Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-08-2015, 02:24 AM   #31
sTi
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 98
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Spodeworld Quote
BTW, post the message you send to Sigma. Maybe we can send the same message to local Sigma centers in our respective countries. Thanks!

Here are my results, and they were typical with multiple tries. I focused on the cup using AF.S:
Thanks for your images that demonstrate the problem.

I've now written to Sigma and await their reply. Here's the English translation of what I wrote:

QuoteQuote:
Sigma 17-70 "Contemporary" for Pentax: compatibility problems with "Shake Reduction" function

Apparently the 17-70 "Contempary" lens suffers from some compatibility issues with the "Shake Reduction" (SR) function of Pentax cameras. I have written a report in the largest English-language forum for Pentax cameras (+Link to this thread)

As can be seen from the metadata of image files, the problem arises due to incorrect values for the parameter "SR focal length" at wide angle. This leads to a malfunction of the SR function in the cameras as it assumes a wrong focal length (e.g. 66mm instead of 17mm), which may result in blurred images. As can be seen in the forum thread, the problem has been confirmed by other users of the lens with various current and older camera models (K-3, K-5II, K-5IIs, K-5).

I would appreciate it if you could investigate this problem or pass it on to the appropriate place. I'd be happy to update the review accordingly as soon as I get more information from you. Of course the question whether this problem can be expected to be fixed by a firmware update will be of particular interest to users of the lens.

Best Regards
...



Last edited by sTi; 01-08-2015 at 02:31 AM.
01-08-2015, 05:44 AM   #32
Senior Member
Nitrogliserin's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Turkey
Posts: 246
I did a quick test and results are as OP has mentioned.



SR OFF


SR ON


Desired results should have been reverse. Don't you think so?

Both photos are on ISO 1600 but with SR ON it looks much more noisy.

Last edited by Nitrogliserin; 01-08-2015 at 06:02 AM.
01-08-2015, 06:53 AM   #33
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Spodeworld's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: New Joisey
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,360
Thanks

I used your text as the basis for my submission to Sigma, which was just sent a few miniutes ago. I suggest that everyone concerned about it contact Sigma with the same message.

Here is the link in the US:
Contact Us | Sigma Corporation of America



Message sent to Sigma:
Sigma 17-70 "Contemporary" for Pentax: compatibility problems with "Shake Reduction" function

Apparently the 17-70 "Contempary" lens suffers from some compatibility issues with the "Shake Reduction" (SR) function of Pentax cameras. A new report has been just written in the largest English-language forum for Pentax cameras (https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/285104-sigm...reduction.html)

As can be seen from the metadata of image files, the problem arises due to incorrect values for the parameter "SR focal length" at wide angle. This leads to a malfunction of the SR function in the cameras as it assumes a wrong focal length (e.g. 66mm instead of 17mm), which may result in blurred images. As a matter of fact, I was able to achieve sharp images at 17mm at 1/15" handheld with SR off, but not able to do so once the SR was turned on due to the overcompensation resulting from the incorrect 'SR focal length' values being passed. As you can imagine, this is extremely distressing to anyone who owns this lens or is considering this lens as this is a fine piece of glass that appears to have been compromised by systemic error.

As can be seen in the forum thread, the problem has been confirmed by other users of the lens with various current and older camera models (K-3, K-5II, K-5IIs, K-5).

I would appreciate it if you could investigate this problem or pass it on to the appropriate place. I'd be happy to update the review accordingly as soon as I get more information from you. Of course the question whether this problem can be expected to be fixed by a firmware update will be of particular interest to users of the lens as well as potential future customers of Sigma products.

Best Regards

Steven Brener


QuoteOriginally posted by sTi Quote
Thanks for your images that demonstrate the problem.

I've now written to Sigma and await their reply. Here's the English translation of what I wrote:
01-08-2015, 07:43 AM   #34
sTi
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 98
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Nitrogliserin Quote
I did a quick test and results are as OP has mentioned.

SR OFF
SR ON

Desired results should have been reverse. Don't you think so?
Thanks for your test with the K-30.
Of course you are right, if SR would function normally with this lens the "SR on" picture should generally show less camera shake than with "SR off". Let's hope Sigma can fix this issue.

