[stevebrot]

And on what are these suspicions based?

I haven't seen any indication even one legacy lens won't mount correctly on a K-1. My suspicion is that if there was one, we would have heard of it by now.

I shoot a fair amount of legacy glass and did a survey of my shelf when the clearance issues first came to light. I was surprised to find that my Auto Rikenon 55/1.4 will not mount cleanly to my Super Program and will only clear a radius of 33mm* at the mount flange due to the prominence of the A/M switch. It will mount fine with the M-42 adapter, but cannot be removed !** I suspect that the K-1 will likewise, be on its "no list".

Does that qualify as "one"? If I can arrange a meetup, I will check it on a local K-1.


Steve

* The storied and often-referenced Russian K-mount spec stipulates maximum 65mm diameter 1mm distal to the mount face. I guess that means my Rikenon 55/1.4 will not adapt to a K-mount Zenit either.

** No, I don't know this by experience. I tested the clearance with the adapter mounted to the body first.

[normhead]

Does that qualify as "one"? If I can arrange a meetup, I will check it on a local K-1.

That's the best you can do, a third party lens?
The point was that there is a standard that pentax hasn't violated, ever. I don't see how a third party lens contributes to that. Again. If a company makes a lens to their spec and someone else copies their spec incorrectly, Pentax has nothing to do with that. When you deal with third party manufacturers, they clearly don't take the Pentax spec as seriously as they should sometimes. Or they don't test on every camera. How is that pentax's fault?

[stevebrot]

That's the best you can do, a third party lens?

Ummmm...I said "legacy", not Pentax/Asahi.

The point was thathtere is a standard that pentax hasn't violated, ever.

That is an interesting conjecture that might deserve a thread of its own. Define "violated"...

I realize that I pushed some button by suggesting that there might be other K-1 clearance issues in the universe of nominally compatible lenses and accessories. In my opinion, that sort of thing should be expected, though perhaps not with current market product from major players.


Steve

[normhead]

Ummmm...I said "legacy", not Pentax/Asahi.



That is an interesting conjecture that might deserve a thread of its own. Define "violated"...

I realize that I pushed some button by suggesting that there might be other K-1 clearance issues in the universe of nominally compatible lenses and accessories. In my opinion, that sort of thing should be expected, though perhaps not with current market product from major players.


Steve

So now Pentax is responsible for every idiot in every third party lens manufacturer anywhere in the world in any time period? That's messed up dude. And if you can't see it's messed up, there's something wrong with you.

The logical conclusion here from my perspective is, if you want to be sure the lens doesn't mess up your camera, buy Pentax glass. I don't care who the company is, you buy third party glass, you aren't getting the same thing, unless you can be sure they have bought into and comply with the K-mount spec, whether it is written down somewhere or derived by reverse engineering the Pentax produced cameras. I'm sure Sigma has figured out what the Pentax spec was. They figured it would never cost them if they cheated on it a little bit, probably trying to make the Pentax mount competitive enough to keep it alive. They were wrong, and it cost people who buy some Sigma lenses some trouble they didn't deserve, and that wouldn't have happened with a more responsible manufacturer.

I'm not sure why everyone is so eager to let Sigma off the hook on this. It's puzzling.

Your example being a case in point. Third party glass being compatible in the future is a crapshoot.

Pentax has a responsibility to keep their bodies compatable with the lenses they have produced. Third party companies have the responsibility to to make sure if they produce a K-mount lens it's compatible with every Pentax k-mount body, now and in the future. Pentax can't stop anyone from claiming a lens is K-mount compatible. Sigma took advantage of that and Pentax customers took the hit.

Just admit it. Sigma messed up trying to make a fast buck. That's exactly what happened.

---

Last edited by normhead; 03-16-2017 at 10:40 AM.

[Rupert]

Just admit it. Sigma messed up trying to make a fast buck. That's exactly what happened.

I don't really agree with you Norm, but am not in an arguing mood today.....Now that Sigma has left Pentax I guess it is a good thing...you think? For many of the great lenses they make, and at affordable prices, I can't seem to view it like that.

For those that have suffered the pain and misery.....You show me yours and I'll show you mine. Haven't played that game since I was a kid and played with Alana next door....my Mom beat my ass half off.....but it was fun, while it lasted!

It hurts me to see it, but since it is mostly covered up 99.999% of the time with a lens, I try to forget it is there. If I ever get a hold on a Sigma design guy, I will strangle him and blame it on Norm!

NSFN (Not Safe For Newbies) ...or those with weak hearts. Mutilated by a big ol' bad Sigma 50-500.


Regards!

[stevebrot]

So now Pentax is responsible for every idiot in every third party lens manufacturer anywhere in the world in any time period? That's messed up dude. And if you can't see it's messed up, there's something wrong with you.

Yes...messed up dude...very sick!

No, Pentax is responsible for their own stuff including the market reality that they sell an interchangeable lens product with a non-proprietary mount and that third party offerings are part of what keeps them in business. A few points and then you can respond and have the last word:

• Mixing brands within a mount family has always been a bit of a crapshoot. You know this is true, just admit it.
• What happens between Ricoh/Pentax and other K-mount producers is pure speculation. Just admit it.
• Sigma played free with their manufacturing tolerances and it came back and bit them. Many copies of the lenses in question mount just fine. The others have a different part mix.
• Pentax pushed the clearance limits with the K-1 design. Are they responsible for compatibility with other than Pentax lenses? Ummm...no, though it is good business to do so. My opinion is that their design decision was stupid, but what do I know. After all there is something wrong with my head.

The bottom line is that Sigma is doing its part to mitigate. With any luck Ricoh/Pentax will take steps to avoid similar future issues. My addled mine has nothing more to say on the topic.


Steve

[normhead]

Whatever. I
I'm not buy it, any of it.

