[Class A]

Personally, I don't even think the Zeiss are as good, though I haven't had the pleasure of using them lately.

I reckon they are better in some ways and potentially worse in others. I don't really know.

I am not saying one can never get a bad Pentax lens, but the chance is way less.

I'm not convinced that third-party QC is worse than Pentax QC. Probably it depends on the lens model. The Pentax 16-50 hasn't got a great reputation regarding decentering, DPRreview couldn't get a single DA* 55/1.4 copy that didn't have issues (they tried three times from a UK distributor who knew what the lenses were for), and many people try to avoid the Vietnam-made Ltds (unfortunately, every new Ltd is made in Vietnam). Whether the latter is justified, I don't know.
The Pentax SDM horror stories might have been blown out of proportion but I've never heard anything like it about Sigma HSM.

Yes, it is a pain to being forced to send a lens back but it is not impossible and I'm not convinced that the Pentax track record is significantly better across all models.

[falconeye]

But you do need to choose these lenses to get near the FA Limiteds.

I think you're both right.

Sometimes, people ask the question that, if Sony FF is only a few hundred bucks mor expensive than APSC, why on earth then it isn't performing like hell?

And besides ergonomics and some dynamic range deficits of Sony's first full frame sensor, the lack of affordable glass must be the #1 barrier (ignoring the 27 Sigma lenses of course -- e.g., the 70/2.8 would be a viable alternative for the Zeiss 85/1.4 ). But 3rd party glass is normally ignored when deciding to invest into a system and there are good reasons to do so.


In terms of affordable full frame glass, only Canikon and Pentax are viable alternatives.

[rparmar]

I'm not convinced that third-party QC is worse than Pentax QC.

I am convinced. The DA*16-50 is a notable exception that a lot of noise was made about. And Zeiss might be the third party exception. But not enough people buy and report on their lenses to get a similar statistical sample.

[gazonk]

I am convinced. The DA*16-50 is a notable exception that a lot of noise was made about. And Zeiss might be the third party exception. But not enough people buy and report on their lenses to get a similar statistical sample.

I'm not quite sure after I had to service my da 70 because of three screws that weren't properly fastened.

[rparmar]

That is a statistical sample of one. How many others have reported this same issue?

[gazonk]

That is a statistical sample of one. How many others have reported this same issue?

Well, someone here showed a picture of a disintegrated da70, I wonder if that was due to similar errors in the pentax factory?

Still, rationally, I agree with you. Can't help that my confidence was hurt, though.

[thibs]

Thanks ClassA for a900 WR report.
That's a nice point for that camera though I'm not going Sony any day.

[rparmar]

Still, rationally, I agree with you. Can't help that my confidence was hurt, though.

I sympathise, actually. I had four things break over a two week span -- speakers, a lens, a tripod and my glasses. But everything fails and sometimes unexpectedly. Even Nikon lenswear, apparently!