[Pentaxor]

it believe that it already has hurt the DA* zoom sales. Sigma and Tamron are probably having a good time catching those eggs that have fallen off the basket.

[Sirfishalot]

Well maybe I should have read up on this more before just purchasing a DA*300 last week.
The 16-50/2.8 seems like it would make a nice addition, but reading the horror stories has me second guessing about that one.
I'll see how it goes with the 300 on the K-7 for a while.

JayT

[Blue]

. . .

-A 60-250 which is less than 8 months old and has spent almost all of it's life in a camera bag.

Pentax can say what they like about SDM reliability.

They are LIARS if they say there are no reliability problems.

This was why I was really reluctant to get the DA* 300mm. I ended up getting an extra warranty for it. I think if it goes out before the Pentax 1 year is up, I'm going to ask them to purchase the extended warranty for me or its plan B and I like my chances on plan B.

[danielchtong]

I've red numerous opinions about SDM lenses. Both good and bad, but when reading such qualitative information you tend to focus on possible issues.

So until now i've been unsure if it is safe or preferable to buy SDM lens. To have a better impression of how things are actually instead of seeing only picked descriptions of problems encountered i've made this poll.

I've offered answers that match my situation best.
If 1:3 votes would indicate bad experience i don't think its a safe option to invest your money in.

All electronics have failure rate ( 5 yrs). There is no stats yet on the SDM lens failure rate yet. I personally think 5 % within 5 yrs is reasonable.
I have been waiting on the side line and I only have DA200mm as I have been eyeing FA*200mm for sometime. It was a no brainer as I was prepared to pay $1400 for the FA* version (ebay rate that time).
And DA*200mm is a repackaged FA*200mm plus weather proof and SDM. Even if the SDM fails still it can work as a FA*200mm
I bought DA*200mm $1100.
Maybe we hear too many horror story like that from Peter. But we have to stomach some degree of electronic failure. The question is how high we anticipate


Daniel

[Rondec]

The big thing with one of the DA * lenses is to shoot a lot with it after you get it. I have a feeling that certain of them are prone to fail and others will basically last forever. The question is which lens did you get?

[Wheatfield]

The big thing with one of the DA * lenses is to shoot a lot with it after you get it. I have a feeling that certain of them are prone to fail and others will basically last forever. The question is which lens did you get?

I'm thinking this might be close to correct, though it doesn't account for a user like Peter Zack who probably uses his 16-50 on practically a daily basis.
I know the LX film camera was very prone to certain failures that would happen just from the camera sitting for extended periods of time, so I'm quite willing to believe that the SDM needs to be used fairly frequently.
Having said this, it is still a design failure of the lens if this is so.

With my failed lens, I can hear the SDM motor trying to move, and the focus ring does move a bit in very small jerky increments for a short while before the motor gives up.

I have a feeling that Pentax has put something on the market that they think should work, and because they think it should work they are just presuming that it does work, even on the face of what is becoming a startlingly large body of evidence to the contrary.

While it is tempting to chew the ear off of a resident Pentax rep, if she isn't already reading threads of this nature and doing something about it, then I don't see much point in trying to kickstart her into doing what she should be doing as a company rep that monitors web forums.

[asdf]

Well maybe I should have read up on this more before just purchasing a DA*300 last week.
The 16-50/2.8 seems like it would make a nice addition, but reading the horror stories has me second guessing about that one.
I'll see how it goes with the 300 on the K-7 for a while.

JayT

I don't know if your DA* 300 f/4 should give you confidence about the other lens. I have two SDM lenses. DA* 300 f/4 has worked for months without a squeak. My 17-70 zoom, on the other hand...has a brand new motor.

