Olympus OMD and the Panasonic 100-400mm lens

[Phocal]

Here is the thread: Weather Sealing betw Oly & Pana lenses & bodies (was: write speed and debris on the lens mount). It is worth noting that it starts with an with debris on the mount from using the 100-400 on an Oly body.

Yes, it starts with talking about debris, but it's black rubber from the o-ring as a result of the o-ring moving across the mounting plate screws ...................not metal shavings in the shutter like the OP is talking about.

 

[DustyGeorge]

My first Panasonic 100-400 was very hard to mount on my OMD EM-1ii. After a couple days I noticed a hairline crack across the silver "washer" in the base of the lens. I returned it and got a replacement. The replacement is still a tighter mount than my Olympus lenses but it is acceptable and I have been very happy with it.

 

[Peter Hammer]

I am not seeing any issues with my 100-400 and the E-M1mk2. Lens mount is tight and smooth, exactly what I want.

Sounds good.

 

[Peter Hammer]

My first Panasonic 100-400 was very hard to mount on my OMD EM-1ii. After a couple days I noticed a hairline crack across the silver "washer" in the base of the lens. I returned it and got a replacement. The replacement is still a tighter mount than my Olympus lenses but it is acceptable and I have been very happy with it.

Not good. But good that you are now OK.

 

[Peter Hammer]

I suspect there is another issue going on here. I have both Panasonic and Olympus cameras and lenses and while I don’t have the PL100-400, I do have a couple of weather sealed lenses (one Panasonic and one Olympus) and they all mount fine. Since the PL100-400 is one of Panasonic’s higher end lenses I would think their quality control for that lens would be at least as good as for their cheaper lenses. I know that their are manufacturing tolerances that could come into play, but a rubber o-ring won’t make metal filings. And the chances of getting two of the same lenses with the same rare problem also seems unlikely. I think you should take the lenses and cameras in question to a camera shop and see what they say (if you are fortunate enough to live near one). Something strange is going on here. I too would love to see pictures.

The rubber O-ring will make filings if is too tight and forces the lens and camera flange to rub together. 4 lenses and 4 camera bodies and they all give problems. You can see the wear.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Peter Hammer]

Here's a photo of one flange of the lens mount of one 100-400mm after it has been on and off 3 different bodies perhaps 12 times! It isn't good! All those specks are metal fragments.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[panamike]

The part ime struggling with is you say it happens with more than one body and more than one lens, i feel it should be a more talked about problem on the web if its not just the case of one body or one lens.
I can understand a camera mount or a lens mount being a problem but not several, there are a lot of people using the 100-400 on Olympus bodies.

I can see you having support problems as its two different manufactures.

 

[tflovik]

I have the PL 100-400mm and have no problem mounting it to E-M1, E-M10, G80 or GH5.

 

[JanW]

When I look at the damage it seems that these marks are not caused by too much pressure of the seal.
The dents on the right look like the lens was not properly placed on the body when it was attached.
I have no idea where the damage on the left side comes from but it certainly has nothing to do with pressure from the seal. Do you have any idea what caused these marks?
Very difficult to see if there is wear on the inside (underside) of the lip on this photo and that is where I would suspect damage if there was too much pressure from the seal.

 

[panamike]

I cant give any definite answer but i did have an EM10 and 100-400, the lens to body fit was very sweet, i sold them early this year and recently purchased a new 10 and 100-400.

The fit on the new ones is so tight and needs too much force, so i will only be using it on my G80, i dont think any thing will have changed with the camera so my money is on the lens o ring.

 

[masayoshi]

It seems there are some production changes about sealing ring. Mine looks like o-ring, but others might look like V-shaped protrusion. Mine (o-ring like) is fine with both Panasonic and Olympus bodies, except for potential sealing defect, but the latter (V-shaped) may be causing the problem with Olympus bodies. Just guessing...

 

[panamike]

It seems there are some production changes about sealing ring. Mine looks like o-ring, but others might look like V-shaped protrusion. Mine (o-ring like) is fine with both Panasonic and Olympus bodies, except for potential sealing defect, but the latter (V-shaped) may be causing the problem with Olympus bodies. Just guessing...

I think you are right about the ring as it is possible to push the two together and mount the lens but no way is it a great fit even then.

 

[Bossman]

There seems to be a problem with this lens in manufacture in that I have now come across 2 lenses where the rubber sealing ring at the lens mount is absent.

Also this particular lens seems to be very much harder to put on a camera than any other lens. You seem to need a lot of force compared to any Olympus lens. Have other people had the same problem? With one lens it started wearing the lens mount and wrecked the camera shutter with metal shavings.

