[monochrome]

exactly! if they believe this "new generation SDM" is better than the old one, then back it up with 10 year warranty, if not lifetime.

Dude. Warranties cost money. Per Consumer Reports, 4% - 8% of cameras and lenses have a failure during their expected lifetimes. Should every single buyer of this lens, which has a hypersonic ring motor (read: 'USD') rather than a geared micromotor (read: 'SDM'), pay insurance for something they're 92% - 96% unlikely to use?

Apparently (I have been bullied into accepting that Pentax's claims of better glass elements and a better barrel are just marketing talk) it is the exact same lens - and the exact same focusing motor - as the Tamron version. It is made in a Tamron factory in Japan. Not in a Pentax factory in the Philippines or Vietnam.

If you're that worried about it buy the Tamron version.

[gsolti]

Ever hear any complaints about Tamron USD failure? No? The "new SDM" is not the "old SDM".

well, if it is better, back it up with better warranty. that's called put the money where the mouth is. Trust lost needs to be earned back.

[monochrome]

well, if it is better, back it up with better warranty. that's called put the money where the mouth is. Trust lost needs to be earned back.

Dude. Warranties cost money.

Aaaaannnnnd . . . . . . you know what I'm going to do, don't you?

[gsolti]

Aaaaannnnnd . . . . . . you know what I'm going to do, don't you?

warranties cost money, but also increase sales. making quality product costs money, so i guess they should not make quality product. o, they did that with 16-50 and 50-135, which are sold are premium prices too.

[Kunzite]

I guess you're boriscleto'd at this point

[northcoastgreg]

well, if it is better, back it up with better warranty. that's called put the money where the mouth is. Trust lost needs to be earned back.

And poppycock grinds no flour. You can talk all you like about trust being earned back and all of that, but a the end of the day, Ricoh is not going to subsidize your FF system. Moreover, why would any rational person want them to subsidize their photography gear? If Ricoh loses money on their FF, they won't bother developing it, and at some point, it will go away.

[IchabodCrane]

Dude. Warranties cost money. Per Consumer Reports, 4% - 8% of cameras and lenses have a failure during their expected lifetimes. Should every single buyer of this lens, which has a hypersonic ring motor (read: 'USD') rather than a geared micromotor (read: 'SDM'), pay insurance for something they're 92% - 96% unlikely to use?

Apparently (I have been bullied into accepting that Pentax's claims of better glass elements and a better barrel are just marketing talk) it is the exact same lens - and the exact same focusing motor - as the Tamron version. It is made in a Tamron factory in Japan. Not in a Pentax factory in the Philippines or Vietnam.

If you're that worried about it buy the Tamron version.

Of course warranties cost money so why not have a 30 day warranty? They could charge less and/or put the savings into more developments.

Warranties are competitive features of an offering. The automotive industry in the USA didn't go from 12 month to 36 month (or more) warranties because they are just a bunch on nice guys doing nice things. They did it because someone else did and they wanted to remain competitive. There's no reason the camera industry is different.

[Kunzite]

As is often the case, extremes makes least sense - and neither extreme can be used as a counter-example to 'justify' the other.

[Tom S.]

warranties cost money, but also increase sales. making quality product costs money, so i guess they should not make quality product. o, they did that with 16-50 and 50-135, which are sold are premium prices too.

Not according to Dr. Deming, the guru on quality. Quality pays, not costs. This is based upon the prospective that quality reduces and ideally eliminates warranty costs, plus the reputation that is achieved from producing a quality product also off sets the cost by increasing sales.

[Rondec]

Of course warranties cost money so why not have a 30 day warranty? They could charge less and/or put the savings into more developments.

Warranties are competitive features of an offering. The automotive industry in the USA didn't go from 12 month to 36 month (or more) warranties because they are just a bunch on nice guys doing nice things. They did it because someone else did and they wanted to remain competitive. There's no reason the camera industry is different.

Pentax has a year warranty because that's what they can get away with. People still are inclined to buy Pentax (if they own a pentax camera) over Sigma and Tamron, even if the lenses are similar and the off brand lenses have longer warranties.

On the list of things people consider when buying gear, warranty length is near the bottom.

[Na Horuk]

Still, just one year warranty doesn't really give much confidence, especially if you look at things like SDM failure in the past.

Pentax has a year warranty because that's what they can get away with.

This is basically it. If they could lower it further without it looking suspicious, they would. The other brands try to build reputation with longer warranties, saying "hey, yes its third party, yes its cheaper, but we guarantee it will work."
And call me a sucker, but I do like to see products with long warranty, because modern business practices are often rather.. poor. Not necessarily with Pentax, but with too many things

[Kenn100D]

Maybe Pentax can try 1 year warranty plus 1 year insurance after the warranty expires. Good deal?=)

Anyway, just wondering if Pentax will remake their old full frame lenses (DFA's or the Takumar A's).

[drougge]

Screw drive does start to get sloppy with each new connection.

So does the aperture control, and that's something you're stuck with on all lenses without an aperture ring.

[monochrome]

At one time Pentax offered a warranty extension for an additional $20. Would you buy that if it was offered?

[Franc]

no, because in the EU its a mandatory 2 years :-)