01-08-2015, 08:11 AM   #35
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,918
It will be interesting to see their reply, if you get one. Will they address the issue or blame the problem on the Pentax SR system? Since I tend to avoid those shutter speeds when shooting handheld, it's something I never noticed in my photos so I'm not really concerned. Since most of my non landscape wide shots will probably involve people, I will have a faster shutter speed simply because people naturally tend to twitch and move, even in "posed" shots.

Where will the buck stop? I can understand the SR hunting during a half press but the data also records whether the photo was stabilized or not and the wrong data shows in stabilized shots. Since the camera is properly recording the focal length, why is the SR stabilizing a 17mm lens as a 45 or 52 mm? This may not be a Sigma issue.
01-08-2015, 08:36 AM   #36
sTi
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 98
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by reeftool Quote
Where will the buck stop? I can understand the SR hunting during a half press but the data also records whether the photo was stabilized or not and the wrong data shows in stabilized shots. Since the camera is properly recording the focal length, why is the SR stabilizing a 17mm lens as a 45 or 52 mm? This may not be a Sigma issue.
It's difficult to say where the problem originates without having inside knowledge of the K-mount communication protocols - maybe the Sigma lens sends incomplete or wrong data to the camera, maybe the camera misinterprets something because it does not fully recognize the lens ID, or maybe something completely different is the problem. However, I'm pretty certain Pentax will feel no responsibility to do anything about it because SR works perfectly with original Pentax lenses. Our only chance is Sigma doing something about it (if it's even technically possible) I'm afraid...
01-08-2015, 08:56 AM   #37
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Spodeworld's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: New Joisey
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,360
Here is the reply I got from Sigma:

"Hello Steven,
We are presently not experiencing this situation but I will forward this to our engineers in Japan for investigation.
Yours Truly,
Paul Pizzano
The Sigma Corp. of America"

Looks like we need more and more people to contact Sigma about this! Please contact Sigma.

Last edited by Spodeworld; 01-08-2015 at 12:06 PM.
01-08-2015, 01:42 PM   #38
Senior Member
Nitrogliserin's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Turkey
Posts: 246
I've sent an e-mail to Sigma UK. (same email text above)

IMO this investigation in Japan can take forever.

And in the end I don't want to end up buying Sigma dock. There must be an alternative solution.

01-08-2015, 02:15 PM   #39
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Spodeworld's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: New Joisey
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,360
Great. We need as many people as possible to contact Sigma.

As far as a dock is concerned, it may have use for future lens/camera purchases, but first and foremost I'd like a solution, even if that's what it takes.

I'm wondering if Adam can promote this as it would be good for as many Pentax users to see this as possible.

QuoteOriginally posted by Nitrogliserin Quote
I've sent an e-mail to Sigma UK. (same email text above)

IMO this investigation in Japan can take forever.

And in the end I don't want to end up buying Sigma dock. There must be an alternative solution.
01-08-2015, 02:45 PM   #40
Senior Member
Nitrogliserin's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Turkey
Posts: 246
QuoteOriginally posted by Spodeworld Quote

I'm wondering if Adam can promote this as it would be good for as many Pentax users to see this as possible.
That would be great and much more result oriented. Perhaps this is a minor issue for Pentax engineers and they can make a hotfix. Who knows?
01-08-2015, 09:50 PM   #41
Veteran Member
MadMathMind's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Houston, TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,717
QuoteOriginally posted by sTi Quote
It's difficult to say where the problem originates without having inside knowledge of the K-mount communication protocols - maybe the Sigma lens sends incomplete or wrong data to the camera, maybe the camera misinterprets something because it does not fully recognize the lens ID, or maybe something completely different is the problem. However, I'm pretty certain Pentax will feel no responsibility to do anything about it because SR works perfectly with original Pentax lenses. Our only chance is Sigma doing something about it (if it's even technically possible) I'm afraid...
I have two other Sigma lenses that do not display this issue. My 70-200mm HSM II (a bit older, I think around 2009 or 2010) is always within a couple mm of the reported focal length. That makes sense that the two not be 100% identical because if they always are, then why both having two separate parameters?

