Creepgate. This whole conversation is ridiculous. So much misinformation and people looking for an issue. I think Albert Dros's images of Puffins in another post on this forum pretty much says all that needs to be said. This lens produces great results. I am not seeing that lens creep stopped him from getting outstanding images. For those that require Sony to specifically tell them that this is the intended behavior, go ahead and wait if that is what you require. Your loss.
And on other news, my Leofoto lens foot for my 100-400 f/4.5 arrived yesterday. Excellent build quality and fits perfectly as expected. Nice feature on it as well.
CPWarner wrote:
Creepgate. This whole conversation is ridiculous. So much misinformation and people looking for an issue. I think Albert Dros's images of Puffins in another post on this forum pretty much says all that needs to be said. This lens produces great results. I am not seeing that lens creep stopped him from getting outstanding images. For those that require Sony to specifically tell them that this is the intended behavior, go ahead and wait if that is what you require. Your loss.
And on other news, my Leofoto lens foot for my 100-400 f/4.5 arrived yesterday. Excellent build quality and fits perfectly as expected. Nice feature on it as well.
You will notice a trend in this thread. Everyone who actually owns the lens isn't complaining about the creep.
Everyone complaining or concerned doesn't own the lens.
I agree with you...this conversation is a whole bunch of nothing.
We knew about the creep from the very first reviews. We knew that the moving elements were heavy enough to unbalance a gimbal once zoomed out or in. Sony obviously knew about it before sending these out...or if for some crazy reason they didn't, they certainly did after the first influencer reviews.
My Leofoto also arrived yesterday from AliExpress seller and it is a legit foot. I always have my doubts when it was the only listing on AliExpress when I ordered. Saved me some $$ over ordering it from the US. Although with the recent 20% off sale it probably would have been about equal depending on shipping costs from US to Canada and any sketchy duties.
Several reports indicate that early and pre-production models have zoom creep WHILE a newer version does NOT on both smooth and tight mode. It seems Sony fixed this issue for latter version as several people reported this on Facebook.
I guess it was a lens issue and I was right all along.
I went to check in on that FB thread. A poster contacted SPS and was told the creep is "within spec" and not to send the lens in. They said they would only service it if Sony issued a service notice in the future.
So for now that is the official word from Sony. Maybe someone with a "tight" lens should contact SPS and see what they say on that end of the spectrum. I bet the answer will be the same. The variability of creep on Smooth is within spec. As I've proposed from the start.
CPWarner wrote:
Creepgate. This whole conversation is ridiculous. So much misinformation and people looking for an issue. I think Albert Dros's images of Puffins in another post on this forum pretty much says all that needs to be said. This lens produces great results. I am not seeing that lens creep stopped him from getting outstanding images. For those that require Sony to specifically tell them that this is the intended behavior, go ahead and wait if that is what you require. Your loss.
And on other news, my Leofoto lens foot for my 100-400 f/4.5 arrived yesterday. Excellent build quality and fits perfectly as expected. Nice feature on it as well.
First it is possible that some copies of the lens have a production issue that either:
a. allows the zoom to creep where it was not designed to do so, or…
b. does not allow the zoom to creep where it should.
We see reports of both behaviors with the lens, and that (the inconsistency) seems like something for Sony to address.
Second, the lens otherwise looks like a great performer from all the evidence we are seeing.
The question of which of the two behaviors reportedly seen with this excellent lens is correct is not “ridiculous.” Would I buy one given the open question at this point? Yes. Do I think that Sony should clarify this? Yes.
gdanmitchell wrote:
Two things can be true at the same time.
First it is possible that some copies of the lens have a production issue that either:
a. allows the zoom to creep where it was not designed to do so, or…
b. does not allow the zoom to creep where it should.
We see reports of both behaviors with the lens, and that (the inconsistency) seems like something for Sony to address.
Second, the lens otherwise looks like a great performer from all the evidence we are seeing.
The question of which of the two behaviors reportedly seen with this excellent lens is correct is not “ridiculous.” Would I buy one given the open question at this point? Yes. Do I think that Sony should clarify this? Yes....Show more →
Well according to Sony Professional Services (SPS) your "a" is within spec. So all that needs to be determined now is if "b" is within spec.
My guess is "b" is also going to be considered in spec. But we would need someone with a non-creeping lens to contact Sony Support or Sony Professional Services to know for sure.
I really hope I can find a non-creeping lens in the wild to see how it feels to zoom it on both the Smooth and Tight setting. If it is overall more resistance on both settings compared to my lens then if I had such a lens I would be trying to get Sony to service it and loosen it so that it does turn easier on Loose.
