Sigma announcement about K-1 lens issue

Not a Number · 05-12-2016, 12:52 AM

Originally posted by rawr

Or in this case, Canon or Nikon. Just look at how flat and roomy the 6D or D810 mount circle seems compared to the cramped and lumpy area around the K-1 mount ...

And how much bigger are those bodies compared to the K-1?

Originally posted by jawsy

Fit your lens, mark the interference zone, remove the lens and relieve the lens with a nail file. No big deal.

Or put some black electrical tape over the area that would get scratched?

jawsy · 05-12-2016, 12:57 AM

Originally posted by Not a Number

Or put some black electrical tape over the area that would get scratched?

Always best to relieve contact points that shouldn't be there. It adds a force in abnormal situations such as dropping or bumping the lens to the body to areas that weren't designed for it. In severe situations the load can accelerate wear on the bayonet ring, although this doesn't appear to be the case here.

distudio · 05-12-2016, 01:10 AM

Originally posted by jawsy

Fit your lens, mark the interference zone, remove the lens and relieve the lens with a nail file. No big deal.

Lenses I generally keep, cameras I don't, so it's the camera that gets modified for me.

jawsy · 05-12-2016, 01:31 AM

Originally posted by distudio

Lenses I generally keep, cameras I don't, so it's the camera that gets modified for me.

My dremel work tends to end up with an unwanted tail somewhere! I wouldn't trust myself not to pierce the skin.

Not a Number · 05-12-2016, 01:40 AM

Originally posted by Not a Number

And how much bigger are those bodies compared to the K-1?

Compare camera dimensions side by side

distudio · 05-12-2016, 01:46 AM

Originally posted by jawsy

My dremel work tends to end up with an unwanted tail somewhere! I wouldn't trust myself not to pierce the skin.

I can see myself loading it into a press with a nice cutt-off disc and producing a neat little scalloped cutout much like the mystery one above. A good vac and a little touch-up paint and she'd be as good as new, just better.

rawr · 05-12-2016, 02:00 AM

Originally posted by Not a Number

And how much bigger are those bodies compared to the K-1?

Hardly bigger at all in the case of some FF's, as already posted in page 2 of this thread:

Body size isn't really the issue.

Kunzite · 05-12-2016, 02:08 AM

Originally posted by distudio

Looking at the cutaway there's plenty of room to get the Dremel to it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ThingsCutInHalfPorn/comments/48hrb4/pentax_k1_camer...lens_1400x518/

I don't see the "plenty of room", things are quite tight. Fix the nonconforming lens, not the camera.

Not a Number · 05-12-2016, 02:39 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by rawr

Hardly bigger at all in the case of some FF's, as already posted in page 2 of this thread:

Body size isn't really the issue.

And the Nikon D810?

Does Canon/Nikon have a screw drive, Aperture control lever mechanisms and IBIS to cram into the body?

Given the shape and position of the pentaprism there isn't much leeway for a nice flat area.

Don't judge a book by its cover.

Caat · 05-12-2016, 02:46 AM - **1 Like**

The worry that I have is that - what is admittedly a relatively minor issue - could easily get blown out of proportion. For example, buyer goes into a shop.

Buyer: Oh, I am interested in the new K-1. What lenses are available for it?

Shop: Well, Pentax have three new lenses released, a handful of older lenses that are still in production and then a large number of lenses that are no longer made.

Buyer: OK, so not many of these 'designed for digital lenses' I hear so much about?

Shop: No, but you can mount Pentax's DA lenses on it.

Buyer: Hmmm, I see. So what about other makers, like Sigma?

Shop: Well Sigma has just issued an advisory saying that some of its newer lenses may damage the camera.

Buyer: OK, well thanks anyway. Think I'll shop around.

The point being that unsympathetic people can blow this out of proportion and anyone with existing Sigma lenses who don't frequent forums but may see the note from Sigma - either like above, or by reading it on Sigma's site - and may well be spooked.

