Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

RBellavance · 12-01-2009, 09:47 AM

I really don't understand why Pentax went with SDM. The only "advantage" I can think of is that it is silent. By all accounts, it is not faster than screw-driven AF - in fact, it is generally slower in my experience.

It is too bad that Pentaxians are "forced" into SDM for the DA* lenses. The DA*16-50 and 50-135 may well be stellar optically, but there is no way I would buy either of them with the current SDM incarnation (and that's without considering the reports of failure - I'm not paying extra to get a slower-focusing lens, however silent it may be).

I really hope Pentax steps backs and either stops deploying SDM to new lenses, or comes up with a new implementation that has tangible advantages over screw-drive and is reliable.

reeftool · 12-01-2009, 10:34 AM

I don't see how Pentax can continue to ignore this issue. The price increases last spring put the hold on a couple of lens purchases I was looking at and right now I'm feeling maybe it was a good thing as one of the lenses I wanted was the 17-70. I feel relieved. No matter how sharp the lens is, an AF lens is worthless if the AF is unreliable and likely to fail. I can buy a just as sharp manual lens for 1/4 the price.

PentaxPoke · 12-01-2009, 11:57 AM

Originally posted by RBellavance

I really don't understand why Pentax went with SDM. The only "advantage" I can think of is that it is silent. By all accounts, it is not faster than screw-driven AF - in fact, it is generally slower in my experience.

I really hope Pentax steps backs and either stops deploying SDM to new lenses, or comes up with a new implementation that has tangible advantages over screw-drive and is reliable.

I agree. SDM is definitely slower, and the only advantage is that it is quiet. As I have said before, I think the SDM was a "me too" product. If they hadn't come out with lens motors, reviewers would lament "how Pentax is behind in technology because they don't have hyper-super-ultra sonic lens motors."

Pentax Limited lenses are the best built lenses I have ever used, and not once in my life have I ever heard anyone comment on their sound. I wish the DA*'s were built like Limiteds. They sure are priced like them!

jeffrey r · 12-01-2009, 02:30 PM

I still find it truly amazing that Pentax is not publicly acknowledging anything regarding SDM failures. If it is truly as rare as they say it is, then they should have no problem stepping up for the "few" people that have had failures and reparing or replacing the SDM motors at no cost, no questions asked. If it is as pervasive as has frankly become all too apparent, then they should step up and fix what is clearly a manufacturing defect, again at no cost, no questions asked.

I have two Tamron zooms (17-50 and 28-75), several DA limiteds, and other lenses, and I've never had any issue with any of them where they simply would not focus. Now my 50-135 on the other hand, which has simply amazing IQ I might add, works on the first try after mounting about 50% of the time. Removing it and mounting it again, or cleaning the contacts, or whatever else I may try to get it going again, often works, but why should this expensive and stellar lens only work properly 50% of the time (separate from the slower SDM focusing in general).

And having bought it used, and it clearly being out of warranty by now, I'd have to pay several hundred dollars to get it fixed. That is just silly. Oh well, we'll see what happens, but this is still perplexing behavior from Pentax. Many of us are very loyal to the brand.

**Ash** · 12-01-2009, 03:30 PM

Originally posted by jeffrey r

Many of us are very loyal to the brand.

Or blissfully brainwashed.

To me the DA*s are not enough of a reason to ditch the brand as a whole. There's so much else going good in Pentax - even if for the Limited series alone.

Class A · 01-12-2010, 04:11 PM

Originally posted by Ash

My statement sent to them a few weeks ago:
...

If you uploaded that as a petition to PetitionOnline.com - Free Online Petition Hosting I'd sign it in a heartbeat. Very well written!

PentaxPoke · 01-22-2010, 11:48 PM

I just saw this posted on another forum, and realized that it was copied from our forum here in this thread. We should keep a running thread count!

