[Pentaxor]

That is a bit apples and oranges, there's a safety issue with cars that can't be ignored. Ford tried it when there were those tire problems a few years ago and it didn't do them any favours.

Having said that, someone throwing their K20 off the top of the Empire State building in frustration because SDM had just failed on them could be considered a public safety issue.

LOL ! honestly, I thought about that Gary (No, not the empire state building scenario). I know that the car thing is about the safety issues, but the point that I was refering to was irregardless of safety concerns, it does talk about quality issues as well or something to do with solving an existing problem that is caused by defective parts. just because SDM failure is not a threat to human life, that we can just simply disregard it. just imagine your highend celfone, computer, tv's, and any other highend electronic equipment fail within a year and the manufacturer would use the same "no real problems basing from our statistics alibi" and charge for an out of 1 year warranty deal. I don't think that anyone would be glad about that as well.

---

Last edited by Pentaxor; 01-28-2010 at 01:57 AM.

[Rondec]

Perception is reality. As long as people think that SDM is a problem, Pentax will sell fewer lenses with it, even if it is fixed. I don't think they need to do a wide spread recall. Just cover issues that they know exist. The problem is that electronics makers in general think that they have to make electronics good enough to get through the warranty period, however long or short it is. AFter that, you are on your own.

That just doesn't work with lenses.

[steveoliver]

In the UK, I don't know about America or Canada or any other countries, but we have a Sale of Goods Act that quite simply states that a product or service must last a reasonable time. That reasonable time is normally far longer than the "warranty" period which should, though rarely is by consumers here, be a superfluous guarantee. In the UK, the manufacturer's (normally) one year guarantee is seen by the majority of the public, as the only time in which you can get something done about a faulty product when in fact you probably have comeback to the retailer for quite a significant period afterwards. For a TV you could easily say at least 5 years, depending on use, a lens would be shorter, but I'd certainly still claim after 3 years had elapsed... Of course the retailers love saying "it's out of warranty", and then you enter the "under of the Sale of Goods Act I think you'll find that..." dah-de-dah-de-dah...!!

[builttospill]

...I just heard on the news that Toyota had recalled about a million cars due to defects. atleast that company had what it takes to value their customers. I even liked it when they even issue an explanation and not leave the general public in the dark about it. why can't Pentax say the same thing? atleast people would respect a brand which is honest about it's product. I'm sure people would still buy a Toyota since it's apparent that they are going to do something about it.

as far as the argument that Toyota is a big company, doesn't really matter. Tamron and Sigma are not bigger than Pentax, but they offer services that are much more customer friendly and efficient.

It's a bit more complicated than that, I'm afraid. Toyota halted sales and issued the third recall after pressure from the US federal government. The first recall was for floor mats in five vehicles, the second was for the gas pedal, and the third was also for the gas pedal affecting 8 vehicles. Toyota may not have issued those recalls without pressure from the government and federal investigations.

So it's not so easy with Pentax. I don't know who would launch an investigation, and I don't know who would apply pressure for a lens recall (unless anybody has friends at Hoya).

Tamron and Sigma are hopefully making money. A struggling company doesn't have the funds for a widespread recall. I don't care if Toyota is a big company or a small company. If they weren't profitable a recall like that would have killed them.

[Oggy]

Now please would everyone who has an SDM lens and not had a problem with it post to say there is nothing wrong with them. One post per person per lens.

[asdf]

Now please would everyone who has an SDM lens and not had a problem with it post to say there is nothing wrong with them. One post per person per lens.

It would be interesting to see a poll on *how long* it took for the motor to die.

Now please would everyone who has an SDM lens and not had a problem with it post to say there is nothing wrong with them. One post per person per lens.

So shall we have them give us daily, weekly or monthly updates?

What you say makes no difference to the current perception. I suspect that the apologists actually achieve the opposite of what they set out to do when they make comments like the one you have just made because they draw attention to the manufacturers silence on the matter and also by prolonging the discussion. It wouldn't matter how many people posted to say their lens hasn't had problems...YET, I doubt if it would change the minds of those who have said they won't buy an SDM lens for the reasons given. It certainly won't stop people talking about the failures and I'm pretty sure we haven't heard about the last failure.

BTW your sig draws more attention to the problem than anything we are saying.

---

Last edited by Damn Brit; 01-30-2010 at 12:05 AM.

[photographyrich1965]

My long dead 50-135 is A/F again after a year of slumber. Had to pickup a K10D and install the old firmware but it never felt so good to hear the screw drive motor whir again ! Pentax needs to give users the option on newer bodies.

