Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

View Poll Results: Do the reported SDM failure problems affect your purchasing?
Yes 9676.80%
No 2923.20%
Voters: 125. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-08-2010, 12:13 PM   #106
Senior Member
Alex00's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 294
QuoteOriginally posted by wallyb Quote
You used a strong flash indoors on those baby shots. You do realise that a flash adds to the amount of light in the scene, much like a sun does? So there's absolutely no difference in comparing indoor flash shots to outdoor daylight shots, you just want to pick on something to be obstinate since most people don't take pictures like the ones you posted. Especially since you can hurt such a young baby's eyes with direct flash like that.

Now, onto a real discussion of quality between the 50-135 and, say, the Tamron 70-200/2.8. Here's a picture of very finely detailed treebark that I took with my copy of the Tamron 70-200/2.8 WITH a 1.7x teleconverter attached AND wide open at f/2.8:



I hope you can understand how both of those will lead to potentially poor performance. And as you can see, there is nothing poor about the quality in the above shot.

Or does my subject need eyelashes in order for you to understand?




You wouldn't want to be at a fast-paced sports game with such a slow and unresponsive motor.
You wouldn't want to pay extra for weather sealing if your body isn't also sealed and you don't live in a humid, foggy, rainy area.
You wouldn't want to lose the shot you could've gotten at 200mm by being stuck with a 135mm lens just because you wanted to shave a pound off your gear.
Finally, you have no idea what you're talking about since the Tamron offers a longer range with equal or superior quality and a more reliable motor at a cheaper price.

It's great how you're able to pick and choose on a lens' benefits in order to suit your own view (you really should get a marketing job btw), but if you look at the situation from *anyone's* viewpoint but your own, you start to realise that the 50-135 is hardly the end-all be-all lens, and is less than ideal for most people considering its short warranty period and frequency of SDM failure.


Again, you really seem to have completely missed what the title of this thread is called. It's not "hey that 50-135 sucks it has terrible quality who's with me!", it's "do SDM problems affect your purchasing". And the simple answer to that question for the vast majority of people, no matter how much cheerleading for an inherently faulty lens you might be doing, is "Yes".

Not to mention how your vehement and adamant addiction to boasting SDM being based on just one month of experience with your first SDM lens is the definition of hilarious.
The picture you posted doesn't prove anything. I downloaded and s looked at the image further. Quality is no where comparable. My point and shoot camera can take pictures like this. You can talk all you want, but until you post a indoor headshot , your not comparing apples to apples. Use any source of light as you wish. And you don't need a tripod or pixel peep to get a good photo. I'm surprised no one posted an indoor headshot yet.


Last edited by Alex00; 02-08-2010 at 12:22 PM.
02-08-2010, 12:26 PM   #107
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Untied States
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,882
QuoteOriginally posted by Alex00 Quote
The picture you posted doesn't prove anything. I downloaded and s looked at the image further. Quality is no where comparable. My point and shoot camera can take pictures like this. You can talk all you want, but until you post a indoor headshot, your not comparing apples to apples. Use any source of light as you wish. And you don't need a tripod or pixel peep to get a good photo. I'm surprised no one posted an indoor headshot yet.
I didn't use a tripod either, so I don't know where you imagined that from.

I'm done. The evidence is there and plain to see by anyone with half a brain. Alex00, I wish you nothing but fun and joy with your lens when it craps out on you. And I'm surprised you bought an $800 lens to, clearly, take no kinds of pictures other than ugly "indoor headshots" with the head-on onboard flash, since those are the only ones you are aware of. And if someone does post one, I'm sure you'll say it's not indoors enough, or not enough like your picture. Apples to oranges, right?


Last edited by Damn Brit; 02-08-2010 at 04:08 PM.
02-08-2010, 12:33 PM   #108
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Frozen white North
Photos: Albums
Posts: 845
QuoteOriginally posted by LeDave Quote
Makes me hestitate to buy them. However aside from SDM problems, what's even further preventing me from buying the 16-50 is the optical problems with de-centering. It is also not as sharp as I hoped it to be wide-open, considering it's heavy price-tag compared to the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 which is much sharper.
Same here. It's priced pretty close to the 50-135 and I don't want those sorts of problems. This is just a hobby for me and while I would like a great weather sealed lens in that focal length, I don't want optical problems.
02-08-2010, 12:35 PM   #109
Damn Brit
Guest




Sorry Wally, I have to agree with him. I was the one who challenged Alex and he rose to the occasion.
Put out a call to JSherman someone.

The statistics are staying pretty static with about 75% in the Yes camp. I hope someone from Pentax is seeing this thread.
Personally, I don't care if they come out with a version II of SDM, they would have to extend their warranty period as well to gain my confidence.


Last edited by Damn Brit; 02-08-2010 at 04:11 PM.
02-08-2010, 12:40 PM   #110
Pentaxian
LeDave's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Minneapolis - St. Paul
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,895
QuoteOriginally posted by tokyoso Quote
How does a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 HSM stack up against the Tamron 70-200/2.8?
The Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 is actually optically better than the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM believe it or not. It rivals the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 in optical quality. The Sigma is not as optically good as the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 but by no means is the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 bad at all, all 70-200 f/2.8 from the four companies are optically great regardless of which one you have.
02-08-2010, 12:42 PM   #111
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Iowa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,368
At its price earlier this year plus the k-7 rebate, the DA* 16-50 was a steal, and because of this I didn't mind taking a chance on the SDM. The SDM hasn't failed me yet, and the lens has served me well so far.