I just found this thread after a quick google search to see if anyone else is experiencing a problem with the PL 100-400 on an Oly body.
I have exactly the same issue with my PL 100-400 on an em1 ii. Metal shavings in the bottom of the mount every time I mount it.

I have read with interest the comments about the different screw fixing PCDs and flange diameter differences between PL and Oly bodies, but I am pretty sure the problem is caused by the sealing ring creating too much pressure on the lens mount.

I have 16 Oly and 3 PL lenses, the PL nocticron 42.5 and PL 20/1.7 neither of which are sealed both mount without problem and not one of my Oly lenses causes a problem. The issue only occurs with the PL 100-400.

I would love to hear from anyone else with a similar experience.

 

[masayoshi]

Actually, you are probably the third person after @Peter Hammer and @DustyGeorge , as far as I remember participating another thread.
Check this one too.
The Panasonic 100-400mm is not weathersealed on Olympus OMD bodies

 

[Peter Hammer]

I just found this thread after a quick google search to see if anyone else is experiencing a problem with the PL 100-400 on an Oly body.
I have exactly the same issue with my PL 100-400 on an em1 ii. Metal shavings in the bottom of the mount every time I mount it.

I have read with interest the comments about the different screw fixing PCDs and flange diameter differences between PL and Oly bodies, but I am pretty sure the problem is caused by the sealing ring creating too much pressure on the lens mount.

I have 16 Oly and 3 PL lenses, the PL nocticron 42.5 and PL 20/1.7 neither of which are sealed both mount without problem and not one of my Oly lenses causes a problem. The issue only occurs with the PL 100-400.

I would love to hear from anyone else with a similar experience.

The problem is that 2 of the bayonet flanges on the 100-400mm are very badly machined and where there should be a taper of the flange to allow the lens to be inserted easily the machining has left a lip which grinds away in the camera. If you use a nail file and a magnifying glass you can file the edge away CAREFULLY and not touch the non taper part and the problem goes away. The taper isn't in play when the lens is attached, it's only there to make the lens insertabale easily. The sealing ring (which seems to be missing on a number of lenses) makes the lens a bit harder to put on but it still goes on smoothly.

 

[masayoshi]

IMO, this should be fixed (replaced) by Panasonic for free. It's just ridiculous we have to use nail file for $1800 lens. If they say 'culprit is Oly's design', then they should both cover the cost half/half.

 

[Peter Hammer]

I agree. I have contacted Panasonic and even got a case number and that's as far as it has gotten after getting on to 2 months. It has nothing to do with Olympus it is just appalling machining of the lens mount. Also appalling is the number of lenses which don't even have the sealing gasket. The quality control of Panasonic is terrible and I would think very careful about buying a Panasonic camera given the QC issues and the total lack of service. Olympus did replace the shutter of one camera which had been damaged for free even though it wasn't their problem.

 

[atarijedi]

It seems there are some production changes about sealing ring. Mine looks like o-ring, but others might look like V-shaped protrusion. Mine (o-ring like) is fine with both Panasonic and Olympus bodies, except for potential sealing defect, but the latter (V-shaped) may be causing the problem with Olympus bodies. Just guessing...

Mine has the v-ring, at least thats what it looks like to me, and it sits fine on the EM1mk2 body. However, the v-ring seems to sit much shallower than the one in Peter Hammers photos, just as shallow as the one on my Oly 12-40mm.

 

[Peter Hammer]

You can feel if the sealing gasket is there by dragging your fingernail across the lens mount. You will feel a slight snap as it catches the gasket and the gasket snaps back into place. It's a slightly bigger gasket than on the the 12-40mm

 

[atarijedi]

You can feel if the sealing gasket is there by dragging your fingernail across the lens mount. You will feel a slight snap as it catches the gasket and the gasket snaps back into place. It's a slightly bigger gasket than on the the 12-40mm

Yeah, I know its there, on my version of the 100-400mm lens, it doesn't look any different than the 12-40mm. But, moving my nail across both gaskets, the 12-40mm is more pronounced than the 100-400mm. Also, when I originally found this thread and checked the gasket on the 100-400mm, I accidentally pushed a piece of the ring under the flange, and had to loosen that first flange plate on the lens to get it to sit properly again. Terrifying experience for a newb who has never even attempted any sort of simple repair on a lens, for fear of effecting the glass, lol.

It's very possible that the gasket on my lens is malformed and is too small. I don't use that lens in anything more than spitting rain anymore since finding this thread, as I saw from rubber marks on the body flange that the lens gasket passes over 2 of the 4 screws on the body, I imagine that anymore more than spitting rain would cause water seepage.