[Ira]

Are you sure it's 100 and not 105? And is it the SMC Pentax or Auto? I have the Auto, and mine is no great shakes.

I'm doing everything I can to get the most out of this lens, and I keep trying, but my 135 just blows it away.

[smcook99]

My initial hope was that it was just that the AF was off because it looked like the pictures were out of focus. The first two pictures of my son were free-handed at 2.8. The first umbrella is 2.8 on tripod and the second umbrella is 5.6 tripod. You can see the texture pop out in the latter and the last is my son free hand at 5.6. In the umbrella test I did f2.8 - f5.6, at full and half zoom, AF and Manual focus hoping to find a common problem and I did, it's the larger the aperture the softer the photo.

If this is something other than how I'm seeing the situation please advise me how to correct what I'm doing wrong. However, with the kit lens, my photos are way sharper so I am leaning toward the lens is incorrectly soft. I ruled out focus because as I said I did a manual vs AF test, as well, later in the day shots at 5.6 and smaller AF were just fine, even on the run.

And please don't think I'm knocking all 3rd party lenses. It's just the the ratio of people complaining about Pentax lens vs 3rd party is so huge I feel I have a higher probability of buying a Pentax without a problem than a Tamron where I read about people getting 2 or 3 in a row bad. I was hoping that they were few and far between when I wagered my money against me getting lucky in this purchase.

Thank you,
-Shawn

[SpecialK]

With all due respect smcook99, this is way too broad a generalization against non-Pentax lenses, considering how many good lenses there are out there (including in the Pentax mount) from Tamron, Sigma, Vivitar, etc. Hopefully you can get your issues worked out.

As a CS manager I hear this reaction all the time. The truth is all manufacturers have gems and duds. Too bad that one did not work out. But read the threads about having to get three Pentax 16-50s to get a good one, or the recent flood of posts about dead SDM motors from Pentax. I'd always make sure I had some trial period with a used lens, however, or at least bring my camera and a laptop to snap off 10 and check them.

[tokyoso]

My initial hope was that it was just that the AF was off because it looked like the pictures were out of focus. The first two pictures of my son were free-handed at 2.8. The first umbrella is 2.8 on tripod and the second umbrella is 5.6 tripod. You can see the texture pop out in the latter and the last is my son free hand at 5.6. In the umbrella test I did f2.8 - f5.6, at full and half zoom, AF and Manual focus hoping to find a common problem and I did, it's the larger the aperture the softer the photo.

If this is something other than how I'm seeing the situation please advise me how to correct what I'm doing wrong. However, with the kit lens, my photos are way sharper so I am leaning toward the lens is incorrectly soft. I ruled out focus because as I said I did a manual vs AF test, as well, later in the day shots at 5.6 and smaller AF were just fine, even on the run.

And please don't think I'm knocking all 3rd party lenses. It's just the the ratio of people complaining about Pentax lens vs 3rd party is so huge I feel I have a higher probability of buying a Pentax without a problem than a Tamron where I read about people getting 2 or 3 in a row bad. I was hoping that they were few and far between when I wagered my money against me getting lucky in this purchase.

Thank you,
-Shawn

You're right. the images you took from your tamron 28-70 2.8 do look very soft. perhaps there was a good reason he wanted to sell it.

[Pentaxor]

My initial hope was that it was just that the AF was off because it looked like the pictures were out of focus. The first two pictures of my son were free-handed at 2.8. The first umbrella is 2.8 on tripod and the second umbrella is 5.6 tripod. You can see the texture pop out in the latter and the last is my son free hand at 5.6. In the umbrella test I did f2.8 - f5.6, at full and half zoom, AF and Manual focus hoping to find a common problem and I did, it's the larger the aperture the softer the photo.

If this is something other than how I'm seeing the situation please advise me how to correct what I'm doing wrong. However, with the kit lens, my photos are way sharper so I am leaning toward the lens is incorrectly soft. I ruled out focus because as I said I did a manual vs AF test, as well, later in the day shots at 5.6 and smaller AF were just fine, even on the run.