Originally posted by Russell-Evans

paulelescoces · 01-23-2010, 11:21 AM

Pentaxpoke, whats the value in resurrecting another Anti-SDM post.... on the front page of the Lens discussion forum there are already 3 others.
I do realise the others were initiated by other users but it almost looks as if you are purposfully juggling to have all these threads (you are involved in them all... even thought you started this one) at the top of the list... create mass hysteria.
I am not suggesting this is not an issue currently for many users (although I and others dont have any issues... yet), however having multiple running threads (with typically the same group of people commenting on each) leads to the hysteria....

Pentaxor · 01-23-2010, 12:08 PM

Originally posted by paulelescoces

Pentaxpoke, whats the value in resurrecting another Anti-SDM post.... on the front page of the Lens discussion forum there are already 3 others.
I do realise the others were initiated by other users but it almost looks as if you are purposfully juggling to have all these threads (you are involved in them all... even thought you started this one) at the top of the list... create mass hysteria.
I am not suggesting this is not an issue currently for many users (although I and others dont have any issues... yet), however having multiple running threads (with typically the same group of people commenting on each) leads to the hysteria....

all who have experienced SDM failures are involved in such threads because they are the ones who have experienced such case which would confirm that there really is a problem. otherwise it would be pointless if most, if not all people that don't have experienced any problem participated in such thread and could easily be dismissed as a rumour.

IMO, such threads are worth the trouble since this isn't just a rumour. besides, such threads are also helpful in making the newbies or people who haven't tried the SDM zooms aware of such problems. this is not a hatchet job, but a way of preventing the uninitiated of undergoing such trouble and also a way to get Pentax's attention that there are people that are unhappy with their "premium grade lenses" that cannot be simply ignored.

if such threads leads to a mass hysteria, then the blame should be on Pentax since they are the ones who created such unsatisfaction or problems in the first place.

you can't blame a Mcdonald's customer for complaining about his rotten meal. honestly, Pentax insensitive reply made the situation much worse by playing dumb and innocent.

PentaxPoke · 01-23-2010, 12:44 PM

Originally posted by paulelescoces

Pentaxpoke, whats the value in resurrecting another Anti-SDM post.... on the front page of the Lens discussion forum there are already 3 others.
I do realise the others were initiated by other users but it almost looks as if you are purposfully juggling to have all these threads (you are involved in them all... even thought you started this one) at the top of the list... create mass hysteria.
I am not suggesting this is not an issue currently for many users (although I and others dont have any issues... yet), however having multiple running threads (with typically the same group of people commenting on each) leads to the hysteria....

Paul,
You are free to ignore my posts. I am not forcing you to read anything. We come to forums to learn, and to talk about what is important to us. I try to make the titles of my threads very clear and easy to quickly interpret so that people who are interested will click, and people who are not, will ignore. I have participated in the SDM threads because they are of interest to me. I have also participated in many other threads. I suggest that you may find your forum time more enjoyable, if you focus on the topics that are of interest to you.

**Ash** · 01-23-2010, 01:00 PM

Originally posted by paulelescoces

Pentaxpoke, whats the value in resurrecting another Anti-SDM post.... on the front page of the Lens discussion forum there are already 3 others.
I do realise the others were initiated by other users but it almost looks as if you are purposfully juggling to have all these threads (you are involved in them all... even thought you started this one) at the top of the list... create mass hysteria.
I am not suggesting this is not an issue currently for many users (although I and others dont have any issues... yet), however having multiple running threads (with typically the same group of people commenting on each) leads to the hysteria....

It's up to the reader to keep a level head about what's posted in fora, Paul.
You must realise that fora are where every minute detail about issues are scrutinised, commonly to the point of exaggeration or pedantry. People must be responsible enough to react appropriately to what they read.

This anti-SDM sentiment (if you wish to call it that) is very real, though, not just overreaction, and will only get worse if Pentax avoids acknowledging that all these failures are not a significant issue. What the list of threads CAN do, though, is provide some (albeit unverified) evidence to attest that SDM failures are disproportionately common and a major concern to the potential customer.

