Has the plastic mount survived the test of time?

[Sanford]

Now the the fairly heavy 18-135mm Nikkor zoom has been out there a few years

how has the plastic mount stood up normal use and abuse?

[ShunCheung]

Not yet a few years. The 18-135mm DX was introduced in August 2006 along with the D80 and became available in the follow month or two:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0608/06080902nikonafsdx18-135lens.asp

 

Therefore, the oldest ones are at most a year old. How well those consumer lenses hold up highly depends on how rough you use them ....

[mharris]

I have one with a plastic mount. It seems to be holding up fine.

[yeux tortu]

The 28 200 G version has a plastic mount also, weighs about the same and has held up very well over time

[tonybeach]

They can always be replaced, probably cheaply.

[john schroeder]

If you dropped your camera hard enough to break a plastic lens mount you would have a lot more to worry about than just the mount. In the 11 years I've been using and selling plastic lens mount lenses I have never seen one wear out.

[calvin_lee]

Not sure about the 18-135mm, but the plastic mount on my flyweight 18-55mm DX lens has held up to constant lens changes after 2 years.

[tom_burke3]

I always thought the main worry about plastic mount lenses was what would happen if you

'clunked' the lens when walking through a doorway, for example. The argument I'd heard was

that in that situation the lens might break at the mount.

 

Of course, if you've hit it so hard that the mount is going to break then you must have hit it

oretty hard indeed. If the mount doesn't break the force of the impact must be absorbed

elsewhere, and the 'plastic mount' lenses are not strong generally.

[jos__javier_vicente]

Don't know about the 18-135, but in my experience the plastic mounts are fragile. No problem with it in a 35-80, but I broke the 80-200 f4,5-5,6 one in a stupid fall while skiing. I was not damaged, neither was the F65 body, so the hit was not too heavy.

 

The camera was carried in a waist case and, althought it was not the best place to keep my equipment safe, this experience made me very hesitant about buying new lenses with plsstic mount such as the 55-200. What a pity, as light telezooms are the only real AF alternative to my trusted 135 3,5 for a small package.

Never mind, it seems the future will be FX and I can wait several years till Nikon will sell a 80-200 replacement.

[ShunCheung]

IMO, the problem here is not whether the mount itself is plaseic per se. It is unlikely that a plastic mount will wear out under normal usage.

 

However, a plastic mount indicates the overall build quality of that lens. I have seen a lot of plastic-mount Nikon lenses and I don't feel that they are well built. If you only use them occasionally and carefully, there is probably no problem. I also wonder how well the lens elements are fastened onto the barrel inside those lenses. Just a bump can get the elements out of alignment; that may be why people tend to see a lot of so called "sample variations" among such lenses (and even on some more-expensive ones).

[bjørn rørslett]

In fact, the inner assembly is done with adhesive tape. No wonder these lenses won't survive a fall to the ground.

[erik_loza]

To further Shun and Bjorn's comments, I had a Sigma consumer zoom literally come apart in my hands, many years ago. To its credit, it had served me well for several years (though I was not as hardcore about things, then), but it was literally held together with this silver foil-like tape. And you cannot just put it back together.

[Sanford]

FWIW I had a 50-135mm AIS Nikkor zoom come apart in my hands. This lens was built to Nikon's highest standards. I bought it used but in mint condition so I didn't know it's history. I suspect extreme vibration in it's former life caused internal parts to become loose. The good news was that there were still local repair shops that could fit it!

[oskar_ojala]

One shouldn't consider wear only, was there is also the case of misalignment. The lens might seem superficially ok, but even a slight change of shape could change the alignment and reduce performance.

[alex_lofquist]

I too have had the Sigma APO 70-210 f/3.5-f/4.5 come apart in my hands while grasping it tightly during a trip over rough roads in the American SW. It cost $90 to get it repaired. George Lepp reported seeing the Sigma APO 400 f/5.6 come apart under similar circumstances. Both mounts are of plastic construction. Optically both lenses are excellent.

[leonard_evens]

The flange on my 18-55 mm plastic lens broke after about a month. Nikon fixed it under warranty, but i took a while. People tell me that such things happen only rarely.

[craig_gillette]

Use of plastic for both camera and lens sides of the mount has been around for quite a while. Many of the entry or lower end film slrs had plastic mounts as did the low end lenses (although not all). It's one of those price/performance decisions product teams need to make. So I'd suggest the idea has survived the test of time. It's one of the ways we get to choose whether we can take pictures or keep saving money until we have "the best."

[ptkeam]

I've also had a 28-200 G Nikon lens for SEVERAL years. -- recently sold it when I got an 18-200 -- The lens mount held up very well -- no problems (by the way this is a great lens)

[jun_cordero]

<p>The plastic mount on the 18-135 seems to be fine, but mine got dropped, mounted on a D80, at a height of about 2 feet, in a padded case, probably landed on an odd angle, and the auto focus became rattly and difficult to focus (hunts, stiff on some points if manually focus). Can be used on manual focus, but mainly serve now as a paper weight.</p>