However, now that the price has risen on this lens, I would not blame anyone for being hesitant to buy one.
02-08-2010, 12:47 PM   #112
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Untied States
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,882
QuoteOriginally posted by Damn Brit Quote
Sorry Wally, I have to agree with him. I was the one who challenged Alex and he rose to the occasion.
Agree in what case? You can clearly see the shot I posted is razor sharp, just as much so as the Pentax 50-135, and that's with an interfering teleconverter. The other pictures posted before were soft and not impressive, and you commented on those. Did you miss mine? The facts are against you with other tests performed with the Tamron lens. Not to mention that shot I posted was taken at ISO 3200 -- not exactly a friend of sharpness. And it still resolves all the way down to little cracks in the moss on the tree.

And I would be careful aligning myself with anyone who spouts "that's apples to oranges, my pocket camera can take shots just like that" in witness to any image that isn't his own.

Last edited by Damn Brit; 02-08-2010 at 04:11 PM.
02-08-2010, 12:50 PM   #113
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Frozen white North
Photos: Albums
Posts: 845
Let's keep this thread discussing how SDM affects your purchasing decisions and not about posting pics, optical quality, etc...

We know the DA* lenses (when put together properly produce great images) but part of the additional cost of the DA* is the SDM system, which when faulty detracts from the overall performance of the lens.

02-08-2010, 12:58 PM   #114
Damn Brit
Guest




Here's a couple of images from the Tamron 70-200, the second is a crop of the first. Taken wide open at 135mm, I believe some Pentax fans have suggested it was soft from this point on.

135mm f/2.8 1/2000s ISO 400:

crop:


Here is a link to the thread they came from.-https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/38885-tamron-70-200-f-2-8-first-test-shots.html
There is a picture of Jay's son in the first post which is a crop and a good comparison for Alex's shots I think. Bear in mind, these shots were also taken minutes after receiving the lens ion the mail.

There are plenty of other shots in the thread that I think demonstrate the Tamron is easily as good as the 50-135. One downside is it's heavier but what do you expect for that extra reach. It's also FF I believe.
02-08-2010, 01:04 PM   #115
Damn Brit
Guest




I disagree,
The shot isn't a good comparison IMO and there is no detail crop to prove your point. There's no point in offering up an ISO3200 image when you're trying to show a lens at it's best.





QuoteOriginally posted by wallyb Quote
Agree in what case? You can clearly see the shot I posted is razor sharp, just as much so as the Pentax 50-135, and that's with an interfering teleconverter. The other pictures posted before were soft and not impressive, and you commented on those. Did you miss mine? The facts are against you with other tests performed with the Tamron lens. Not to mention that shot I posted was taken at ISO 3200 -- not exactly a friend of sharpness. And it still resolves all the way down to little cracks in the moss on the tree.

And I would be careful aligning myself with anyone who spouts "that's apples to oranges, my pocket camera can take shots just like that" in witness to any image that isn't his own.

Last edited by Damn Brit; 02-08-2010 at 04:12 PM.
02-08-2010, 01:14 PM   #116
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Untied States
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,882
QuoteOriginally posted by Damn Brit Quote
I disagree, .
The shot isn't a good comparison IMO and there is no detail crop to prove your point. There's no point in offering up an ISO3200 image when you're trying to show a lens at it's best.
If you disagree, that's fine, I've given my side and you've given yours. But there's no need to devolve the conversation. And there's no reason to talk about the need for a detailed crop from me with that image, since the full image is provided in a link.

Further, you just made a post with images saying the lens is as good as the 50-135. So what's your aim, just to have an argument? Do you need a nap?

Last edited by Damn Brit; 02-08-2010 at 04:14 PM.
02-08-2010, 01:15 PM   #117
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,255
The bokeh here looks good.

QuoteOriginally posted by Damn Brit Quote
Taken wide open at 135mm, I believe some Pentax fans have suggested it was soft from this point on.
You mean dpreview? Look at their review.

"Indeed if we look solely at the studio optical tests, it is a resounding success, as the technical quality of the images this lens can produce is superb throughout most of the range, matching or even outperforming the much more expensive Canon 70-200mm F2.8 L IS USM. It's slightly soft wide open in the middle of the zoom range (most visibly on the more demanding APS-C/DX sensor format), but stop down a little and the quality really starts to shine through. Resolution is excellent from corner to corner, chromatic aberration is generally very low, and vignetting about average for a lens of this class."

I hadn't realized that dpreview staff were Pentax fans.

Downsampled images don't tell you much about acutance. They may tell you something about bokeh, though.

Here's another interesting part:

"This is compounded by the noise the motor makes, which could be a real problem in situations such as wedding or event photography for which the user wishes to remain unobtrusive; discrete it is not."

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamron_70-200_2p8_c16/page6.asp
02-08-2010, 01:42 PM   #118
Damn Brit
Guest




So put your money where your mouth is a post a detail crop of that image you posted.
02-08-2010, 01:48 PM   #119
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Untied States
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,882
QuoteOriginally posted by Damn Brit Quote
So put your money where your mouth is a post a detail crop of that image you posted.
You mean a full size crop? What's the point in that? Do you understand what a crop is? The full-size image is linked to.
02-08-2010, 01:50 PM   #120
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,255
QuoteOriginally posted by wallyb Quote
You mean a full size crop? What's the point in that? Do you understand what a crop is? The full-size image is linked to.
100% crop or GTFO.
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!
k-mount, pentax lens, sdm, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
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
More SDM problems PentaxPoke Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 128 02-08-2010 06:22 AM
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



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:23 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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