[Reed]

Do you know that or is it purely baseless speculation?

Based on my own experience, and I've had quite a few of those(C50/1.8II) in my hands, also I had to disassemble two of them on separate occasion to take them off from camera because of little plastic baffle placed in back of that lens that fall off and got stuck within camera mount. It was better to brake cheap lens apart than having camera serviced(off warranty) and receive broken lens and camera back for value of new one. In other thread about FA 35/2 revamps I've wrote this I was employed for a time at one of biggest retailers of camera equipment here, we had a situation that brand new batches(in factory bulk boxes) of Canon 50/1.8II lenses shipped with promotional stickers/leaflets dated back to mid 90's packed within that boxes. And that was in early 2010's. It was quite possible that late replacement of Canon 50/1.8STM just few years back was due to overproduction of previous model that left "bad stock". That is of course based on my own assumption, not of any official data provided.

[monochrome]

I think that some problem with limiteds as with the other FA primes was a "badstock" left of glass blanks and other parts to be used for current line. If those ware updated before they run out of the legacy parts, then who would buy older stuff? Similar story got Canon tied to 50/1.8II plastic horror, recently changed for 50/1.8 STM.

To precisely what problems with Limiteds and other FA primes do you refer, and on what basis do you attribute supposed Pentax problemns to left over “bad Stock? Specific, informed examples please.

Do you know that or is it purely baseless speculation?

Please cite any exosting references to examples of Pentax selling old, bad stock or lenses made from old, bad parts.

Based on my own experience, and I've had quite a few of those(C50/1.8II) in my hands, also I had to disassemble two of them on separate occasion to take them off from camera because of little plastic baffle placed in back of that lens that fall off and got stuck within camera mount. It was better to brake cheap lens apart than having camera serviced(off warranty) and receive broken lens and camera back for value of new one. In other thread about FA 35/2 revamps I've wrote this I was employed for a time at one of biggest retailers of camera equipment here, we had a situation that brand new batches(in factory bulk boxes) of Canon 50/1.8II lenses shipped with promotional stickers/leaflets dated back to mid 90's packed within that boxes. And that was in early 2010's. It was quite possible that late replacement of Canon 50/1.8STM just few years back was due to overproduction of previous model that left "bad stock". That is of course based on my own assumption, not of any official data provided.

So you have real world experience with a Canon lens. On what basis do you legitimately conflate that experience with Pentax practices and products? Specific, known examples with citations, please.

[Merv-O]

An upgrade to include the HD coating and weather-sealing should enhance performance and appeal while keeping them small.

Philip

The DA 20-40 Limited is not small per se, but it is fast and accurate. The 70mm is slightly below average size. The only real pancake lens in my estimation, is the 40mm f2.8 Limited...that is truly a fun lens. A small 27mm diameter and thin focus ring make it look quite "interesting" when attached to a K-3ii or a K-1

[Reed]

By "bad stock" I mean not a faulty product, but overproduced and not sold yet. And all of that stuff have to be used up for production, and sold for distribution chain, before you can introduce new version. Nothing negative about Pentax moves here on my side. This is normal for any camera manufacturer. You want to sell what you have before you go with an update. There are 5 or more different generations of kit lenses for any camera brand not because they like to make them over and over, but because they sell a lot of that stuff and can provide faster updates without being left out with older versions. But if you like an examples directly from out brand look at introduction of DA lenses as indicator- when a lens sells nice, they can come with more or less updated versions of it with later batches- for example SMC DA 55-300 updated to HD DA 50-300 and then new replacement with HD DA 55-300 PLM, same with all DA Limiteds updated/replaced with HD versions, now the HD 35/2. For some time good indicator of production time was the box used for packaging of a lens- Ricoh changes the layout of Pentax lens boxes to new silver ones around 2013, before that there ware Hoya's era of green/black and before then, grey ones with big red Pentax logo. I had a brand new, mint, FA50/1.4's shipped in pre-Hoya boxes straight from local distribution along the HD Limiteds in Silver Rioch boxes.
In other thread there was some comments about SMC tech suitable glass being not available any more for production, I don't know if its true, but seems logic to use up anything you have left before you go with something more advanced on market.

[monochrome]

Most lenses are made in batches and sometimes held for years in inventory. That’s how they’re planned. Supposedly the FA Limited production ended 12/2012 and resumed in 01/2016 with a new ‘batch’ to prepare for the K-1. There’s nothing new, sinister or unusual about waiting to update a design until Stock is sold. Consumer lenses might well be made in nearly continuous production.

I still don’t understand what this has to do with a warehouse full of bad parts or old lens blanks unsuitable for Limiteds or ‘problems’ with FA lenses. Whatever. I’m out.

[Merv-O]

I still don’t understand what this has to do with a warehouse full of bad parts or old lens blanks unsuitable for Limiteds or ‘problems’ with FA lenses. Whatever. I’m out.

I'm with you on that one.

[wanderer2]

I found this video to be quite amazing. There is so little hand craftsmanship such as this remaining in this world now and I did not know lens manufacture involved that.

[lytrytyr]

I still don’t understand what this has to do with a warehouse full of bad parts or old lens blanks unsuitable for Limiteds or ‘problems’ with FA lenses. Whatever. I’m out.

Let's remember that @Reed is not a native English speaker,
but a forum member with valuable insight on how things have worked in the Polish market.

The way I read the posts, "bad stock" does not mean bad product,
just a mismatch of past production to actual demand.

[Reed]

Let's remember that @Reed is not a native English speaker,
but a forum member with valuable insight on how things have worked in the Polish market.

The way I read the posts, "bad stock" does not mean bad product,
just a mismatch of past production to actual demand.

Yes, that was my actual intention. Sorry if it wasn't clear

[monochrome]

Yes, that was my actual intention. Sorry if it wasn't clear

Let's remember that @Reed is not a native English speaker,
but a forum member with valuable insight on how things have worked in the Polish market.

The way I read the posts, "bad stock" does not mean bad product,
just a mismatch of past production to actual demand.

Got it. Interpreted the the statements on the two threads as negative about specific Pentax lens production, parts and QC. If that wasn’t the intent of the post then OK.