Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-11-2016, 06:58 PM   #181
Site Supporter
jpzk's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Québec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,985
I'm sure there is another such thread somewhere here .... let me see ...

Here ! ... https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/190-pentax-k-1/319686-k-1-3rd-party-lens-compatibility.html
and here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/190-pentax-k-1/320805-sigma-announcement-...ens-issue.html


Last edited by jpzk; 05-11-2016 at 07:04 PM.
05-11-2016, 07:03 PM   #182
Pentaxian
Not a Number's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 3,901
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
I would not anticipate any clearance issues with the K-1 except perhaps for the rail if a QR plate or L-bracket is attached to the camera. (Rail clearance at the rear is essential.)
Thanks. The rear bracket on the auto bellows series is larger and the bayonet adapter is thinner. The rear bracket also has a foot on it. With my K10D there is barely enough clearance for the square base of the lens mount around the foot. To switch for portrait to landscape I have to either turn the entire rig 90° or loosen the retaining screw for the adapter, dismount the adapter (with body) and change the orientation. Unfortunately the only digital camera I have is my K10D so I can't take photos of it mounted on my auto bellows A but I can take photos with my K1000 or Program Plus film bodies. Oh I have a dead ZX-50 too.
05-11-2016, 07:04 PM   #183
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,600
IMHO, this K-1 controversy shows the design dept of Pentax remains less vigilant than it should be about keeping the area in front of camera connection points (like the lens mount) generously clear. We saw a similar lack of vigilance with the K-30 pentaprism overhang and the K-3 II's hotshoe placement.

Luckily the K-1 designers kept access clear and un-obstructed to the SD card slots, head-phone plug, and USB plug too, so that third party cards, cables and plugs can still connect properly to the camera. This Sigma problem raises similar issues.
05-11-2016, 07:17 PM   #184
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,112
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
IMHO, this K-1 controversy shows the design dept of Pentax remains less vigilant than it should be about keeping the area in front of camera connection points (like the lens mount) generously clear. We saw a similar lack of vigilance with the K-30 pentaprism overhang and the K-3 II's hotshoe placement.

Luckily the K-1 designers kept access clear and un-obstructed to the SD card slots, head-phone plug, and USB plug too, so that third party cards, cables and plugs can still connect properly to the camera. This Sigma problem raises similar issues.
Really? As mentioned above, the mount is within their long standing specs. If Sigma makes a lens next year that's 10" in diameter should Pentax design it's next camera to accomodate it?

Now excuse me while I write a letter of complaint to Chrysler. I'd like to put a Chevy small block V8 in my Wrangler, but it won't fit. They should have collaberated with GM when they designed the Jeep.

05-11-2016, 07:22 PM - 1 Like   #185
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,600
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
Now excuse me while I write a letter of complaint to Chrysler. I'd like to put a Chevy small block V8 in my Wrangler, but it won't fit. They should have collaberated with GM when they designed the Jeep.
No, but Chrysler don't force you to buy and fit only Chrysler designed rims and tyres on your Wrangler either.

Somehow third-party tyres fit fine, and a vast 3rd party marketplace exists supplying those accessories, to the benefit of Chrysler owners.
05-11-2016, 07:24 PM   #186
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,501
How much clearance is 'generously clear' and where is the triage point where the engineers can say, "We're not going to accommodate that one."
05-11-2016, 07:35 PM   #187
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,420
This is way overblown. I realize some of you are collectors and want to keep the gear in pristine condition, but for many of us this camera is going to get a lot of scratches over the next few year. The reason I like Pentax is that the bodies can take the abuse. A 2mm wide x 10mm long scratch that is hidden behind the lens is pretty irrelevant.
05-11-2016, 07:35 PM   #188
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,600
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
How much clearance is 'generously clear' and where is the triage point where the engineers can say, "We're not going to accommodate that one."
Pentax may simply not have realised the minutely increased angle of the body over the lens mount in the K-1 was a likely problem. Their engineering team is pretty small.

But they are practical and [unlike fanboys] not 'religious' about solving design problems customers raise with them - for instance the K-50 dropped the pentaprism overhang of the K-30, the K-1 hotshoe is more elevated than the K-3II hotshoe and now sits clearer, causing less likely problems for 3rd party flashes and accessories.

05-11-2016, 07:35 PM   #189
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,112
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
No, but Chrysler don't force you to buy and fit only Chrysler designed rims and tyres on your Wrangler either.