And please don't think I'm knocking all 3rd party lenses. It's just the the ratio of people complaining about Pentax lens vs 3rd party is so huge I feel I have a higher probability of buying a Pentax without a problem than a Tamron where I read about people getting 2 or 3 in a row bad. I was hoping that they were few and far between when I wagered my money against me getting lucky in this purchase.

Thank you,
-Shawn

I believe you got a dud. hence, the reason why the former owner sell the lens at such a price. I dunno know, but part of the blame seems to fall on you as well as you weren't vigilant enough to have the lens for a test drive before buying it. I don't want to make you feel bad, but it seems you got suckered big time. I would imagine he has that mischievous grin on his face once he got rid of the lens and got money from a junk lens. if I were you, I would ask for my money back because the seller failed to mention a critical info about the lens.

lessons learned, never buy a used item unless you are able to try it first hand or guarantee something in return if the lens turned out to be defective. be it Pentax or any other 3rd party manufacturer. also, always make sure that the item is "in good or perfect working condition" or does not have any problems. it doesn't matter if the seller states it is brand new or in box condition.

my thoughts regarding Pentax lenses, Pentax does not mean that you'll be free of duds or defective copies. maybe you haven't heard of the dreaded SDM failures of the DA*s yet, but they have a substantial amount of failure rate that cannot be simply ignored. that is apart from decentering or FF/BF issues with the lens. not to mention that you only have a 1 year warranty of such a product which makes it less secured.

[smcook99]

You are right, I got burned. I like to believe the best in people however I'm no fool. My original plan was to meet the guy in the day, test the camera and then purchase, however my schedule got screwed and I ended up meeting him at 11pm at a 711 (my fault) where by I didn't have enough light to really see the issue. I don't know the guy or where he lives it was a craigslist purchase.

The worse part about it is now I can either eat the lens, or have the moral quandry of repeating the dasterdly deed of passing on the lens. Which is something I'm not willing to do. I'm a single dad that stretched for this lens so I could have even nicer captured moments of my son. God help me if I pass the lens on again and someone in an even WORSE situation buys it. NO. I will pray the lens is covered under warranty. If not, I guess I'll wait another year before my budget permits a lens purchase.

[Pentaxor]

You are right, I got burned. I like to believe the best in people however I'm no fool. My original plan was to meet the guy in the day, test the camera and then purchase, however my schedule got screwed and I ended up meeting him at 11pm at a 711 (my fault) where by I didn't have enough light to really see the issue. I don't know the guy or where he lives it was a craigslist purchase.

The worse part about it is now I can either eat the lens, or have the moral quandry of repeating the dasterdly deed of passing on the lens. Which is something I'm not willing to do. I'm a single dad that stretched for this lens so I could have even nicer captured moments of my son. God help me if I pass the lens on again and someone in an even WORSE situation buys it. NO. I will pray the lens is covered under warranty. If not, I guess I'll wait another year before my budget permits a lens purchase.

if it's not covered by warranty, I believe there are known individuals in this forum that know somebody who knows how to fix defective lenses for a very affordable amount. he's is a highly regarded individual in the forum and I think most of the members here knew him pretty well and would send their lenses which have some problems, be it electrical or mechanical. I think the lens assessment is free as well or they just give him a call for disclosing the lens problem. if I'm not mistaken, he's name is Eric.

I also believe that there are good people as well and I have done some purchases in craigslist myself. some of the sellers I dealt with were even happy or willing enough to phone them back if ever I encountered any type of problem with the lenses. some issued a receipt and some included a receipt and some a warranty card for those slightly used lenses. so far, I haven't called back a single person or any one of them. I haven't had any single lens transaction on craigslist where a contact or phone info isn't given, especially if you don't know the individual or meeting him for the first time. it's usually done via 2-way phone communication if both parties agreed to make a transaction. email transactions aren't really that reliable since the other party can just simple ignore your email after the transaction is finished.

eBay, and forum marketplace transactions though is a different story. some people use or get to familiarize with both the buyer and the seller for safety purposes. some rely on the feedback system and I do think that the mods and the administrator are giving their share of monitoring the transactions inorder to avoid any problems and are instrumental in settling disputes, way better than Paypal (). there are a lot of ways that transactions are made here. lens swap or trade(or + money), paypal cheques or any cheques, money orders and paypal credit card. most of the sellers or forum members are great people, but also there are a very few sleazy guys that appear once and disappear the next. I think it has become a rule that a new member involved in a selling or buying transaction is taken with caution due to security concerns. been there and I'm just glad that I'm over that stage long enough and with enough feedback to earn me some trust.

