[Loren E]

What makes me nervous is the 6-18 months bit. If it were a matter of having a "dud" or a "good copy" show up it would be easy enough, but knowing your lens could fail in a year or a year and a half after being taken care of makes me feel way uneasy. These lenses have only been around for a few years...maybe many of the SDMs that have been working no problem for 2-3 years for some people will give out as well in the next 2-3 years? I'd much rather have a louder AF system like screw drive that will last as long as I take care of it, rather than technology so unsound it would be a dream to think it would still be working in 8-10 years....I posted recently about whether Pentax might come out with DA* II series that would omit the SDM lenses and implement something new, I think the consensus is "who knows", but without any acknowledgment of the SDM problems my hopes are low I guess..

[builttospill]

I posted recently about whether Pentax might come out with DA* II series that would omit the SDM lenses and implement something new, I think the consensus is "who knows", but without any acknowledgment of the SDM problems my hopes are low I guess..

I think the new DC (direct current) lens is your answer to that question.

[lawsonstone]

My DA*16-50 failed this weekend. I purchased it in February 2009 and had no problems with it. I had not used it for several weeks, and then tried to use it this weekend to take pictures at my small hometown "old fashioned Christmas" celebration and it wouldn't focus. Dead.

I guess now I'm a statistic, but nobody seems actually to be counting...

[Pentaxor]

My DA*16-50 failed this weekend. I purchased it in February 2009 and had no problems with it. I had not used it for several weeks, and then tried to use it this weekend to take pictures at my small hometown "old fashioned Christmas" celebration and it wouldn't focus. Dead.

I guess now I'm a statistic, but nobody seems actually to be counting...

people here are counting, except for Pentax. I wouldn't be surprised if their sales for the DA*zooms drop significantly , so does the prices. but still, I wouldn't lay a finger on getting one. I'll buy a Sigma instead.

[paperbag846]

My DA*16-50 failed this weekend.

Did you take the lens off while the camera was on?

[lawsonstone]

It looks like my DA*16-50 is okay. I have routinely taking DA* lenses on and off with the camera on with no problems, so I'm pretty sure that's not the issue.

I did learn that apparently there is a component in the SDM mechanism that carries a small charge. If the lens is not used for a long period, the charge can drop. Connecting the lens to a powered-on camera for several minutes reputedly can revive the lens.

I did that, and the lens seems to have awakened and is as good as ever.

So I guess I'm off the statistic roles, which is fine with me! I love this lens and have had no problems with it before now.

[snipenekkid]

What makes me nervous is the 6-18 months bit. If it were a matter of having a "dud" or a "good copy" show up it would be easy enough, but knowing your lens could fail in a year or a year and a half after being taken care of makes me feel way uneasy. These lenses have only been around for a few years...maybe many of the SDMs that have been working no problem for 2-3 years for some people will give out as well in the next 2-3 years? I'd much rather have a louder AF system like screw drive that will last as long as I take care of it, rather than technology so unsound it would be a dream to think it would still be working in 8-10 years....I posted recently about whether Pentax might come out with DA* II series that would omit the SDM lenses and implement something new, I think the consensus is "who knows", but without any acknowledgment of the SDM problems my hopes are low I guess..

Exactly the reason I am no longer adding lenses to my Pentax system. I have enough lenses, none sealed but I refuse to invest further in any lenses for my Pentax system. Now add the unfortunate K-5 sensor problem and I am not buying any new bodies either. Of course what is the point of paying the premium charged for the weather sealed body if none of the sealed lenses are trustworthy. Yeah, I want to spend $800-$1400 for a lens that will potentially fail sometime within 3-years. That right there makes the much higher cost of the Canon glass seem maybe not to high.

The one and only reason I stick with a Pentax system is I like the color rendering though I am not 100% sold on the new sensor in that area even with it's allegedly increased dynamic range, I use the word alleged because it has been suggested that Pentax gamed-the-table this time around -- much like other manufacturers -- to get the higher DxO test results. I originally bought a Pentax system for the weather sealed body and lenses. Wish I had been made aware there were known potential issues with the DA* lenses back then. I did at least know the quality control of the DA* 16-50 was suspect at best thanks to other sites.

[snipenekkid]

It looks like my DA*16-50 is okay. I have routinely taking DA* lenses on and off with the camera on with no problems, so I'm pretty sure that's not the issue.

I did learn that apparently there is a component in the SDM mechanism that carries a small charge. If the lens is not used for a long period, the charge can drop. Connecting the lens to a powered-on camera for several minutes reputedly can revive the lens.

I did that, and the lens seems to have awakened and is as good as ever.

So I guess I'm off the statistic roles, which is fine with me! I love this lens and have had no problems with it before now.

Wish you luck, but your situation seems more like a portent of things to come. So keep an eye on it, I am sure you will and do not need anyone to tell you that for sure. But I if there is some sort of capacitor which can't hold it's charge after a period of time, then cannot properly restore that charge on power up, that is a defect or sign that element is beginning to fail.

I am not at all trying to diminish the joy you much have in managing to convince your much loved lens to work again, but merely want to point out this is not a behavior one should see in such an electronic component. And also to point out if the issue was that simple then there would be no valid reason Pentax would remain mute on the matter. Nobody would worry if this was a normal behavior that needs to be considered before heading out to use the lens. Also were this the true issue, Pentax would have replaced the parts so newly produced lenses would no longer have this happen, we are talking parts which cost pennies. But given that Pentax has done nothing and new lenses seem to continue to fail, I would not be over excited this was the fix everyone had missed.