Somehow third-party tyres fit fine, and a vast 3rd party marketplace exists supplying those accessories, to the benefit of Chrysler owners.
Right. Those third party tyres fit because the tyre manufacturers designed them to, not because Chrysler designed the Jeep to fit the tyres.
05-11-2016, 07:35 PM   #190
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,501
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
No, but Chrysler don't force you to buy and fit only Chrysler designed rims and tyres on your Wrangler either.

Somehow third-party tyres fit fine, and a vast 3rd party marketplace exists supplying those accessories, to the benefit of Chrysler owners.
A better analogy was when GM completely redesigned their full-size cargo vans, and lots of conversion van owners had their transferable add-on accessories obsoleted.

Likewise, van converters who licensed GM's technical drawings and leased GM tools were immediately able to install production interiors, but the reverse-engineering types had to painstakingly hand modify all their shop jigs and tools after-the-fact.

Even that's not a good analogy, because Pentax didn't actually change anything other than the amount by which they exceeded their own design standard.

Last edited by monochrome; 05-11-2016 at 07:49 PM.
05-11-2016, 07:41 PM   #191
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,793
QuoteOriginally posted by jpzk Quote
I'm sure there is another such thread somewhere here .... let me see ...
Yeah, but over here in the Lounge we get the news by Pony Express so it takes a little longer for us! Carol rode hard all night just to get us that information...and we thank her!

Regards!
05-11-2016, 07:42 PM   #192
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,234
QuoteOriginally posted by Not a Number Quote
Thanks. The rear bracket on the auto bellows series is larger and the bayonet adapter is thinner.
I just did a little walk with Google images and see what you mean.


Steve
05-11-2016, 07:51 PM   #193
mee
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,260
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
Right. Those third party tyres fit because the tyre manufacturers designed them to, not because Chrysler designed the Jeep to fit the tyres.
Tire size is not proprietary... K mount is. So the example doesn't fit.

Pentax's goal is to sell lenses and accessories (at big markup). If Pentax is willingly allowing Sigma and/or any other 3rd party to create lenses for their camera bodies, then they just shot themselves in the foot so to speak.

Pentax is the host, Sigma is the parasite (in essence). Well.. this is mutualism maybe at best, commensalism probably, parasitism at worst... and that is coming from someone that enjoys Sigma lenses.
05-11-2016, 07:55 PM   #194
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,600
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
Those third party tyres fit because the tyre manufacturers designed them to, not because Chrysler designed the Jeep to fit the tyres.
It's evolved into a two way street though. Chrysler could change the bolt pattern on it's wheels every year if it wanted to, but it doesn't. It likes third party rim and tyre support, and it's customers do too.
05-11-2016, 08:01 PM   #195
Pentaxian
aleonx3's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Brampton, Ontario
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,873
QuoteOriginally posted by mee Quote
Tire size is not proprietary... K mount is. So the example doesn't fit.

Pentax's goal is to sell lenses and accessories (at big markup). If Pentax is willingly allowing Sigma and/or any other 3rd party to create lenses for their camera bodies, then they just shot themselves in the foot so to speak.

Pentax is the host, Sigma is the parasite (in essence). Well.. this is mutualism maybe at best, commensalism probably, parasitism at worst... and that is coming from someone that enjoys Sigma lenses.
You are right about that.. I don't really think that the problem (if exists) has anything to do with Ricoh/Pentax. It is up to Sigma to figure out and address the issues if they want to make/sell k-mount lenses to compete with Pentax. Keeping in mind unlike Tamron, they have not collaborate/license k-mount technology with Pentax. OTOH, I feel sorry for the Sigma lens owners (I know some whose k-mount lenses are exclusively Sigma brand).
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
announcement about k-1, body, camera, compatibility, design, dozen, dslr, full frame, full-frame, issue, k-1, k-1 lens, k1, lens, lenses, mount, nikon, pentax, pentax k-1, pka, scratch, sigma, sigma announcement, space, third party lenses
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
my 1-k words about the K-1 jimr-pdx Pentax Full Frame 35 05-15-2016 02:32 PM
Question How to Unpin the 'Pentax K-1 Full Frame' announcement at the top of page mee Site Suggestions and Help 8 02-26-2016 09:00 AM
Announcement no one is talking about: Macro converter GM-1 astron Ricoh GR 4 02-23-2016 02:31 PM
For Sale - Sold: Sigma 50mm f1:2.8 K-A Mount 1:1 Macro Manual Focus Lens $85 shipped to US Archimedes the Dog Sold Items 7 11-28-2015 09:46 AM
Dreaming about next PMA announcement regken Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 02-28-2007 08:24 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:16 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top