[Franc]

I have seen over time a number of posts from people who state that an SDM issue was fixed no charge, and some cases where a lens went in for something else and the work order said the SDM was also replaced. These reports are all second or third hand but I see no reason to disbelieve them.

straight out of the horses mouth and he's is member here as well

[starbase218]

Something like that happened here. One member of the Dutch forum got his SDM problem repaired for free by using the statement in the interview. So maybe there is a service bulletin issued but you have to use the given statement as a ground for a free repair.

Yup, that may have been me. Although I don't know if it was fixed because I mentioned the statement. I just wanted to maximise the chance of getting it fixed, and figured it wouldn't hurt.

At least in the US the auto industry is closely regulated and any potential safety issues must have a recall notice issued. That's the law and even if the government did not require it, the lawsuits would. I don't think you can compare cameras and autos in this situation. There is no comparable legislation for non-auto products except perhaps "child safety" regulations that concern stroller, baby cribs and so on.

My coffee machine was recalled a few years ago. But you are right; that also had to do with a safety issue..

But, Pentax themselves have admitted at least one time that there was a problem with one of their products: the K-5 and its sensor stains on early models. IIRC, a recall was made.

[jatrax]

IIRC, a recall was made.

Yes they did: K-5 Sensor Stains | Ricoh Imaging Support

I suppose the difference was a clearly noticeable problem that affected many (most?) of a particular batch or production run. As opposed to a problem that manifests itself only in a small percentage and at seemingly random lengths of use, without a clearly defined batch or lot number. We don't really know what percentage of SDM failures there have been, IIRC Camera Lens Rentals reported the SDM issues were statistically no different than other brands' problems.

I'm not sure the SDM issue rises to the 'recall' level. As I said before IMHO they should have issued a service bulletin and extended the warranty without making a fuss. But what 'should' happen and what does happen are often two different things with lots of variables. This issue also spanned Pentax>Hoya>Ricoh so perhaps the transition was part of the problem. Hoya certainly would not have wanted to state they had a problem that might require a lot of warranty repair cost if they were trying to shop Pentax around. Now it is Ricoh's problem and the only public comment we have from any of the corporate entities is a statement from Ricoh that it was a problem and it is now fixed.

In my experience with Ricoh, (with copiers) they don't have a lot of tolerance for manufacturing problems. If something is not working right, it gets fixed, period. And they have gone to almost incredible lengths to make something as minor (IMHO) as a tiny squeak in the paper feed of our copier go away.

Just my experience over the years but Pentax has always made innovative products but their quality control in some cases was a little lax. Ricoh in my experience may not be cutting edge but the attention to detail, fit and finish, and quality control are exceptional. When they build something they expect it to work. I think the fusion of Pentax thinking with Ricoh manufacturing is going to produce great things. It may take longer than we want but I think the combination will be very good in the long run.

[metallicvapor]

Looking at the line up, it seems that there is no hope of getting an ultra-wide rectilinear lens with at 10mm soon... which means I still have to go to Sigma or Tamron for ultrawide.

[TenZ.NL]

Maybe they are looking to phase out the DA* nomenclature completely and use limited/red stripe to denote the high quality range.
Makes sense if you think about the DA 50 1.8 and DA 35 2.4

IIRC the red stripe was introduced for the first time with the DA560, which was the first lens with the new HDcoating. Wouldn`t the red stripe just be a marker that a certain lens is HDcoated?

[Tonto]

IIRC the red stripe was introduced for the first time with the DA560, which was the first lens with the new HDcoating. Wouldn`t the red stripe just be a marker that a certain lens is HDcoated?

Well it remains to be seen if the HD coating will be used on cheaper lenses so its abit of a chicken/egg scenario as of right now.

[Cynog Ap Brychan]

so its abit of a chicken/egg scenario

If you're a Creationist, the chicken came first; if you're a believer in evolution, the egg came first. Wow, did I just go off thread....?

[Aristophanes]

Because the United States government (through the NTSB - thank you Ralph Nader) regulates the industry and mandates the recalls, or has so scared the beejezus out of the car makers that they are self-regulating.

Not quite. The major force is unlimited legal liability through civil action. Insurance is also important. Lemon laws assure some level if durability and redress and have gone a long way towards improving overall reliability. NTSB and other government agencies monitor the market and products setting minimum safety standards and industry responses.

[TenZ.NL]

Well it remains to be seen if the HD coating will be used on cheaper lenses so its abit of a chicken/egg scenario as of right now.

Offcourse, I wasn`t implying that all lenses will be coated with HD and get red stripes, only that HDcoated lenses get the red stripe

[monochrome]

Offcourse, I wasn`t implying that all lenses will be coated with HD and get red stripes, only that HDcoated lenses get the red stripe

What if red trim means Limited - only Limited products would get red stripes - and the coming high-end APSc camera had red trim, designated a "Limited" line - K3-L?

Then if the FA Limiteds were re-released with red trim - we'd have an explosion here

[Fogel70]

What if red trim means Limited - only Limited products would get red stripes - and the coming high-end APSc camera had red trim, designated a "Limited" line - K3-L?

Then if the FA Limiteds were re-released with red trim - we'd have an explosion here

This logic work if you view the DA 560/5.6 as a compact pancake lens.

[starbase218]

This logic work if you view the DA 560/5.6 as a compact pancake lens.

Ahh, it's all a matter of perspective.

[TenZ.NL]

What if red trim means Limited - only Limited products would get red stripes - and the coming high-end APSc camera had red trim, designated a "Limited" line - K3-L?

Then if the FA Limiteds were re-released with red trim - we'd have an explosion here

That`s a nice thought, I really love that but as Fogel70 and I pointed out: where does the DA560 fit in this picture? It`s neither LTD nor DA*, it`s just a "regular" DA with HDcoating.

[Aristophanes]

What if red trim means Limited - only Limited products would get red stripes - and the coming high-end APSc camera had red trim, designated a "Limited" line - K3-L?

Then if the FA Limiteds were re-released with red trim - we'd have an explosion here

What if red is just a different colour choice because someone got bored with green (and red looks better with silver)?

[cfraz]

What if red is just a different colour choice because someone got bored with green (and red looks better with silver)?

From Ricoh's description of the DA560:

The lens exterior is painted an elegant white to minimize heat haze generated inside the lens barrel, and a red ring is featured in the middle of the barrel to serve as a distinct, radiant symbol of the new HD (High Definition) lens series.

PENTAX - HD PENTAX DA 560mm F5.6ED AW