[Wheatfield]

But we have to stomach some degree of electronic failure. The question is how high we anticipate


Daniel

Canon has been making ring motor AF lenses for some 25 years now with very low failure rates. I don't recall ever hearing of an AF failure from Canon while I was selling their equipment.
I don't think a 5% failure rate in 5 years is reasonable, I'd call that a technology fail.
Pentax is flogging this stuff to a group of people who tend to be outdoors a lot taking pictures and not necessarily babying their gear, hence weather sealing and the like.
I know that forums such as this tend to garner the attention of people who have equipment problems more than people who don't, but there are still too many reports of SDM failure to believe that Pentax has put a reliable technology onto the market with SDM AF.
So far, this poll is showing a 30% failure rate.
That's pretty bad.

[Blue]

All electronics have failure rate ( 5 yrs). There is no stats yet on the SDM lens failure rate yet. I personally think 5 % within 5 yrs is reasonable.
I have been waiting on the side line and I only have DA200mm as I have been eyeing FA*200mm for sometime. It was a no brainer as I was prepared to pay $1400 for the FA* version (ebay rate that time).
And DA*200mm is a repackaged FA*200mm plus weather proof and SDM. Even if the SDM fails still it can work as a FA*200mm
I bought DA*200mm $1100.
Maybe we hear too many horror story like that from Peter. But we have to stomach some degree of electronic failure. The question is how high we anticipate


Daniel

That was pretty much the logic I used when deciding on getting the DA* 300mm. I actually considered the DA* 200 as well since it is f2.8, but passed over it since I have the Tamron 180mm.

[sebberry]

Pentax is flogging this stuff to a group of people who tend to be outdoors a lot taking pictures and not necessarily babying their gear, hence weather sealing and the like.

Perhaps the weather sealing on DA* lenses conveys a sense of "ruggedness" too much? I'm sure most of us don't beat on our lenses and usually keep $1,000 lenses in their cases, but perhaps the solid and durable feeling bodies and lenses are misleading people into thinking they can take more than they really can?

[Blue]

Perhaps the weather sealing on DA* lenses conveys a sense of "ruggedness" too much? I'm sure most of us don't beat on our lenses and usually keep $1,000 lenses in their cases, but perhaps the solid and durable feeling bodies and lenses are misleading people into thinking they can take more than they really can?

I don't think that is really the situation. There are always one or 2 guys that flail on anything or the occasional mishap. I also drive rugged vehicles (1990 Bronco that I still drive) and a Jeep Wrangler that is my daily driver. However, I don't go out and turn them over in the woods just because one came with a 4x4 OffRoad decal and the other a TrailRated badge.

Edit: My point was that this may be what some Gomers at Pentax want people to think.

[Wheatfield]

Perhaps the weather sealing on DA* lenses conveys a sense of "ruggedness" too much? I'm sure most of us don't beat on our lenses and usually keep $1,000 lenses in their cases, but perhaps the solid and durable feeling bodies and lenses are misleading people into thinking they can take more than they really can?

Perhaps. My lens proved that sitting in a gadget bag is more than it can take.

[Blue]

Perhaps. My lens proved that sitting in a gadget bag is more than it can take.

You didn't drop the bag off a 5-story building did you?

[Class A]

All electronics have failure rate ( 5 yrs).

The problem with SDM is very likely not electronics related but an ill-designed or too easy to incorrectly install SDM motor mount. If that part fails the motor will try to move the mechanism but can't. If it gets jammed in the process it will die.

Even if the SDM fails still it can work as a FA*200mm

That's not true, unfortunately, for most of us. Only K10D users who are willing to go back to an older firmware or Peter Zack with his magically defunct K20D can use SDM lenses as FA lenses. For all others it means they now have a very capable MF lens (since they cannot turn on screw drive AF to replace SDM).

But we have to stomach some degree of electronic failure.

In general, yes, but since SDM is neither faster than screw drive and nor really silent either, I think a number of users would prefer a reliable screw drive operation rather than spending $1000+ on a lens always wondering if they are going to join the group of people reporting on their SDM troubles.

[sebberry]

Perhaps. My lens proved that sitting in a gadget bag is more than it can take.

Hmm.. perhaps I am being too gentle to mine by setting in on a golden pillow filled with virgin goose feathers every night and singing it a lullaby while gently stroking it right under the AF switch.