Hope I am wrong and your lens works for your for decades.

[Frogfish]

It looks like my DA*16-50 is okay. I have routinely taking DA* lenses on and off with the camera on with no problems, so I'm pretty sure that's not the issue.

I did learn that apparently there is a component in the SDM mechanism that carries a small charge. If the lens is not used for a long period, the charge can drop. Connecting the lens to a powered-on camera for several minutes reputedly can revive the lens.

I did that, and the lens seems to have awakened and is as good as ever.

So I guess I'm off the statistic roles, which is fine with me! I love this lens and have had no problems with it before now.

I wonder how many people didn't know that ... assumed their lense was dead and sent it in for repair thinking it another casualty of SDM failure.

[builttospill]

That right there makes the much higher cost of the Canon glass seem maybe not to high.

Wow, a little bitter perhaps? I had a DA 17-70 SDM fail on me. Lucky for me it was still under warranty. I sent it in and the entire SDM was replaced, and I just learned from the current owner the same lens failed again recently.

I can't tell you how many lenses (non-L) my Canon-shooting buddies have had to send back for calibrating. Unfortunately SDM and focusing haven't been Pentax's strengths. Each brand has their weaknesses but I'd encourage you to find the strengths Pentax has that works for you or move to the higher-cost Canon.

[Pentaxor]

I wonder how many people didn't know that ... assumed their lense was dead and sent it in for repair thinking it another casualty of SDM failure.

it shouldn't have an issue like that in the first place. the lens is not battery operated by itself. the motor is small and shouldn't take long for it to start working. and it is slower. and why doesn't it work like the HSM does everytime? you can't expect the owners to wait or charge the lens during an event so that he can use the lens. that is just outrageous.

[ytterbium]

I wonder how many people didn't know that ... assumed their lense was dead and sent it in for repair thinking it another casualty of SDM failure.

That is one golden observation. Thats the first time i've heard of such thing. Makes me question a lot of things.

If the charge can drop so much it's observable, can it indicate a unreliable power component/circuit?

Is it really a charge (why would there be such thing), or a way that half dead SDM behaves?

Etc...

Was it new, from Pentax, or possibly unsold old stock? I know of a couple places that have some 50-135s that have been sitting since late 2008.

It doesnt matters. If the've detected the problem, they should recall and replace lenses in shops instead of smuggling them to buyers. If they still allow bad lenses to be sold, they have not fixed the problem.

P.S. And i'm still avoiding any SDM lenses until the problem is rectified (explanation and proof of fix, extended warranty*, SDM II, DC or similar way).

* - few have written that the SDM fails just after the warranty ends.

[snipenekkid]

Exactly the reason I am no longer adding lenses to my Pentax system. I have enough lenses, none sealed but I refuse to invest further in any lenses for my Pentax system. Now add the unfortunate K-5 sensor problem and I am not buying any new bodies either. Of course what is the point of paying the premium charged for the weather sealed body if none of the sealed lenses are trustworthy. Yeah, I want to spend $800-$1400 for a lens that will potentially fail sometime within 3-years. That right there makes the much higher cost of the Canon glass seem maybe not to high.

The one and only reason I stick with a Pentax system is I like the color rendering though I am not 100% sold on the new sensor in that area even with it's allegedly increased dynamic range, I use the word alleged because it has been suggested that Pentax gamed-the-table this time around -- much like other manufacturers -- to get the higher DxO test results. I originally bought a Pentax system for the weather sealed body and lenses. Wish I had been made aware there were known potential issues with the DA* lenses back then. I did at least know the quality control of the DA* 16-50 was suspect at best thanks to other sites.

Wow, a little bitter perhaps? I had a DA 17-70 SDM fail on me. Lucky for me it was still under warranty. I sent it in and the entire SDM was replaced, and I just learned from the current owner the same lens failed again recently.

I can't tell you how many lenses (non-L) my Canon-shooting buddies have had to send back for calibrating. Unfortunately SDM and focusing haven't been Pentax's strengths. Each brand has their weaknesses but I'd encourage you to find the strengths Pentax has that works for you or move to the higher-cost Canon.

First I could give a flip about non-L glass. And next why not include the WHOLE comment rather than the sound bite snippet that lets your cherry pick to come off as the "great defender of the faith"....rather than someone who can't face the facts...SDM is not a reliable system. And the Canon "L" series sure has had their set of clunkers off the line to, but they make 10x the number of lenses as Pentax but likely have the NUMBER of bad lenses.

My comment was in reference to FAILURES of the AF system not sending in a lens for calibration with a specific body. And most of those calibrations were before the ability to adjust each of your lenses in the body setup. I went through THREE DA 35 limiteds before I got one that was a match for the body I have.

[twitch]

How I wish pntrs.com/t/TUJGRktHSkJHRkpISUVCRkpOSkVN?url=lensrentals.com offered Pentax lenses, then we might be able to get some real figures on failure rates. As it is though their report on problem lenses and failure rates from Nikon, Canon & Sony makes very interesting reading LensRentals.com - Lens Repair Data 4.0

[GlennG]

ever been to Vegas?

Yes, but I can't tell you much about it - what happened there STAYED there!