There are also potential implications for other more exotic lens designs such as tilt and shift lenses.

The main issue is that you don't want a narrative developing which is: "there is a design flaw on the K-1". Which we know there isn't really, just an oversight regarding a number of lenses made by other manufacturers.

distudio · 05-12-2016, 03:21 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

I don't see the "plenty of room", things are quite tight. Fix the nonconforming lens, not the camera.

It only needs to be a similar size to the mystery cutout above where the Sigma lenses rub, no great drama.

rawr · 05-12-2016, 03:40 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Not a Number

Given the shape and position of the pentaprism there isn't much leeway for a nice flat area.

But there was enough leeway in the K-200D, K-x, K-5, K-5II, K-3. K-3 II ...

The K-1 design team should have kept a few mm spare above the K-mount, even made a nice empty circle around the lens mount like they did in the K-3/K-5/K-x etc.

In the good old days, they left plenty of flat, vacant space above the K-1 mount ring.

jawsy · 05-12-2016, 03:47 AM

Originally posted by rawr

In the good old days, they left plenty of vacant space above the K-1 mount ring

I see now. It took Pentax 16 years to resolve the Y2K bug.

Not a Number · 05-12-2016, 03:49 AM

Originally posted by Caat

Shop: Well Sigma has just issued an advisory saying that some of its newer lenses may damage the camera.

Not to mention Sigma said they will be supplying repair kits to resolve the problem. Yes, it means you have to wait for the fix but what else is new even in this so-called high tech society?

It's not like you cannot mount the Sigma lenses at all. And it's not like Ricoh changed things so you could not use any K-mount lens.

Kunzite · 05-12-2016, 03:55 AM

"Repair kits"... also known as "file"

05-12-2016, 03:40 AM - 1 Like	#222
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by Not a Number Given the shape and position of the pentaprism there isn't much leeway for a nice flat area. But there was enough leeway in the K-200D, K-x, K-5, K-5II, K-3. K-3 II ... The K-1 design team should have kept a few mm spare above the K-mount, even made a nice empty circle around the lens mount like they did in the K-3/K-5/K-x etc. In the good old days, they left plenty of flat, vacant space above the K-1 mount ring. Last edited by rawr; 05-12-2016 at 03:55 AM.

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

05-12-2016, 12:52 AM	#211
Not a Number Moderator Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Venice, CA Posts: 10,525	Originally posted by rawr Or in this case, Canon or Nikon. Just look at how flat and roomy the 6D or D810 mount circle seems compared to the cramped and lumpy area around the K-1 mount ... And how much bigger are those bodies compared to the K-1? Originally posted by jawsy Fit your lens, mark the interference zone, remove the lens and relieve the lens with a nail file. No big deal. Or put some black electrical tape over the area that would get scratched?

05-12-2016, 12:57 AM	#212
jawsy Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 422	Originally posted by Not a Number Or put some black electrical tape over the area that would get scratched? Always best to relieve contact points that shouldn't be there. It adds a force in abnormal situations such as dropping or bumping the lens to the body to areas that weren't designed for it. In severe situations the load can accelerate wear on the bayonet ring, although this doesn't appear to be the case here.

05-12-2016, 01:10 AM	#213
distudio Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Sydney Photos: Albums Posts: 450	Originally posted by jawsy Fit your lens, mark the interference zone, remove the lens and relieve the lens with a nail file. No big deal. Lenses I generally keep, cameras I don't, so it's the camera that gets modified for me.

05-12-2016, 01:31 AM	#214
jawsy Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 422	Originally posted by distudio Lenses I generally keep, cameras I don't, so it's the camera that gets modified for me. My dremel work tends to end up with an unwanted tail somewhere! I wouldn't trust myself not to pierce the skin.