But hey, I have an SDM lens myself and I'm pleased with it (apart from it being a bit of a slouch) - so why would someone like me pick a bone with Pentax? Well, it's not about me. It's about seeing a prevalent problem sorted out both for the benefit of the consumer as well as the company.

Class A · 01-23-2010, 08:11 PM

While I see all the points made in response to Paul's post, I'd like to state that he has a point. He simply asked whether it is justified to create an SDM hysteria, if that was the intention of resurrecting an old thread. Telling Paul to read other posts misses this point.

A hysteria is characterised by an disproportional reaction. If someone actively tried to keep the anti-SDM fire burning (I'm not claiming anyone does), that could well be a disproportional reaction to some SDM failure reports.

I personally became a lot more wary about ever touching a current generation SDM zoom because of all the SDM threads. Whether that's a good thing, justified, or an irrational reaction, I don't know.

The worst thing, after the failures to users just out of the warranty period, is really the lack of response we're getting from officials. And if we get one (like the one Ash quoted) then it says something along the lines of "I respect pentaxforums..." to then continue with statements that show that there is no respect at all.

PentaxPoke · 01-23-2010, 08:34 PM

Sorry about that. The only reason I "resurrected" this thread is that I noticed someone posted Russel's list on another forum. Russell's list came from this thread. I didn't think that posting that was fomenting hysteria. I also don't believe it is a disproportionate response.

I think a disproportionate response would be to do something silly like sue Pentax for all of the shipping charges I am out because I had to send 5 lenses back.

Russell-Evans · 01-23-2010, 10:33 PM

Originally posted by Class A

While I see all the points made in response to Paul's post, I'd like to state that he has a point. He simply asked whether it is justified to create an SDM hysteria,

Is the concern over creating hysteria valid or is this just another way to try to tell people to shut up?

Thank you
Russell

wwwmorrell · 01-23-2010, 10:50 PM

Its not hysteria ??? if youre the one stuck with a faulty lens.

01-23-2010, 08:11 PM	#72
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	While I see all the points made in response to Paul's post, I'd like to state that he has a point. He simply asked whether it is justified to create an SDM hysteria, if that was the intention of resurrecting an old thread. Telling Paul to read other posts misses this point. A hysteria is characterised by an disproportional reaction. If someone actively tried to keep the anti-SDM fire burning (I'm not claiming anyone does), that could well be a disproportional reaction to some SDM failure reports. I personally became a lot more wary about ever touching a current generation SDM zoom because of all the SDM threads. Whether that's a good thing, justified, or an irrational reaction, I don't know. The worst thing, after the failures to users just out of the warranty period, is really the lack of response we're getting from officials. And if we get one (like the one Ash quoted) then it says something along the lines of "I respect pentaxforums..." to then continue with statements that show that there is no respect at all. Last edited by Class A; 01-23-2010 at 08:16 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Do SDM problems affect your purchasing	axl	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	167	04-25-2010 02:12 AM
DA*50-135mm f2.8 SDM Problems / No Problem	rustynail925	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	30	03-22-2010 06:08 PM
Uh oh, I think my 17-70mm SDM is having problems	Big G	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	30	02-17-2010 02:23 PM
Is there alot of problems with the SDM AF motor?	NorthPentax	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	01-30-2009 12:29 PM
AF problems with SDM lenses on K20D?	tcom	Pentax DSLR Discussion	19	07-18-2008 07:55 AM

12-01-2009, 09:47 AM	#61
RBellavance Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Near Montréal, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,716	I really don't understand why Pentax went with SDM. The only "advantage" I can think of is that it is silent. By all accounts, it is not faster than screw-driven AF - in fact, it is generally slower in my experience. It is too bad that Pentaxians are "forced" into SDM for the DA* lenses. The DA*16-50 and 50-135 may well be stellar optically, but there is no way I would buy either of them with the current SDM incarnation (and that's without considering the reports of failure - I'm not paying extra to get a slower-focusing lens, however silent it may be). I really hope Pentax steps backs and either stops deploying SDM to new lenses, or comes up with a new implementation that has tangible advantages over screw-drive and is reliable.