---

Last edited by Pentaxor; 04-04-2010 at 11:59 AM.

[little laker]

You are right, I got burned. I like to believe the best in people however I'm no fool. My original plan was to meet the guy in the day, test the camera and then purchase, however my schedule got screwed and I ended up meeting him at 11pm at a 711 (my fault) where by I didn't have enough light to really see the issue. I don't know the guy or where he lives it was a craigslist purchase.

The worse part about it is now I can either eat the lens, or have the moral quandry of repeating the dasterdly deed of passing on the lens. Which is something I'm not willing to do. I'm a single dad that stretched for this lens so I could have even nicer captured moments of my son. God help me if I pass the lens on again and someone in an even WORSE situation buys it. NO. I will pray the lens is covered under warranty. If not, I guess I'll wait another year before my budget permits a lens purchase.

If I made that mistake I'd contact tamron and ask them if they can fix the lens. If they figure they can send both your camera body, and the lens in for calibration together.
It should cost way less than a replacement lens of equal quality.

[flippedgazelle]

Wow, these shots are really horrible. I hope Tamron's warranty dept. can fix the lens - my one experience with their service was outstanding - 9 days from the date I sent it out via USPS to the day it was on my doorstep.

I have to chide you a little bit though - you've indicated that these shots are very important to you, as they're your son's 2nd Easter. Why on Earth didn't you test out the lens beforehand? I'm not even talking about at the time of sale, but when you got home, test, test, test.

Did the person who sold you the lens include the original receipt, by any chance?

[smcook99]

I tested the lens the first sunlight I had after buying the lens. Which was yesterday, so needless to say when I took my pictures today I had the option of my kit lens or this one no wider than 5.6 so Easter was saved lol, I just wish I could have taken the pictures the way I like with a 2.8 or 3.5 stop.

I didn't even consider that maybe Tamron would repair the lens for a fee. Anyway, I tried to contact the seller but no answer. I have his phone #. I went craigslist vs eBay because there was no shipping time AND since I just finished going through bankruptcy I have not checking account or credit card to facilitate and eBay purchase at the moment.

I got a $450 lens for $300. I honestly would say that the quality is in keeping with an average purchase of a used anything. It's MOSTLY perfect. I just wish I would have know it's soft down to 5.6. I wanted a fast lens so I would have passed but maybe someone who just wanted the range would have bought it knowing it's soft.

I'm mad but like someone said, it's my fault for just snapping a few pictures at night and not REALLY giving it a run through.

[Pentaxor]

I tested the lens the first sunlight I had after buying the lens. Which was yesterday, so needless to say when I took my pictures today I had the option of my kit lens or this one no wider than 5.6 so Easter was saved lol, I just wish I could have taken the pictures the way I like with a 2.8 or 3.5 stop.

I didn't even consider that maybe Tamron would repair the lens for a fee. Anyway, I tried to contact the seller but no answer. I have his phone #. I went craigslist vs eBay because there was no shipping time AND since I just finished going through bankruptcy I have not checking account or credit card to facilitate and eBay purchase at the moment.

I got a $450 lens for $300. I honestly would say that the quality is in keeping with an average purchase of a used anything. It's MOSTLY perfect. I just wish I would have know it's soft down to 5.6. I wanted a fast lens so I would have passed but maybe someone who just wanted the range would have bought it knowing it's soft.