It's Pentax's job to make sure their lenses work with their lenses, parasites like Sigma should be bending over backwards to fit in.
Bottom line. Pentax didn't do anything that messed up even one of their lenses. How is it they could do that and Sigma couldn't?
Pentax had nothing to do with this. They give Sigma all the information they pay for. If Sigma chooses to reverse engineer, everything is on them.

Final word. At least from me.

[cyberjunkie]

Whatever. I
I'm not buy it, any of it.

It's Pentax's job to make sure their lenses work with their lenses, parasites like Sigma should be bending over backwards to fit in.
Bottom line. Pentax didn't do anything that messed up even one of their lenses. How is it they could do that and Sigma couldn't?
Pentax had nothing to do with this. They give Sigma all the information they pay for. If Sigma chooses to reverse engineer, everything is on them.

Are you serious?
parasites...?
I'm a long time Pentax fan, 6x7 and LX, plus all the rest, since 1979.
I'm not a fanboy, though.
Present time Sigma lenses, especially high end ones, are awesome, and i'm very unhappy to see the latest Art releases not available in PKAF mount.
Let's be honest, long time ago people used to buy Asahi Pentax because of Takumar or SMC Pentax glasses.
I bought my K-1 because it's a wonderful camera body, with a very high price/performance ratio. Not because of the current lens line-up, sorry to say that, but it's true.
Having said all that, Sigma reverse engineers the data communication with the camera body, not the PK mount spec.
There is no proprietary standard, and no specs regarding the room around the mount itself, as already explained.

I just repaired an old Sigma AF zoom (an EX DF!). The spare part was readily available and i had the lens back in ONE working day!
Two other zooms, warranty long expired, were software updated and had the bayonet adjusted/replaced. For free! (including shipment).
The same zooms worked fine with previous Pentax bodies, and were released LONG BEFORE Pentax introduced the K-1.
BTW, the problem is not the scratch, it's the firmware.
Kudos to Sigma.
Should i remind you of all the SDM motor that died just after the warranty expired...?

Let's be balanced, com'on

cheers

Paolo

[GeneV]

If Pentax were one of the dominating brands, I'd be more inclined to see this as Sigma's problem. However, with cameras in its mount selling in single digit percentages, I'd say the camera maker has a stronger incentive to make it easier for third party accessories to be sold profitably than the third party manufacturer has to make a lens or accessory for a line with a tiny market share. This particular incompatibility does not sound like a huge problem, but making it less profitable for Sigma to sell K mount lenses does not seem to be the way to go.

[SA Photo]

Well I got my new K1 and FA 15-30 yesterday and it's a beast! Took a few shots with the new setup and then went straight to my Sigma 70-200 to test it and to my surprise it seemed to work fine. Also tried my Sigma 180 macro and my Sigma 150-500 and they all seemed to work fine. I did have the firmware updated on the 70-200 soon after I got my K3, it started to have focus issues. I was really expecting issues after everything I had read and had already contacted Sigma to send them back for updates. For those of you that had problems did they appear right away or over time. My 70-200 worked fine on my K3 at first but them started to have focus issues after a couple of months. But man, that 15-30 is wide!

[Rupert]

So far I am the only one that has posted a picture of this horrific and devastating damage caused by mounting a Sigma? I would have thought that in a photo forum there would be lots of pictures confirming the injuries suffered?

Maybe it is such a traumatic experience that eyes full of tears just can't get focus on the "train wreck" the Sigmas have delivered?
If we were playing poker, I'd be walking away with a pot full of cash!

Regards!

[mlt]

So far I am the only one that has posted a picture of this horrific and devastating damage caused by mounting a Sigma? I would have thought that in a photo forum there would be lots of pictures confirming the injuries suffered?

Maybe it is such a traumatic experience that eyes full of tears just can't get focus on the "train wreck" the Sigmas have delivered?
If we were playing poker, I'd be walking away with a pot full of cash!

Regards!

How does the Sigma 50-500 do at the 500mm end on your K1? Looking at adding more reach than my 300 DA at a price lower than the 150-450.

Thanks,
MLT

[Rupert]

How does the Sigma 50-500 do at the 500mm end on your K1? Looking at adding more reach than my 300 DA at a price lower than the 150-450.

Thanks,
MLT

I find it very good at 500mm.....here is a link where most of the shots are at 500mm. Clicking on an image gives you the EXIF.....I post the good, bad, and ugly, so there is a good mix to evaluate.
Pentax K1 | Flickr

Regards!

[mlt]

I find it very good at 500mm.....here is a link where most of the shots are at 500mm. Clicking on an image gives you the EXIF.....I post the good, bad, and ugly, so there is a good mix to evaluate.
Pentax K1 | Flickr

Regards!

Appreciate the links. Nice work - looks like the 50-500 is a good fit for the K1. As a side note, just got an email reply from a tech rep at SIGMA Corporation of America on questioning them if new 50-500's purchased from them would need to be sent in for adjustment for the K1. Per their reply "All of our current lenses ship K-1 compatible."

Thanks,
MLT

[Rupert]

Appreciate the links. Nice work - looks like the 50-500 is a good fit for the K1. As a side note, just got an email reply from a tech rep at SIGMA Corporation of America on questioning them if new 50-500's purchased from them would need to be sent in for adjustment for the K1. Per their reply "All of our current lenses ship K-1 compatible."

Thanks,
MLT

The Bigma works exceptionally well on the K1. On my previous Pentax bodies AF was slow and undependable in low light. Works perfectly on the K1!

Best Regards!

Per their reply "All of our current lenses ship K-1 compatible."

...that's good news, you sure would not want to end up like some here with severe mental disorders and PTSD (Post Traumatic Scratch Disease) from one of those teeny tiny scratches!