12-01-2009, 10:34 AM	#62
reeftool Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Upstate New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,555	I don't see how Pentax can continue to ignore this issue. The price increases last spring put the hold on a couple of lens purchases I was looking at and right now I'm feeling maybe it was a good thing as one of the lenses I wanted was the 17-70. I feel relieved. No matter how sharp the lens is, an AF lens is worthless if the AF is unreliable and likely to fail. I can buy a just as sharp manual lens for 1/4 the price.

12-01-2009, 11:57 AM	#63
PentaxPoke Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Oklahoma Posts: 1,411 Original Poster	Originally posted by RBellavance I really don't understand why Pentax went with SDM. The only "advantage" I can think of is that it is silent. By all accounts, it is not faster than screw-driven AF - in fact, it is generally slower in my experience. I really hope Pentax steps backs and either stops deploying SDM to new lenses, or comes up with a new implementation that has tangible advantages over screw-drive and is reliable. I agree. SDM is definitely slower, and the only advantage is that it is quiet. As I have said before, I think the SDM was a "me too" product. If they hadn't come out with lens motors, reviewers would lament "how Pentax is behind in technology because they don't have hyper-super-ultra sonic lens motors." Pentax Limited lenses are the best built lenses I have ever used, and not once in my life have I ever heard anyone comment on their sound. I wish the DA*'s were built like Limiteds. They sure are priced like them!

12-01-2009, 02:30 PM	#64
jeffrey r Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: New Jersey, USA Posts: 337	I still find it truly amazing that Pentax is not publicly acknowledging anything regarding SDM failures. If it is truly as rare as they say it is, then they should have no problem stepping up for the "few" people that have had failures and reparing or replacing the SDM motors at no cost, no questions asked. If it is as pervasive as has frankly become all too apparent, then they should step up and fix what is clearly a manufacturing defect, again at no cost, no questions asked. I have two Tamron zooms (17-50 and 28-75), several DA limiteds, and other lenses, and I've never had any issue with any of them where they simply would not focus. Now my 50-135 on the other hand, which has simply amazing IQ I might add, works on the first try after mounting about 50% of the time. Removing it and mounting it again, or cleaning the contacts, or whatever else I may try to get it going again, often works, but why should this expensive and stellar lens only work properly 50% of the time (separate from the slower SDM focusing in general). And having bought it used, and it clearly being out of warranty by now, I'd have to pay several hundred dollars to get it fixed. That is just silly. Oh well, we'll see what happens, but this is still perplexing behavior from Pentax. Many of us are very loyal to the brand.

12-01-2009, 03:30 PM	#65
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Originally posted by jeffrey r Many of us are very loyal to the brand. Or blissfully brainwashed. To me the DA*s are not enough of a reason to ditch the brand as a whole. There's so much else going good in Pentax - even if for the Limited series alone.

01-12-2010, 04:11 PM	#66
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by Ash My statement sent to them a few weeks ago: ... If you uploaded that as a petition to PetitionOnline.com - Free Online Petition Hosting I'd sign it in a heartbeat. Very well written!

