I remember the teardown of the 1st Sony 70-200 2.8.
Possibly the worst report ever.
Not so much that it had obvious weaknesses, more that he hoped he'd never have to work on one.
(This finding was not typical of Sony lenses)
snapsy wrote:
Unfortunately Roger Cicala stopped doing his incredible lens teardowns, where he would take apart a a lens and show in detail how well (or not) it was put together, which would predict how rentals of the lens would fare for the normal wear and bumps it would see being shipped out and used. He would often find some disturbing aspects to the construction that wouldn't bode well. I don't recall how the Sony models did on balance.
I think looking into this makes a lot more sense than encasing in acrylic.
Using the GM 24 less due to it's similar appearance makes no sense at all.
Maybe change to Nikon or Canon due to the lenses having a different look?
Sorry for your loss, but get over it! Or get into Holgas.
tschopp wrote:
I'm thinking a fairly small bump is more an element misalignment as apposed to something that broke. Even non-working parts-only lenses have value on Ebay I like photography for relaxation, I wouldn't personally find it relaxing to open up a lens and look around, but I could see how some might. I guess to a repair shop a more obviously damaged lens might be easier to repair.
