figure out that the thinnest piece of soft metal shouldn’t hold the two biggest pieces together.

And finally, we learned there’s some really elegant and complex engineering in the Sony FE 70-200 f/2.8 GM OSS lens. There’s also some engineering that just seems complex. It may be far more awesome than I realize and I’m just missing the point. Or not.

I’ll repeat what I say all the time: Sony is trying a lot of new things; that’s how you advance. I completely admire the risk taking and efforts to try new things when most manufacturers are just fine-tuning what already is. Some of these new things turn out to be awesome, some don’t. It’s just as important to identify which new things are not better, or not even adequate, as it is to identify when the new thing is a dramatic improvement.

 

Roger Cicala and Aaron Closz

Lensrentals.com

March, 2017

 

Author: Roger Cicala

I’m Roger and I am the founder of Lensrentals.com. Hailed as one of the optic nerds here, I enjoy shooting collimated light through 30X microscope objectives in my spare time. When I do take real pictures I like using something different: a Medium format, or Pentax K1, or a Sony RX1R.

Posted in Geek Articles
  • Patrick Chase

    Never assume conspiracy where mere incompetence will suffice.

    Seriously, I’ve seen results like that from highly silo-ed design teams, i.e. ones where different groups are responsible for the various components and they don’t communicate well or have consistent objectives. This sort of outcome also tends to reflect deficiencies in the systems architecture/engineering role, though that can itself be a symptom of a silo-based organization (the individual silos tend to hoard responsibility, and that prevents the overall architect from effectively riding herd on the whole mess)

  • Oye

    I don’t want to go all conspirational here, but both that thin aluminium ring, as well as that pressure spring that was the eventual culprit seem like rather obvious weak points compared to how robust almost everything else is. Especially when the former looks indeed so weak and the latter is a small part of a single assembly which costs so much to replace.

    I’m always amazed when things are designed in a smart way (e.g. to be easily repairable) so it ticks me off even more when they have such weak points, makes me wonder if some of that isn’t on purpose.

    Do you have that feeling when taking apart other higher-end lenses? (With the cheaper ones I can understand they may not be worth fixing.) And how would this factor compare to lenses from say, 20 years ago?

  • Volker Bartheld

    Haha. That kind of makes us brothers in arms. I lost an AF Micro Nikkor 105mm 1:28 D that was plagued by fungus exactly the same way. Heck. It could have worked though…

  • Patrick, absolutely. 4 hours would still be a good time/price point. If we see a lens go out of sorts optically that will be one of the first things we check. But it also will matter how long the optical adjustment will take. So if it’s 4 hours of disassmbley/reassembly and 4 hours of optical adjustment, it could get close to economically unfeasible. Our economics are different, though, because that lens is also a lot of valuable parts so we have a point where ‘parts’ makes better economic sense than ‘fix’.

  • Louis Sherwin

    Yes this seems to be the same problem in the FE 70-200 F4 except the pictures that I saw the connecting ring is plastic and seems to shatter under certain circumstances. The example that I found most troubling was the lens that was found broken in two in the shipping box. Maybe the delivery driver was playing soccer with the box while on break…

    Even so I have purchased the Sony after I saw really terrible flair problems using my EF70-200F4 with a Photodiox adaptor. It is best, as Roger says, to not drop your equipment. I am clearly going to be extra careful with this Sony lens.

    -louie

  • Mehdi Torabi

    Thanks, I really enjoy your posts. First thing I do before starting to work each dat is to look at your blog for a geeky post. I take excellent care of my equipments but my Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L USM Fisheye lens has been very jumpy, I had to open it up and repair it three times, reading your posts helped a lot doing it well. I have to say it’s modular construction makes openning and closing it very easy. First time it jumped out of my bag and landed on the asphalt, a nylon round thing (roller or cam) had broke in half which made the large front element jerk which I glued, second time I fell down a 3m wall and the lens was in mu pocket… again the same roller broke and I glued it. The last time I was photographing birds and sunset I was walking on the caspian sea my legs where 50cm in the water and this lens in my pocket I bended then I heard a splash sound and then I thought ohhh! the lens fell in the water and went down in the sand. well it wass all wet I cleaned it and put it in silica gel to maybe dry it the next day it was dry but the camera didnt recognize it and no auto focus and diaphragm… I opened it up and reconstructed it again, its amazing there was no sign of salt, water or sand inside and after closing it up it worked and it is as sharper as it was when new.