[Pentaxor]

Now please would everyone who has an SDM lens and not had a problem with it post to say there is nothing wrong with them. One post per person per lens.

actually some of the people who had the SDM lenses had openly defended it til they themselves got into the same situation,and later changed their minds and are now part of the stupid damn motor (SDM) bash club.

[juu]

Now please would everyone who has an SDM lens and not had a problem with it post to say there is nothing wrong with them. One post per person per lens.

That would show little, the expected failure rate isn't 50%.

[Rondec]

I have two SDM lenses -- one has worked fine for about eighteen months, one gave up the ghost at about 8 months after purchase. They both work fine now. There is just a constant concern, though, in using these that they will quit working one day. As Gary says, if I posted once a week that my lenses were still working, it wouldn't help the situation any, in fact it seems denial not believe that there is some underlying issue that will crop up for a good percentage of these lenses.

[brecklundin]

Lemme see, I bought ONE SDM lens last July I believe, it began to fail inside of 3-weeks, I returned it to the retailer and got a full refund. What are the odds I will EVER go near another SDM lens until this issue is resolved AND whatever replaces the current SDM design proves reliable. Until that time, the fact I bought a K20D to take advantage of the weather sealing is rendered moot since there are only two non DA* WR lenses, well three counting the new DFA 100mm Macro which I have zero interest in.

Basically, I feel, one of the major reasons I switched to Pentax, the weather sealing at an affordable price with some nice top of the line sealed lenses, now makes me wonder why I bothered. I mean it's not like I am gonna drag out the FA Limiteds in the rain, snow or whatever. Yeah, they are probably safe enough under mild wet conditions for a SHORT period of exposure, but to me it's not worth the risk.

So, given that my one experience with SDM ended is swift failure and I bought the thing aware some lenses had an issue but there were certain members here who claimed it was blown out of proportion, who was wrong? And, I am also not in the mood to sort through half a dozen 16-50's in order to find one w/o any of it's myriad of issues other than the potential for SDM failure in about a year...so, my single experience combined with people who are now reporting early failures (anywhere from a few months to a couple years is too soon, way too soon) which do not in the slightest depend on high use rates, in fact many who report problems report having not uses the lens(es) much at all.

And to make it worse are the reports of the lenses having random episodes of failure only to suddenly return to life...talk about Pavlovian conditioning to be afraid when even looking at an SDM lense...chaotic negative feedback conditioning baby, works every time...

Naw....no problem...let it go just keep paying for the repairs every year or two for a lens you shoot maybe 500 shots/yr with...and paid around a grand or more to buy...

[PentaxPoke]

So, given that my one experience with SDM ended is swift failure and I bought the thing aware some lenses had an issue but there were certain members here who claimed it was blown out of proportion, who was wrong?

You gettin' this Oggy???




(And for our white k-m owners )

[Rondec]

Part of the problem is that rather than turn in SDM failures to Pentax immediately, the lenses are returned to dealers to be resold to someone else. The store should be obligated to return the lens for fixing if there are optical or functional problems with it, not wait for someone else and then hope they don't notice in the return window period.

[brecklundin]

Part of the problem is that rather than turn in SDM failures to Pentax immediately, the lenses are returned to dealers to be resold to someone else. The store should be obligated to return the lens for fixing if there are optical or functional problems with it, not wait for someone else and then hope they don't notice in the return window period.

Just a question I took your comment to be a general state of online buying not that my returning the defective item to the place of purchase part of any problem? Does Pentax not tell us to return items to the retailer rather than send them in for repair? Or was that just the bodies? I could have just transfered that info over. Plus I sure as hell do not want an $800 purchase to spend the 4th through 13th week in the repair shop...that is far from right.

I can promise you my return was because the lense was defective and I gave that reason for the return and that was the basis on which it was granted even though my retailer had a no questions asked return policy.

But from there absolutely, so many retailers are not sending defective/failed items back to the mfg for proper inspection, repair/refurbishment or disassembly for parts that I am almost to the point of not wanting to buy online from some retailers anymore. Only those I have done business with for a number of years.

But, I don't think that many defective SDM lenses are being returned to new stock because most are failing well into their first year or slightly after, or so it seems anyway...in other products maybe, my failed 50-135 would have been the perfect example of a cosmetically perfect item that was not always showing the signs of failure...it was intermittent but there...so I could see some poor schmuck getting it as new. THAT is si beyond wrong & unethical, and sadly seems to fast becoming common practice because of the move to online sales where nobody gets to actually handle the exact item you are buying.

It's just a mess all around...I really wish it would change...but the way corps are run these days, I don't think I'll hold my breath.