I'm mad but like someone said, it's my fault for just snapping a few pictures at night and not REALLY giving it a run through.

call him again and several times more, if he really doesn't answer, then you and I would know by now that he made a mischief. anyway, if that happens, just think that it's Easter Sunday and the lord has risen and has forgiven us. honestly, my personal issue against UPS had subsided a bit and with less negative vibe. but I'm not saying that I won't pursue my case but would rather be diplomatic rather than be really angry. being angry doesn't give comfort nor gives a good feeling. it just adds to the burden. so taking everything with a light heart and finding a solution is much better rather than concentrate or grieve on the problem. anyways, I still have a few more issues concerning banks, phone services and other stuff that needs contention where the said parties owes something from me rather than me from them. it's not easy but I take it with more patience and good feeling. we do want the universe to shower us with positivity.

[tokyoso]

You are right, I got burned. I like to believe the best in people however I'm no fool. My original plan was to meet the guy in the day, test the camera and then purchase, however my schedule got screwed and I ended up meeting him at 11pm at a 711 (my fault) where by I didn't have enough light to really see the issue. I don't know the guy or where he lives it was a craigslist purchase.

The worse part about it is now I can either eat the lens, or have the moral quandry of repeating the dasterdly deed of passing on the lens. Which is something I'm not willing to do. I'm a single dad that stretched for this lens so I could have even nicer captured moments of my son. God help me if I pass the lens on again and someone in an even WORSE situation buys it. NO. I will pray the lens is covered under warranty. If not, I guess I'll wait another year before my budget permits a lens purchase.

think of it in a positive way, maybe the lens will correct itself by the time you take pictures of your grand children.

[smcook99]

Tamron said it's not covered under warranty because it wasn't purchased from an Authorized Reseller (so much for the Serial verification option they mentioned on their website). They said this is a very common problem with this model and it's a fix repair fee of $140. That being said what I paid + the repair fee would equal a New one from BH and so I could almost justify paying the 140 EXCEPT they only cover repairs for 90 days! I asked, is this a glass problem or an alignment problem and they said alignment which means if its soft because something inside is even the slightest bit lose, after 90 days if it moves again and goes soft I'm out $450 now unless I sink ANOTHER 140 into it. This could become a black-hole of a lens.

Please, people with experience. Once corrected, in your opinion, will this lens go soft again?

[jeffrey r]

Tamron said it's not covered under warranty because it wasn't purchased from an Authorized Reseller (so much for the Serial verification option they mentioned on their website). They said this is a very common problem with this model and it's a fix repair fee of $140. That being said what I paid + the repair fee would equal a New one from BH and so I could almost justify paying the 140 EXCEPT they only cover repairs for 90 days! I asked, is this a glass problem or an alignment problem and they said alignment which means if its soft because something inside is even the slightest bit lose, after 90 days if it moves again and goes soft I'm out $450 now unless I sink ANOTHER 140 into it. This could become a black-hole of a lens.

Please, people with experience. Once corrected, in your opinion, will this lens go soft again?

I know this is a real bummer for you, but if you are not going to pursue this with your seller, then I don't think you have another choice other than paying the $140 with Tamron and getting it fixed up. I've heard positive experiences with Tamron's service department, and from what I have read, they get their lenses fixed up very nicely, whether a possible bigger issue like yours, or just some front focus or back focus.

Many of us are very happy with our Tamron zooms, like the 17-50/2.8 and 28-75/2.8, or even the cheaper 70-300. So they can and should make this lens much better for you, and you'll likely have a top-notch lens ready to serve you for years to come.

[smcook99]

I can only pursue the seller so far. As previously stated, I got taken. Hey, if I knew the guys address you better believe I'd be banging on his door.

And I'm not opposed to investing the other $140 into the lens, it's just that after already getting burned once on the lens I don't want to invest $140 (bring this lens upto brand new purchase price) and in half a year it goes soft and now I have to invest ANOTHER 140 into it. I mean if there is even a minimal chance I'm looking at that possiblity I'd rather just sell the lens with full disclosure and eat the difference. Maybe someone would be happy with a 28-75 F4.5 or F5.6 lens. Me personally, I'm not, I want a wide aperture.

That's why I asked experienced people, if I have them fix this and it comes back to my satisfaction (be it 1 or 2 or x times sent back to Tamron), do they think it could go soft on me again after 90 days or is Fixed; Fixed.