[Pennypunny]

Dear All,

During the past couple of weeks this forum has helped me tremendously in making a decision whether to buy a K5 or not. Many thanks for this.

I finally ordered a K5 at Amazon Germany about a month ago, but returned it due to heavy FF. Other than that, I really liked the camera a lot (especially when compared to my Dad's Canon gear which I use every now and then). So, after the new firmware came out, it was pretty much a no-brainer for me to go ahead and order another copy right away.

I received my new K5 yesterday and must admit that I was slightly disappointed when I found out that it had a rather old serial nr. (3854606). I checked the forum's firmware database and found that virtually all the recent purchases had newer serials.

At the same time I have to say that the camera seems to have no issues, in particular no major stains or necklaces (although the sensor was actually quite dirty, but nothing that wouldn't go away with a bit of cleaning). I didn't test the FF yet but will do so tonight. The firmware was 1.01.

I was hoping to get your opinion on whether the old serial nr. should give me any reason to be concerned and return the camera to ask for a replacement. In particular since I understand that some "older" cameras started to show the stains only after a while.

I am aware that one could easily ask why I would want to return a camera that seems to work just fine. On the other hand the "want-to-have-factor" was a major point in making my purchase decision. Hence, I want my new luxury toy to be in perfect shape all around.

Looking forward to hearing your opinion.

Many thanks,

Ben

[deadwolfbones]

If you don't have any problems, don't be concerned.

[Smeggypants]

I guess we're now seeing what's happening to all those returned K-5s after they've had their sensor replaced

(although the sensor was actually quite dirty,

Brand new camera, the sensor should be spotless.


I wouldn't be happy I must admit

[30v iPentax]

Kannattaa kysyä 4007xxx tai uudenpi, pitäisi olla täysin virheetön.
Kaikki 39xxxxx ovat jonkun kaupiaitten vanhaa varastoa jotka haluavat päästä eroon näistä, kun löytyy sopiva uhri.
Se on varmaa ei Pentax pilaa mainettaan näin halpamaisesti.
Paikallinen maahantuoja voi selvittää mikä on oikea asian tila.

---

Last edited by 30v iPentax; 03-16-2011 at 08:21 AM.

[Adam]

Since the camera's firmware was already updated, it's probably one of the newer ones. Please log the serial number and enjoy!!

[Pennypunny]

Thanks for the answers so far.

I just ran ExifTool and it tells me that Manufacture date was 1/21/2011. Here's the (in my opinion) odd thing: the K5 that I returned because of the FF had a 39xxxx number and according to ExifTool the manufacture date was one day earlier than the "new" one.

Can anyone tell if this means anything (i.e., returned unit with replaced sensor and updated manufacture date)?

Ben

[Couscousdelight]

The same thing appends in France, but only with Amazon. (they return crippled bodies, as seen on many french forums)
You have to contact Pentax Service, and to explain them the situation.
Regards,
Arno

---

Last edited by Couscousdelight; 03-16-2011 at 11:41 AM.

[alexeyga]

FWIW... The replacement copy that I have received also had a rather early 384xx... serial.... back then i've received it with the 1.02 already installed and no signs of ever being touched by anybody... never bothered digging any deeper as it's stain-free, AF is spot on and everything works just the way it should...

[Tom S.]

At the same time I have to say that the camera seems to have no issues, in particular no major stains or necklaces (although the sensor was actually quite dirty, but nothing that wouldn't go away with a bit of cleaning). I didn't test the FF yet but will do so tonight. The firmware was 1.01.

No major stains??? It should have NO STAINS! Did you happen to check the shutter count? It sounds like you may have received either someone else's' return, or a re-manufactured/repaired unit. Like Smeggy, I would not be happy!

[Pennypunny]

Shutter count is ok. While I appreciate that it is a fair statement to say that as long as it works, it shouldn't really matter if it's a replacement or not, I am not exactly happy with what I got. Cant really explain why, but having spent this much money on my new "toy" I want it to be beyond any doubt that I don't get anything used.

[DogLover]

Shutter count is ok. While I appreciate that it is a fair statement to say that as long as it works, it shouldn't really matter if it's a replacement or not, I am not exactly happy with what I got. Cant really explain why, but having spent this much money on my new "toy" I want it to be beyond any doubt that I don't get anything used.

With a mfr. date of 1/21/11, you got a new one.

[Pennypunny]

With a mfr. date of 1/21/11, you got a new one.

I would have thought so too, but as said, the 39xxx model I ordered before had an earlier manufacturing date... Any thoughts on how this could be explained?

@TomS.: when I say no major stains, I mean no stains that won't go away after some cleaning. It still sucks though...

[Cannikin]

I would have thought so too, but as said, the 39xxx model I ordered before had an earlier manufacturing date... Any thoughts on how this could be explained?

Probably a unit that was sent back to Pentax, cleaned and reassembled on the new manufacture date. There have been reports of some people (in Japan) getting back the same serial number as the one they sent in, so they are just replacing/cleaning the internals while leaving the original serial number.

[DogLover]

Do we know that serial #'s are assigned in a strictly linear fashion?

[Quicksand]

Do we know that serial #'s are assigned in a strictly linear fashion?

Right. There's also the possibility that a number of units were in the process of being manufactured when the flaw was discovered, and either reworked in the factory or held for completion until after resolution.