[thxbb12]

My gosh, that's awful. It makes the Fuji 16-80 looks like an awesome lens!

[Klaus]

I think these lenses were never designed to be really serviceable ...
I'm a bit surprised that they even tried rather than simply replacing a bigger component. Or maybe they did, and the replacement part was a dud.
Considering the labor and handling costs, it probably doesn't make any sense to repair a sub-$500 (retail) lens.
Whatever we see as retail price, the production costs are probably far less than 50% - the rest is R&D, marketing, transport, manufacturer profits and dealer profits.

[toni-a]

Whatever we see as retail price, the production costs are probably far less than 50% - the rest is R&D, marketing, transport, manufacturer profits and dealer profits.

This explains a new tendancy after COVID and Ukraine War: raw material are becoming scarce, so production must be decreased, dealer profit per item must increase to cover its running costs, shipping prices have increased too, it doesn't make any sense anymore to manufacture cheap items. Don't expect to see cheap lenses coming, there will be nothing but super expensive lenses and even entry level items will be overpriced.

[stoppingdown]

«I'm a bit surprised that they even tried rather than simply replacing a bigger component. Or maybe they did, and the replacement part was a dud.»

They did replace a bigger component — actually two. The invoce is really detailed and they included part replacement serial numbers. Googling I found they are the “3rd and 4th group assy” — the word “assy“ is pretty new to me, but if I'm not wrong is more or less a lens group, right? In the invoice they are labeled “STEADY SHO(T)” and “3RD IRIS” and the labour description includes "replacement of internal lens groups” (translated).

When they looked at the test I sent them they were puzzled and asked whether I suspected a bump during delivery. The packaging indeed was not showing any sign of that.

[davidmanze]

«I'm a bit surprised that they even tried rather than simply replacing a bigger component. Or maybe they did, and the replacement part was a dud.»

They did replace a bigger component — actually two. The invoce is really detailed and they included part replacement serial numbers. Googling I found they are the  “3rd and 4th group assy” — the word “assy“ is pretty new to me, but if I'm not wrong is more or less a lens group, right? In the invoice they are labeled “STEADY SHO(T)” and “3RD IRIS” and the labour description includes "replacement of internal lens groups” (translated).

When they looked at the test I sent them they were puzzled and asked whether I suspected a bump during delivery. The packaging indeed was not showing any sign of that.


  Ah yes the old "damage during transit" excuse .
After clarifying that the packaging bore zero signs of any impacts, now's the time to insist on a replacement lens .... they really don't allow the time for a full optical test of yours .... no doubt there is a stack awaiting repair already .....  
 Insist simply and kindly on another lens before their inevitable factory response of: "no fault found" ... "or lens within specifications" brings an end to any further redress ..... 

[toni-a]

«I'm a bit surprised that they even tried rather than simply replacing a bigger component. Or maybe they did, and the replacement part was a dud.»

They did replace a bigger component — actually two. The invoce is really detailed and they included part replacement serial numbers. Googling I found they are the  “3rd and 4th group assy” — the word “assy“ is pretty new to me, but if I'm not wrong is more or less a lens group, right? In the invoice they are labeled “STEADY SHO(T)” and “3RD IRIS” and the labour description includes "replacement of internal lens groups” (translated).

When they looked at the test I sent them they were puzzled and asked whether I suspected a bump during delivery. The packaging indeed was not showing any sign of that.


   Ah yes the old "damage during transit" excuse .
After clarifying that the packaging bore zero signs of any impacts,  now's the time to insist on a replacement lens .... they really don't allow the time for a full optical test of yours .... no doubt there is a stack awaiting repair already .....  
 Insist simply and kindly on another lens before their inevitable factory response of: "no fault found" ... "or lens within specifications" brings an end to any further redress ..... 

very well said

[stoppingdown]

Got the lens back from the lab...

[stoppingdown]

So it looks like it will be a long story. There are huge improvements at 70mm, good improvements at 50mm, 35mm is so-so; 24mm is basically unchanged.
In the next days I'll be out for a trip, then I'll resend the lens back to the lab.
I see above suggestions to ask for a new lens... But the lens was out of warranty, so I think the only point I can stress is to ask for it to be really fixed (the repair is under warranty of course) — or eventually a refund.

[jkp2505]

Given the number of complaints about quality control with that model of lens I’m assuming there must be a design defect somewhere

I wonder if Sony ever tweaked the design of the 16-70mm in more recent years to work around the problem - like they did with the A mount 16-80mm and its autofocus issues. With the latter you could supposedly tell the revision from the first two digits of the serial number on the front.

Not that it really helps you unless you can get a refund for the repair and find another copy that’s priced cheaply

[stoppingdown]

Given the number of complaints about quality control with that model of lens I’m assuming there must be a design defect somewhere

Yes.