FWIW, I compared my 100-400 4.5-5.6 GM to the 100-400 4.5 GM this morning and the Tight setting on the new lens feels smoother to zoom than the Loose setting on the old lens. It is close but still nicer feel to the new lens on Tight than the old one on Loose. The old lens creeps on Loose and still creeps at the ~1/3 towards the Tight. It also creeps a little at the 1/2 setting but won't creep the entire zoom range. Once past the 1/2 way on the ring it prevents creep. Full on Tight on the old lens is very stiff. Still can zoom it but doesn't feel like you should be doing so on a regular basis.
CPWarner wrote:
Creepgate. This whole conversation is ridiculous. So much misinformation and people looking for an issue. I think Albert Dros's images of Puffins in another post on this forum pretty much says all that needs to be said. This lens produces great results. I am not seeing that lens creep stopped him from getting outstanding images. For those that require Sony to specifically tell them that this is the intended behavior, go ahead and wait if that is what you require. Your loss.
And on other news, my Leofoto lens foot for my 100-400 f/4.5 arrived yesterday. Excellent build quality and fits perfectly as expected. Nice feature on it as well.
gdanmitchell wrote:
Two things can be true at the same time.
First it is possible that some copies of the lens have a production issue that either:
a. allows the zoom to creep where it was not designed to do so, or…
b. does not allow the zoom to creep where it should.
We see reports of both behaviors with the lens, and that (the inconsistency) seems like something for Sony to address.
Second, the lens otherwise looks like a great performer from all the evidence we are seeing.
The question of which of the two behaviors reportedly seen with this excellent lens is correct is not “ridiculous.” Would I buy one given the open question at this point? Yes. Do I think that Sony should clarify this? Yes....Show more →
First it was "this should not happen with an internally zooming lens", or " I have never seen that before". Then it was "this is a design flaw" and "the behavior is can not possibly be design intent". Now we are on to hearsay about inconsistent behavior and the dreaded sample variation. Some of that is simply misinformation. Note the post earlier in this thread where someone said their lens did not creep from 400mm when pointed up. Yeh, it would never do that as the heavy elements are already at their lowest point. Pointing up will creep from 100mm to 400mm on smooth. Simple inspection would show that.
And yes, this this entire saga is ridiculous. Whether it creeps or not is irrelevant when out using the lens. As Arbitrage pointed out, those that own it and use it know this. Have a great day and I look forward to the next evolution in the creepgate saga. I personally want to figure out where that puffin location in Ireland is as that looks like way more fun.
CPWarner wrote:
First it was "this should not happen with an internally zooming lens", or " I have never seen that before". Then it was "this is a design flaw" and "the behavior is can not possibly be design intent". Now we are on to hearsay about inconsistent behavior and the dreaded sample variation. Some of that is simply misinformation. Note the post earlier in this thread where someone said their lens did not creep from 400mm when pointed up. Yeh, it would never do that as the heavy elements are already at their lowest point. Pointing up will creep from 100mm to 400mm on smooth. Simple inspection would show that.
And yes, this this entire saga is ridiculous. Whether it creeps or not is irrelevant when out using the lens. As Arbitrage pointed out, those that own it and use it know this. Have a great day and I look forward to the next evolution in the creepgate saga. I personally want to figure out where that puffin location in Ireland is as that looks like way more fun. ...Show more →
How can you say “whether it creeps or not is irrelevant when using the lens” if you don’t know how people will be using this lens? I’ve had zooms that had creep and many images were ruined by the creep.
chez wrote:
How can you say “whether it creeps or not is irrelevant when using the lens” if you don’t know how people will be using this lens? I’ve had zooms that had creep and many images were ruined by the creep.
I can say that from experience using the lens. It is really simple and has been stated here multiple times. Put the switch to "tight" and there is no creep and the zoom is still very easy to operate. Way better than the old 100-400. Leave it there if that is an issue for you and you will not have images ruined because there is no creep. If you like lighter action and are not going to be affected by creep put it on smooth. Done, no problems. Again, those that have the lens and have used it know this is a non story.
The first time I used the lens I could hold it vertically with no creep. I just used it again and I guess it's "broken in" now because now it does creep slowly when held vertical. The tight setting alone would probably have been fine if Sony had built it that way, a little on the stiff side but still better than the original 100-400 IMHO.
I'm happy with the IQ with the TC's versus the 300 f2.8 and 400-800 now that I've shot with those more. I'm seeing the 100-400 / 1.4X vs the 300 / 2X and 100-400 / 2X vs the 400-800 as too close to call for everyday shooting.