I checked about 10 of my images with the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8. Those were 100% identical. Now, this is a lens that has been reported to have major focus issues (which I have not seen to nearly the extent of what others have), which are most assuredly something miscommunicating between the lens and body.

If the issue is in the lens, it seems to be unique to the 17-70. I never noticed the issue because I avoided those low shutter speeds. Come to think of it, I think I did so because the pictures didn't come out so well. I had always assumed that 1/10 is just too slow, even with shake reduction. But I am able to hold the 18-35 at the wide end at that shutter speed and have even gone down as low as 1/6 with limited success. (Anything slower....forget it.)
01-08-2015, 10:02 PM   #42
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Spodeworld's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: New Joisey
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,360
Then please contact Sigma with this info. Based on their response to me it seems like they are unaware of this. They will be more inclined to fix the problem if more people bring it to their attention. Thanks


QuoteOriginally posted by MadMathMind Quote
I have two other Sigma lenses that do not display this issue. My 70-200mm HSM II (a pbit older, I think around 2009 or 2010) is always within a couple mm of the reported focal length. That makes sense that the two not be 100% identical because if they always are, then why both having two separate parameters?

I checked about 10 of my images with the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8. Those were 100% identical. Now, this is a lens that has been reported to have major focus issues (which I have not seen to nearly the extent of what others have), which are most assuredly something miscommunicating between the lens and body.

If the issue is in the lens, it seems to be unique to the 17-70. I never noticed the issue because I avoided those low shutter speeds. Come to think of it, I think I did so because the pictures didn't come out so well. I had always assumed that 1/10 is just too slow, even with shake reduction. But I am able to hold the 18-35 at the wide end at that shutter speed and have even gone down as low as 1/6 with limited success. (Anything slower....forget it.)
01-09-2015, 05:20 AM   #43
New Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 10
Can anyone test whether it has something to do with what angle (relative to horizontal) you hold the camera at the time the photo is taken? I'm not familiar with the gyro mechanism, but the gyro may have the most latitude to fix shake when shooting horizontal and the mechanism offers float equally in all directions on the focal plane. The theory I'm throwing out there is that at an angle the mechanism maxes out at its physical limit and you are not getting any SR at all, or blur is introduced when the mechanism starts bouncing off its physical limiters when shooting downward, upward, etc.
Perhaps it's some combination of incorrect data and the function of SR together that is causing the problem. Test away.
01-09-2015, 06:21 AM   #44
Veteran Member
MadMathMind's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Houston, TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,717
QuoteOriginally posted by Spodeworld Quote
Then please contact Sigma with this info. Based on their response to me it seems like they are unaware of this. They will be more inclined to fix the problem if more people bring it to their attention. Thanks
I no longer own the lens. If they want information or ask me to do something, I can't. I'd worry they'd see this as wasting time and not take listen to serious requests.
01-09-2015, 08:05 AM   #45
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Spodeworld's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: New Joisey
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,360
Has anybody else received any responses from Sigma? Based on mine, it seems like I am the only one they have ever heard this from. That's not encouraging if we're hoping for a fix.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, da, data, firmware, image, images, issue, k-mount, length, lengths, lens, lenses, manufacturer, metadata, notes, pentax lens, performance, photome, row, section, shots, shutter, sigma, slr lens, speeds, sr, value
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sigma 17-70 Contemporary vs Sigma 17-50 2.8 bass3587 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 21 01-24-2015 10:31 AM
AF of K-5 II with Sigma 17-70 Contemporary Casion Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 01-17-2015 10:19 AM
New Sigma 18-200mm "Contemporary" for Pentax Adam Pentax News and Rumors 25 02-23-2014 06:58 AM
Using "stops" to measure Shake Reduction sydbarett Photographic Technique 23 07-02-2012 08:43 AM
"Upgrade" Sigma 17-70 to Tammy 17-50? lavascript Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 01-05-2011 02:51 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:35 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top