[ricsal]

I can live with the two dots on my sensor but to make me feel easy, today I will go and see the Service center at my place to at least confirm by them. If can do 1 to 1 exchange then it would be great. If cant, then I just use it coz K-5 still rocks my world.

[dexmus]

I can live with the two dots on my sensor but to make me feel easy, today I will go and see the Service center at my place to at least confirm by them. If can do 1 to 1 exchange then it would be great. If cant, then I just use it coz K-5 still rocks my world.

But why should you live with that. If you paid full price, you expect the product to have no visible defects. Pentax needs to fix the camera or give that camera to you at refurbished price.

[WerTicus]

Does anybody here have an electron microscope?

Ahh the internet, when you can ask if anyone has an electron microscope in the 'room' and get a yes answer

[Winder]

Hopefully Pentax will compensate the first adapters is some way shape or form. People paying a premium for a product should receive premium service.

[dgaies]

Ahh the internet, when you can ask if anyone has an electron microscope in the 'room' and get a yes answer

Well, in fairness, I don't actually own the electron microscope.

[Wheatfield]

But why should you live with that. If you paid full price, you expect the product to have no visible defects. Pentax needs to fix the camera or give that camera to you at refurbished price.

The sane thing to do is to ask yourself if this is going to be a problem in your photography.
If the answer is yes (for me it would be, but fortunately, my camera isn't afflicted), then either get an exchange or get a warranty repair.
Now I can say this calmly I suppose because I have a good camera store a few miles from me where I buy my gear.
It isn't Pentax's fault that consumer greed both killed the local retailer and made it pretty much impossible to have an every product checked for defects quality control system.
This stuff is the consumers fault, and look at you all moan now that it's coming back to roost.
This apparent problem is certainly Pentax's fault (or the fault of the sensor supplier if this came out of Sony), but at the end of the day, the underlying cause is consumer driven.

[dgaies]

It isn't Pentax's fault that consumer greed both killed the local retailer and made it pretty much impossible to have an every product checked for defects quality control system.
This stuff is the consumers fault, and look at you all moan now that it's coming back to roost.
This apparent problem is certainly Pentax's fault (or the fault of the sensor supplier if this came out of Sony), but at the end of the day, the underlying cause is consumer driven.

I agree with the overall point you're making. I also fully acknowledge that if Pentax were to hand inspect every camera, and reject each one what had even the slightest hint of an issue, that the camera could easily be several hundred dollar more expensive than it is now. It's a trade-off between being able to buy it at the lowest possible price in exchange for a higher probability of having a potential issue. At the end of the day, whether or not that's a good or bad thing depends on the individual making the purchase. Would you rather spend $1800 and have a <1% chance of getting a defective product or spend $1500 and have a >10% chance of having an issue that might require exchanging/sending the camera back. Personally I prefer the latter, but I also understand that given the current state of things people don't actually have a choice between the two options.

[glanglois]

The sane thing to do is to ask yourself if this is going to be a problem in your photography.
If the answer is yes (for me it would be, but fortunately, my camera isn't afflicted), then either get an exchange or get a warranty repair.

<snip>

One may also ask if this is going to be a problem for resale.

I don't recall a need to shoot at f/22 or f/32 but I'm learning all the time. And I don't plan on taking the K-5 to the grave with me. Spotmatic, yes. But not K-5.

I'd like to get a good copy and simply not worry about only my current photography. I decided to order mine from my local shop (and pay the premium) so I don't have to worry.

But then I'm a bit of a planner by trade - looking for the pitfalls ...

[ricsal]

But why should you live with that. If you paid full price, you expect the product to have no visible defects. Pentax needs to fix the camera or give that camera to you at refurbished price.

Its true what u have said. I agree.

Just return from seeing my distributor and showed them my K-5. They said they only have one similar case. The guy will ask Pentax Japan what to do with this. By next week I would get the answer. So by then i'm still using it. The sad part, if the camera returning to Japan for repairs etc, that would take months. By then its only gonna be me & my MG & Super Program

[Peter Fang]

Hi Falk,

Many thanks for providing us with such an insightful analysis. I think we can now be quite certain about where the dusts/particles/stains are located and it eliminates the possibilities of cleaning them from the outside. This also sort of echoes some preliminary feedback from some local distributors that the stains were not on the outer surface of the AA filter and thus they cannot clean it easily for their customers.

I will give my distributor a call today or tomorrow and see if they have any updates from Pentax.

Peter

[Kenn100D]

Well, in fairness, I don't actually own the electron microscope.

At least its you have one. I guess your right, you have to remove the sensor to fit the chamber. Hope Pentax notice this one and check with sony for the batch in productionj. I believe they have electron microscope at the plant.

[sicyon]

Electron microscopes are usually used for all kinds of samples and are not necessarily a place where I'd stick my sensor. Not to mention that you would most likely just see the top of the stack that Falconeye posted. You'd have to take it apart to see the stains and it's location...

[falconeye]

Does anybody here have an electron microscope? i think we can see the problem more clearly.

While it's a great idea, it's not actually needed.

The particles are pretty large. With reversed lens macroscopy, we should be able to get a very good photograph of the particles.

If the particles have a smile on their face, we would clearly see it

The trick is to mount a, say '50 to the K-5 and a '300 to another camera like a K-7. Then use a reverse filter ring and step rings to connect the two filter rings and cameras.

And then photograph the K-5 inerds (in bulb mode) using the K-7. The '50's focus wheel is used to shift the subject plane to the required location where everything above the sensor surface is easily adjusted.

Because the entire is sealed from light, you have to place a small LED with battery (gift shop article) in the bottom of the K-5 mirror box before mounting the '50.

In the end, you get a 1µm resolution image of the particle making it about 40x40 pixels large. So, a Raynox image is 1/50 of what's feasible with equipment on board.

[Boris]

I've read somewhere (although it was related to cell phones, but I think it applies here even more) that all modern equipment has flaws. That is, if you buy a new cell phone, camera, etc, they would have some problems, be it something like this, or a bit of a body that chips off the K10D or misaligned electronic level or infamous SDM problem. I hardly shoot at f/11 and less, but if you do - it may a problem for you. If not, just be happy and take many pictures... That's my approach.

[raider]

I venture to ask the oz pentaxians if the k-5 we get down under also has this issue?