05-12-2016, 01:40 AM	#215
Not a Number Moderator Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Venice, CA Posts: 10,525	Originally posted by Not a Number And how much bigger are those bodies compared to the K-1? Compare camera dimensions side by side

05-12-2016, 01:46 AM	#216
distudio Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Sydney Photos: Albums Posts: 450	Originally posted by jawsy My dremel work tends to end up with an unwanted tail somewhere! I wouldn't trust myself not to pierce the skin. I can see myself loading it into a press with a nice cutt-off disc and producing a neat little scalloped cutout much like the mystery one above. A good vac and a little touch-up paint and she'd be as good as new, just better.

05-12-2016, 02:00 AM	#217
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by Not a Number And how much bigger are those bodies compared to the K-1? Hardly bigger at all in the case of some FF's, as already posted in page 2 of this thread: Body size isn't really the issue.

05-12-2016, 02:08 AM	#218
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by distudio Looking at the cutaway there's plenty of room to get the Dremel to it. https://www.reddit.com/r/ThingsCutInHalfPorn/comments/48hrb4/pentax_k1_camer...lens_1400x518/ I don't see the "plenty of room", things are quite tight. Fix the nonconforming lens, not the camera.

05-12-2016, 02:39 AM - 1 Like	#219
Not a Number Moderator Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Venice, CA Posts: 10,525	Originally posted by rawr Hardly bigger at all in the case of some FF's, as already posted in page 2 of this thread: Body size isn't really the issue. And the Nikon D810? Does Canon/Nikon have a screw drive, Aperture control lever mechanisms and IBIS to cram into the body? Given the shape and position of the pentaprism there isn't much leeway for a nice flat area. Don't judge a book by its cover.

05-12-2016, 02:46 AM - 1 Like	#220
Caat Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: United Kingdom Photos: Albums Posts: 927	The worry that I have is that - what is admittedly a relatively minor issue - could easily get blown out of proportion. For example, buyer goes into a shop. Buyer: Oh, I am interested in the new K-1. What lenses are available for it? Shop: Well, Pentax have three new lenses released, a handful of older lenses that are still in production and then a large number of lenses that are no longer made. Buyer: OK, so not many of these 'designed for digital lenses' I hear so much about? Shop: No, but you can mount Pentax's DA lenses on it. Buyer: Hmmm, I see. So what about other makers, like Sigma? Shop: Well Sigma has just issued an advisory saying that some of its newer lenses may damage the camera. Buyer: OK, well thanks anyway. Think I'll shop around. The point being that unsympathetic people can blow this out of proportion and anyone with existing Sigma lenses who don't frequent forums but may see the note from Sigma - either like above, or by reading it on Sigma's site - and may well be spooked. There are also potential implications for other more exotic lens designs such as tilt and shift lenses. The main issue is that you don't want a narrative developing which is: "there is a design flaw on the K-1". Which we know there isn't really, just an oversight regarding a number of lenses made by other manufacturers.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-12-2016, 03:21 AM	#221
distudio Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Sydney Photos: Albums Posts: 450	Originally posted by Kunzite I don't see the "plenty of room", things are quite tight. Fix the nonconforming lens, not the camera. It only needs to be a similar size to the mystery cutout above where the Sigma lenses rub, no great drama.

05-12-2016, 03:47 AM	#223
jawsy Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 422	Originally posted by rawr In the good old days, they left plenty of vacant space above the K-1 mount ring I see now. It took Pentax 16 years to resolve the Y2K bug.

05-12-2016, 03:49 AM	#224
Not a Number Moderator Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Venice, CA Posts: 10,525	Originally posted by Caat Shop: Well Sigma has just issued an advisory saying that some of its newer lenses may damage the camera. Not to mention Sigma said they will be supplying repair kits to resolve the problem. Yes, it means you have to wait for the fix but what else is new even in this so-called high tech society? It's not like you cannot mount the Sigma lenses at all. And it's not like Ricoh changed things so you could not use any K-mount lens.

05-12-2016, 03:55 AM	#225
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	"Repair kits"... also known as "file"