Crumbling lens mount - repair or replace?

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Ian Rance, Oct 8, 2012.

  1. My much used 75-240mm lens last night lost part of its lens mount. Half of one of the three grips snapped off due to spring pressure inside the camera mount. Thankfully it made it through the sub-sun light show I was greeted with.
    I have replaced the mount myself on the common plastic lenses like the 28-100mm and 18-55mm with cheap copies and they are easy to do. I cannot find a lens mount for the 75-240mm though, presumably because there is no call for them.
    So I was wondering, what sort of charge does Nikon make for lens mount replacement - if they are still available? The 75-240mm was not popular I feel.
    For a light but sharp zoom I was also looking at the 70-300mm G lens, which seems to be available new and have better parts availability. How do the two lenses compare? I was wondering if getting the new lens would be a better route to take.
    Thanks for any input, Ian
    I attach the last photo it took prior to a part snapping off.
    00au59-498995584.JPG
     
  2. Just to show what goes wrong when you least expect here is the broken area
    00au5d-498999584.JPG
     
  3. I had the 70-300 VR and found my copy to be excellent, sharp as can be all the way out to 300. In my opinion, it would be an great replacement for your 75-240 and give you that much broader focal length and vibration reduction, something I find very useful.
     
  4. Or think about a Tamron 70-300 VC USD: cheaper and better than the Nikkor.
     
  5. You could find a used one for about $60. I doubt anyone could repair it for that.
     
  6. Ah, that sucks, the 75-240mm really is a great lens! Poorly received because it was just before digital, and people groaned about the plastic lens mount and being made in China, which are nonissues today. I'd say that your best bet, given that the lens fell into obscurity rather quickly, is to take Hans' advice and get yourself a Tamron 70-300mm VC. Great optics, you'll find it a worthwhile successor.
    To fix your own lens, if you don't want to upgrade, maybe the plastic lens mounts are universal? I am not sure what country you are in, but try calling some Nikon 3rd party repair facilities (C.R.I.S. is good if you're in the USA, along with Havel) and see how much it would cost them to source a replacement mount.
     
  7. Nikon has made a lot of 70-300 lenses. There is a cheap 70-300G lens around $140 that I've tried and returned. It was slow and I found it pretty soft at 300. There is also a "D" version with aperture ring but I think it is optically very similar. The newer 70-300VR is much better although it is still a little soft at 300 but it also costs around $500. Your 75-240 is selling used on Amazon for $60. It probably costs more than that to repair.
     
  8. Sorry that this happened. It is a textbook example of why I would never own a lens with a plastic lens mount--the only exception being the 35mm 1.8 which is so small and light that I don't think it will be an issue.
     
  9. "...maybe the plastic lens mounts are universal?"
    They are not. They are almost without exception unique to each lens model. There is "stuff" on the back of the mount that you don't see that differs slightly or significantly from lens to lens. As an example, the humble AF-S 18~55mm DX lens has THREE replacement lens mounts (one for each version), each with different part numbers (and different "parts").
    Ian is in the UK.
     
  10. Lisa, my 35mm f1.8 lens has a metal mount. Not sure where you got that info about plastic mounts on that lens.
     
  11. Will, I could have sworn the Nikon 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX had a plastic mount--are we talking about the same lens? Mine is at home right now so I can't verify--if I'm wrong I apologize for any confusion. It really is a great little lens, even though to me it feels very light and "plasticky."
     
  12. Lens mounts can be replaced, but it's not cheap. I had one replaced on a 17-35/2.8 AFS, which cost about $200 at Authorized Nikon Service in Morton Grove, IL. It would be less for a non-electronic lens.
     
  13. Thank you for the input. I was thinking about another (used) copy of the 75-240 but two things put me off. The fact that I would still have my broken lens and also the condition of the replacement may not be far behind mine. These lenses have gone up in price in the UK for the reason that they are sharp and also have little distortion, aberrations and no focus shift (which more expensive lenses seem to suffer with). It also has an aperture ring.
    Now that Nikon no longer sell parts I think I may well be priced out of a repair on this one - especially in the UK!
    I will check out the Tamron 70-300 - I did not know about it. I could at least sell my lens as 'spares or repair' I suppose.
     
  14. Will, you're wrong. Lisa, while this happens, keep in mind that this lens is a consumer lens from 12 years ago. That's a pretty good lifetime for it.
     
  15. Will, you're wrong.
    No he isn't. :)
    [​IMG]
     
  16. Ian - you might want to keep an eye on this uscamera.com page to see if it comes back in stock:
    http://www.uscamera.com/international/1c999-090.htm
    Given Nikon USA policy about selling parts, I suspect it may be permanently out of stock, as I don't think uscamera.com is an authorized repairer. But it might be worth an email to see if there is any chance of a re-stock.
     
  17. Wow, comment redacted. I just looked at mine, and it's a metal mount. Don't know what I was thinking.
     
  18. Thanks Michael - I have just sent an enquiry to them.
     
  19. No parts availabilty due to Nikon ban on selling spare parts I'm afraid. That policy does not bode well for lenses like mine.
     
  20. Thanks for posting the photo, Michael. That's exactly what my 35mm f1.8 lens mount looks like.
     
  21. You could always try Ebay for a "parts lens" to get a replacement mount. I saw 2 that sold for under $50 just recently. Or look at the Tamron as a modern replacement.
     
  22. The idea of 'upgrading' to Tammy 70-300 makes sense, since the widest opening is F4.0, while Nikon's 70-300 starts with F4.5. Don't think that's such a huge difference, since the widest opening may or may not perform splendidly. But, with the current rebate you can pick one for less than $400. Not selling....just my 2 cents. Good luck.
    Les
     

Share This Page