01-22-2010, 11:48 PM	#67
PentaxPoke Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Oklahoma Posts: 1,411 Original Poster	I just saw this posted on another forum, and realized that it was copied from our forum here in this thread. We should keep a running thread count! Originally posted by Russell-Evans I couldn't find that thread, but I did find these. Sophie Wilson Help! Dead DA* 50-135 SDM or dead K10D???: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review HonourableTyr Perfect DA16-50 Not so perfect anymore :'(: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review robt61x49 Problem w/ DA50-135: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Rupert60 My DA50-135 is Dead!: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review paul_do K20D+DA 50-135mm is amazing: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Larry Paris DA300 Auto focus stopped working - Help!: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review janneman02 SDM issue????: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Dale108 DA 50-135 SDM Failure: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Eric C in OK Re: SDM issue????: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review LKeithR Another Failing 50-135: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review psu28k 50-135 SDM woes: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Reg Quiring DA* 50-135 SDM Failed- Other Canucks?: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review rogerstpierre SDM Problems...: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review inferno10 Help Ned! Replacement 16-50 has to go back after just receiving it!: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review faither Another Dead SDM in My DA* 50-135: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Jim King Finally experienced an SDM failure...: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Neil Morgan yes - 16-50 (sometimes) , 50-135 - no: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review dick eduard 16-50 sometimes-; 50-135 - no; 60-250 no: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review shane gerrish 16-50 yes: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Zevon 16-50 Yes 60-250 No: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review mnovikov 50-135 no, 16-50 yes (fixed) n/t: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review hanssont 200-yes 300-no 60-250 no 16-50 no 50-135 no 55 no: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Cideway 16-50 (2yrs) No, 50-135 (1.5yrs) yes, 60-250 (3mths) No: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review ropen 0.5 out of 4: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review HotJapaneseCamera Yes, 16-50 (2nd ex.) No, 50-135: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Mike V99 16-50 YES, 50-135 No (as in Not Yet): Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review sinus007 16-50 - yes, 50-135 - no [nt]: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Joseph Tainter Yes--16-50: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review JoeLim Yes, 16-50 (9 months) & 50-135 (6 months). 300 (3 months) No: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review PentaxPoke Yes 16-50: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Paul_E 16-50 x 2, no SDM failure; 50-135, yes; DA300, no failure.: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Lance Re: My 17-70 SDM Died :( ... has come back to life !!: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review gerard boulanger Got a repair estimate for my 3 faulty SDM lenses ....: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review flash1100 Took the DA17-70 in today...: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review AndresEE 50-135: 2 x YES: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review A Schamber One... out of two.: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review DarylK Second 50-135 failed: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review AlbertSiegel Re: Second 50-135 failed: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review John Shakespeare Mine died also, but within warranty...: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review RobertBarnett Re: DA16-50 problem: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review WildSammy Re: DA16-50 problem too!: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review picsbydan Re: 50-135 SDM woes: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Paul_E Re: 50-135 SDM woes: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review roxalo Re: How much was the fee if you don't mind me asking?: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Anilla DA 16-50 SDM problems: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review ZorKa My lens has the same problem...: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review magicone New DA50-135 won't focus w/K10 or K20: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Pakhead Re: More experience with SDM problems: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review FranckB 17-70: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Moosemilk 8 problematic lenses reported in this thread so far.: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Thank you Russell

01-23-2010, 11:21 AM	#68
paulelescoces Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Switzerland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 252	Pentaxpoke, whats the value in resurrecting another Anti-SDM post.... on the front page of the Lens discussion forum there are already 3 others. I do realise the others were initiated by other users but it almost looks as if you are purposfully juggling to have all these threads (you are involved in them all... even thought you started this one) at the top of the list... create mass hysteria. I am not suggesting this is not an issue currently for many users (although I and others dont have any issues... yet), however having multiple running threads (with typically the same group of people commenting on each) leads to the hysteria....

01-23-2010, 12:08 PM	#69
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by paulelescoces Pentaxpoke, whats the value in resurrecting another Anti-SDM post.... on the front page of the Lens discussion forum there are already 3 others. I do realise the others were initiated by other users but it almost looks as if you are purposfully juggling to have all these threads (you are involved in them all... even thought you started this one) at the top of the list... create mass hysteria. I am not suggesting this is not an issue currently for many users (although I and others dont have any issues... yet), however having multiple running threads (with typically the same group of people commenting on each) leads to the hysteria.... all who have experienced SDM failures are involved in such threads because they are the ones who have experienced such case which would confirm that there really is a problem. otherwise it would be pointless if most, if not all people that don't have experienced any problem participated in such thread and could easily be dismissed as a rumour. IMO, such threads are worth the trouble since this isn't just a rumour. besides, such threads are also helpful in making the newbies or people who haven't tried the SDM zooms aware of such problems. this is not a hatchet job, but a way of preventing the uninitiated of undergoing such trouble and also a way to get Pentax's attention that there are people that are unhappy with their "premium grade lenses" that cannot be simply ignored. if such threads leads to a mass hysteria, then the blame should be on Pentax since they are the ones who created such unsatisfaction or problems in the first place. you can't blame a Mcdonald's customer for complaining about his rotten meal. honestly, Pentax insensitive reply made the situation much worse by playing dumb and innocent.