  • Benz Oberst

    Yep, that’s what my first thought was when I saw the photo of a flex snaking around the assembly – “it’s looks like typical Nikon crap”.

  • Benz Oberst

    Yes, many classic lens mounts are filled with bearing balls, but 2mm balls are huge and off the top of my head I can think of only a couple of places I’ve seen anything of that size. Most of the balls you find in lenses like FD are in 1-1.5mm range and I keep piles of them just so that I don’t have to look when another detent ball escapes on me. Of course FD is different in that it uses cylindrical rollers for a detent 🙂

  • Patrick Chase

    Could you afford 2 hrs if you had a lens that was obviously “out” optically?

    As you’ve pointed out many times, it’s not a good idea to try to fix stuff that isn’t clearly broken. Presumably you’d only go to the trouble of checking the plate if you had good reason to suspect a problem. This specific case was unique in that you couldn’t check the optics due to the jammed focus.

    If the alternative is a Sony-sized repair bill then it seems to me that the economics might work, depending on the salvage rate (percentage of the time that the plate is the sole cause of the problem and said 2 hrs’ labor actually results in a fixed lens).

  • That is a very good point. I didn’t mention it in the article, but well worth considering.

  • Patrick Chase

    I’m in a similar position. I have a 1Dx II and a bunch of Canon glass. I’ve been eyeing the a7R II as a “high-res” body for a while, and have rented it a couple times. The sensor is terrific at lower ISO (though Canon has hugely reduced their read noise deficit in the 1DxII and 5Div, so the Sony isn’t as compelling as it was a year ago) and IBIS works beautifully even with adapted glass. It’s a slow camera even with native glass and slower still when adapted, but that’s what I have the 1Dx II for.

    The thing that keeps me from going with the Sony is that I’m reluctant to invest that kind of money on a purely adapted solution, and I don’t think that Sony’s glass represents good value. The last few teardowns haven’t done much to change my opinion, and the 70-200/2.8’s design is a complete misfire IMO.

    If only there were a financially distressed camera-maker with terrific glass, that already uses Sony’s sensors and might be an attractive acquisition target. OTOH Sony already acquired one of those and the “lens design transplant” didn’t take.

  • denneboom

    “Well, first and foremost, that lens repair is a miserable way to make a
    living. ”

    I learnt that when i had to take apart a nikon 105 f2.8D, i had to remove a pcb for distance feedback that was glued to a barrel in order to disassemble the lens.

    i messed up, bending one of the contact pin , so that the distance feedback was broken. and during reassembly i could get the diagraph lever functioning again, it got stuck when focusing.

    Although i am glad that it was my own lens, and i dont repair lenses for a living.
    That nikon 105 still works on my sony a7. Well…kinda.

  • Frank Kolwicz

    The thing that I find most disconcerting is that, if the focus hadn’t failed, any other owner would not know that this lens was bent and that image quality is bound to have suffered.

  • Dragon

    I have quite a few cameras and also a lot of Caterpillar equipment. Cat makes a lot of assemblies that have the same sort of precision as lenses (think fuel injection systems and rotating hydraulic manifolds on excavators). I do my own Cat repair and have never encountered silicone glue. If corrosion resistance is called for, then the part is either plated accordingly or made of a corrosion resistant material. If sealing is called for, then O-rings (some quite exotic) are used in profusion, but silicone glue is avoided even on engine gaskets. I suspect this is because Cat is a very service oriented company and they expect that their people are going to have to repair these things at some point (similar to Canon). Silicone glue is great stuff to seal something up that you don’t expect to ever take apart (at least in a precision kind of way). House siding is a good example. Seal it with silicone and if you ever have to take it apart get out the sledge hammer and the wrecking bar.
    Enough said.

