[Wheatfield]

I don't think anyone's happy about the delays, Bill, nor is anyone saying we should be positive about them. Some are being philosophical about it, though, and would prefer to wait if that means getting a product that's the best quality it can be. In that sense, you could say those people have a positive outlook on the situation

And some are being downright insulting regarding people even daring to desire some new lenses.
Pray tell, what is philosophical about implying that a degree of impatience is threatening to hold one's breath until one is blue in the face?
What is acceptable about implying that users who are showing a degree of impatience are little children threatening to hold their breath until they pass out?
Pray tell what is positive about enabling that sort of abuse towards other forum users?
I have no problems waiting until this lens is released.
What I do have a problem with is people insulting those of us who want these improved optics and the enabling of people who choose to make these derogatory comments.

---------- Post added 04-18-18 at 11:09 AM ----------

I'll just say, I don't believe in your characterizations of either you or me. That's about as kind as I can be.
Hang in there buddy. Believe it or not, the world won't end if Pentax doesn't release this lens tomorrow.

More backhanded swipes?
Really?
Do try to be civil.

[normhead]

Pray tell, what is philosophical about implying that a degree of impatience is threatening to hold one's breath until one is blue in the face?

They are the same in that they are both useless endeavours that have no practical purpose except to possibly alarm other people. Why do you feel it's OK for you to dump your immature impatience on other forum participants?

What I do have a problem with is people insulting those of us who want these improved optics and the enabling of people who choose to make these derogatory comments.

And who would that be? Don't even try and pointing a finger at me. I've already taken the position I'll buy one of these new lenses two or three years down the line when there is more selection. I'm going to find a practical position that doesn't involve emotional distress for myself and others, not share my emotional distress with the whole world hoping some one will do something to calm me down.

The world is unfolding as it should. Don't concern yourself with the trivial. A few months here or there, even a few years, is trivial in the big picture.

[BigMackCam]

OK - Bill, Norm, let's leave it there, please, and return to the thread topic. Everyone will appreciate it, I'm sure

Thank you both

[builttospill]

Impatience is one thing, and intolerance is another. If the new lens is something any of you desire, purchase it when it's released. It's certainly okay to eagerly await the day you mount the new lens to your camera. However, no amount of complaining will decrease the time until the lens arrives on your porch or in your local camera store.

We shouldn't tolerate inappropriate comments from either camp. But we should also tolerate each others' opinions. If you can't tolerate the wait, no one is stopping you from leaving Pentax and finding another brand with the lenses you need. Each brand of camera has their own strengths and weaknesses. Pick the tools that meet the needs of your craft. Again, If Pentax doesn't have the tools you need to create images, go with something else that does, or (im)patiently wait until Pentax has the tool.

[jatrax]

FA★50mmF1.4 SDM AW (Tentative name)

Does anyone else find it odd they still use "Tentative name" in a press release?

in order to finalize the quality control stage and shift to mass production

I suspect this is the key phrase. I know these lenses are out in the wild already, I've exchanged emails with people who are using them for testing. I wonder how much difference there is in building a few by hand for demonstration / testing to going into full mass production? Probably a lot I guess. Especially if they want a high percentage of 'pass' at QC.

[UncleVanya]

Does anyone else find it odd they still use "Tentative name" in a press release?

I suspect this is the key phrase. I know these lenses are out in the wild already, I've exchanged emails with people who are using them for testing. I wonder how much difference there is in building a few by hand for demonstration / testing to going into full mass production? Probably a lot I guess. Especially if they want a high percentage of 'pass' at QC.

I personally think they would be wise to DROP the SDM name and come up with a new name for this technology to distance themselves from past issues.

[Kunzite]

Most K-1 customers likely don't even know about the past issues. It's our job to remind them constantly... right?

[jatrax]

personally think they would be wise to DROP the SDM name

Most K-1 customers likely don't even know about the past issues.

I agree with Uncle on this one and said so from day one. But to be honest outside of this forum, and maybe the other one, no knows what SDM is or anything else about it.

And no it's not our job but nothing ever goes away on the internet so anyone doing a search is going to see a lot of old info that no longer has relevance. I wonder if they have a trademark on SDM?

[UncleVanya]

I agree with Uncle on this one and said so from day one. But to be honest outside of this forum, and maybe the other one, no knows what SDM is or anything else about it.

And no it's not our job but nothing ever goes away on the internet so anyone doing a search is going to see a lot of old info that no longer has relevance. I wonder if they have a trademark on SDM?

I was speculating that the "tentative" part may be tied up in determining if they will keep SDM in the name but to be honest that ship probably already sailed and they likely have trademarks and will keep it. I agree with you on this possibility.

[Kunzite]

Instead of dropping the SDM name (probably a trademark) they could've said "SDM II". But in the end it doesn't (or shouldn't) matter.
Canon is also using the same USM designation for all their ultrasonic rings. It works for them.

[Rondec]

SDM is a designation that tells you next to nothing. It is clearly a group of motors that have little to do with each other. The SDM designation is used for all of the DA * primes (55, 200, 300), DA * zooms (16-50, 50-135, 60-250), and the Tamron manufactured DFA zooms (15-30, 24-70). A couple of those lenses have had real issues over time with their in lens motors, most don't. I don't know that changing the designation would do much in this situation.

Even now, it feels as though most SDM problems are focused on the 16-50 and 50-135 with occasional outliers popping up here and there.

The reality is that any time you have an in lens motor you can have issues with in lens motor failures, they just shouldn't be a high percentage of the lenses released that fail quickly. But given enough time, even high quality ring motors will fail if used enough.

[UncleVanya]

Even now, it feels as though most SDM problems are focused on the 16-50 and 50-135 with occasional outliers popping up here and there.

I can't supply ratio's of good lens to bad lens but I can confirm I fix far more of those two than the two primes (200/300). I have also been very infrequently contacted about 60-250's but that zoom cannot be resolved using the conversion methods we understand.

[builttospill]

SDM is a designation that tells you next to nothing.

Agreed. I'm guessing the SDM in the 645 lenses is very different from the SDM in the DA and DA* lenses.

[clackers]

Agreed. I'm guessing the SDM in the 645 lenses is very different from the SDM in the DA and DA* lenses.

Yep, and the one in these * or Opera primes or whatever is different again.

SDM is just a label that's covered different generations and methods of in-lens motors.

[Kunzite]

Just like Canon's USM