01-23-2010, 12:44 PM	#70
PentaxPoke Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Oklahoma Posts: 1,411 Original Poster	Originally posted by paulelescoces Pentaxpoke, whats the value in resurrecting another Anti-SDM post.... on the front page of the Lens discussion forum there are already 3 others. I do realise the others were initiated by other users but it almost looks as if you are purposfully juggling to have all these threads (you are involved in them all... even thought you started this one) at the top of the list... create mass hysteria. I am not suggesting this is not an issue currently for many users (although I and others dont have any issues... yet), however having multiple running threads (with typically the same group of people commenting on each) leads to the hysteria.... Paul, You are free to ignore my posts. I am not forcing you to read anything. We come to forums to learn, and to talk about what is important to us. I try to make the titles of my threads very clear and easy to quickly interpret so that people who are interested will click, and people who are not, will ignore. I have participated in the SDM threads because they are of interest to me. I have also participated in many other threads. I suggest that you may find your forum time more enjoyable, if you focus on the topics that are of interest to you.

01-23-2010, 01:00 PM	#71
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Originally posted by paulelescoces Pentaxpoke, whats the value in resurrecting another Anti-SDM post.... on the front page of the Lens discussion forum there are already 3 others. I do realise the others were initiated by other users but it almost looks as if you are purposfully juggling to have all these threads (you are involved in them all... even thought you started this one) at the top of the list... create mass hysteria. I am not suggesting this is not an issue currently for many users (although I and others dont have any issues... yet), however having multiple running threads (with typically the same group of people commenting on each) leads to the hysteria.... It's up to the reader to keep a level head about what's posted in fora, Paul. You must realise that fora are where every minute detail about issues are scrutinised, commonly to the point of exaggeration or pedantry. People must be responsible enough to react appropriately to what they read. This anti-SDM sentiment (if you wish to call it that) is very real, though, not just overreaction, and will only get worse if Pentax avoids acknowledging that all these failures are not a significant issue. What the list of threads CAN do, though, is provide some (albeit unverified) evidence to attest that SDM failures are disproportionately common and a major concern to the potential customer. But hey, I have an SDM lens myself and I'm pleased with it (apart from it being a bit of a slouch) - so why would someone like me pick a bone with Pentax? Well, it's not about me. It's about seeing a prevalent problem sorted out both for the benefit of the consumer as well as the company.

01-23-2010, 08:34 PM	#73
PentaxPoke Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Oklahoma Posts: 1,411 Original Poster	Sorry about that. The only reason I "resurrected" this thread is that I noticed someone posted Russel's list on another forum. Russell's list came from this thread. I didn't think that posting that was fomenting hysteria. I also don't believe it is a disproportionate response. I think a disproportionate response would be to do something silly like sue Pentax for all of the shipping charges I am out because I had to send 5 lenses back.

01-23-2010, 10:33 PM	#74
Russell-Evans Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,553	Originally posted by Class A While I see all the points made in response to Paul's post, I'd like to state that he has a point. He simply asked whether it is justified to create an SDM hysteria, Is the concern over creating hysteria valid or is this just another way to try to tell people to shut up? Thank you Russell

01-23-2010, 10:50 PM	#75
wwwmorrell Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Mount Buller, Australia Posts: 397	Its not hysteria ??? if youre the one stuck with a faulty lens.

More SDM problems

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!