  • mtnman1984

    In my full time job, I work at a company that builds test chambers. We build pneumatic and electrodynamic shakers that integrate into environmental chambers. I’m not an engineer, but I’m imagining a fall from no more than shoulder height, likely waist high slipping out of the renter’s hands while switching lenses. With no visible external damage, probably onto a carpeted surface or similar. I don’t know if I want to invest in a lens that may bend if dropped from waist high and become unusable. It reminds me pictures I’ve seen of the 70-200 F4 split in half after a drop. This is coming from a guy that has an a7rii with adapted Canon glass and really wants to dive into the E-mount system, but reliability is huge for me. I don’t want to carry a $2,600 lens and worry that a short fall would kill it.

  • We won’t rush into judgement on one sample. I did consider stocking more replacement plates, but I think we’ll wait and see if this is a recurrent problem. One other thing we have to consider is how much better we’ll get at tearing them down. Obviously we’ll get faster as we get used to the lens, but we can’t afford even a 2 hour teardown just to check and see if the plate is OK. This is the first broken 70-200 GM we’ve had. If we start to see patterns, then we’ll get more aggressive about stocking parts.

  • mtnman1984

    Thanks for the teardown Roger. It’s funny that you prevented the replacement of a major component by simply moving a piece back into position, after tearing into one of the most complex lenses in production. With the damage to the aluminum ring and the lock pin hole wear on the bayonet, would you consider this lens more fragile than the Canon 70-200 2.8 L II? Do you see similar damage/wear problems with the Canon? I’ve been wanting to switch to Sony from Canon, but this teardown really gave me pause. I realize that this is only one lens, but the weaknesses still exist in every example. Are you going to stock bayonet plates and those aluminum rings for repairs?

  • Thanks, Patrick, that’s a better description of my thinking than what I wrote in the blog.

  • Patrick Chase

    I feel obligated to say: I never would have believed that s*** (Southern Fairy Tale).

    Seriously. If I’d read that on a random forum somewhere I would have discounted it as another “85/1.4 metal shavings” incident.

  • Patrick Chase

    Tried to post earlier but I think comments were disabled:

    In a former life (before detours through image-processing, imaging systems architecture, and software) I was a mechanical engineer. This design strikes me as “unbalanced”, by which I mean that it’s extremely robust in some respects but not in others. Ironically the fact that the halves are heavily built with thick metal barrels increases the vulnerability of that joint.

    I also wonder how much shock and vibration testing this design saw. The middle joint looks like a shock vulnerability even at the low accelerations that are typically used for product testing, and those springs look like they wouldn’t last very long on the shake table.

  • lemonjam

    Thanks so much for all this work Roger and Aaron. Really interesting ~ What a lens !

  • Guido

    As always: interesting, informative and entertaining. Thank you so much!

  • Maxim Podtopelny

    Wow, definitely it’s the most complex and superheroic teardown I’ve ever seen in this blog. Thanks for letting me discover the meaning of PIA abbreviation.

  • Old Canon FDn lenses are filled to the brim with ball bearings!

  • Adam, you are correct and that was inappropriate of me. Removing that now.

  • We see ball bearings every so often, around USM motors, but I don’t recall seeing anything like this many and don’t think I’ve ever seen them around a lens element.

  • Possible, I guess. I considered that, but then thought how you had to largely disassemble the lens to get to the ‘crumple zone’ was an awful lot of work. But it’s certainly possible.

  • Panacea

    Roger, is there a possibility that the weak connecting plate was intended to function as a destructible, consumable item to take the brunt of minor drops that might otherwise damage other, harder-to-service components?

    (Not that it mattered in this case. Maybe they need to make that plate thinner? ;))

  • Thanks for continuing to be awesome. For being able to repair the unrepairable (or at least the not intended to ever be repaired), and for sharing your findings with the world.

    Two possible typos:
    “mechanical designer who saw fit to make the stacking of the ring USM” (unstacking?)
    “creating a bit of a tilt of the element that was scarping the inner barrel” (scraping?)

    Re: 2mm ball bearings, you said that they’re uncommon, but have you ever seen bearings used like that in any other lenses? Thanks!

  • Adam Sanford

    With deep, deep respect for all that you do for the photographic community, Uncle Rog, please consider revising the title of this article. A difficult lens to tear down and service does not in the slightest compare to *that* level of human suffering. Surely there are other words you could use.

Follow on Feedly