[happyprince]

Hi friends,
I have just got a Pentax DA* 55 mm 1.4 lens as second hand and I used it with pleasure,however I noticed that when I use it on normal viewfinder,when I just turn on the camera,it won't autofocus. When I switch to live view mode,then it starts to focus and then it does so even if I close the live view. Do you have any ideas about why that happens?Thanks in advance...

[NZ_Ross]

I have a DA*55/1.4 also that exhibits somewhat similar issues, especially if I haven't used it for a while. I have found after a few minutes of being connected to the camera and getting power to it, then everything comes right.

I haven't done precise tests on this, but have found that if I put it on the camera, do about 5-10 test focus then it seems to 'warm up' and is good from there - I have figured that is a symptom of the SDM motor getting older. Still works ok once 'warmed up' and gives images I am happy with

[seventhdr]

I have a DA*55/1.4 also that exhibits somewhat similar issues, especially if I haven't used it for a while. I have found after a few minutes of being connected to the camera and getting power to it, then everything comes right.

I haven't done precise tests on this, but have found that if I put it on the camera, do about 5-10 test focus then it seems to 'warm up' and is good from there - I have figured that is a symptom of the SDM motor getting older. Still works ok once 'warmed up' and gives images I am happy with

My thoughts too. I've also heard that it is the lubricant that is going more viscous (thicker) which makes the SDM motor fail as it can no longer turn against the thicker lubricant. A few turns of the lens and then some live view focussing seems to free up the lubricant.

Regards

Chris

[AfterPentax Mark II]

hello, I also have this lens and a little while ago I had shortly that behaviour after not using it for a while. I noticed that my battery was far from fresh, so I put in a fully charged one and it came on immediately. So beware of the battery that has a charge of 50% or lower.

[Andrea K]

Sadly is a SDM fail

[GeeEmm]

Yes, I tend to agree. The symptoms described match my experience with the 17-70 (twice) and 60-250 (once, so far), the SDM starts working after 'exercising'. If it is in warranty, get it in before the warranty runs out, otherwise start saving ...

On rereading the OP, savings looks to be the only available option.

[photogem]

Title is wrong!
It is the very typical beginning of the SDM failure!

[normhead]

Title is wrong!
It is the very typical beginning of the SDM failure!

I have the same issue with my DA*200, DA*55 1.4, and DA*60-250.
If I don't use them for a while, this happens. Once used they will be good for weeks. It's been an issue with my DA*60-250 for over 5 years now and I've never had an SDM failure.

I'll go with the original title.

[GeeEmm]

I have the same issue with my DA*200, DA*55 1.4, and DA*60-250.
If I don't use them for a while, this happens. Once used they will be good for weeks. It's been an issue with my DA*60-250 for over 5 years now and I've never had an SDM failure.

I'll go with the original title.

You may go with the original title, but I'm surprised you cannot see the contradiction in the bolded penultimate sentence. Perhaps you meant never had a SDM failure that I haven't been able to recover, because what you describe is self-evidently an SDM failure, just not (yet?) a permanent failure.

[normhead]

You may go with the original title, but I'm surprised you cannot see the contradiction in the bolded penultimate sentence. Perhaps you meant never had a SDM failure that I haven't been able to recover, because what you describe is self-evidently an SDM failure, just not (yet?) a permanent failure.

Frame it however you want. I could care less.
Wouldn't use the word failure to describe the situation. But language is flexible.
What would you call one of your failures if the lens didn't wake up? A double failure? Maybe now you can see the issue with your choice of nomenclature. Personally, I consider a part to have failed when it permanently doesn't do what it's supposed to do. A few minutes of inaction is not a failure in my use of the language, but everyone's different.

[photogem]

I have the same issue with my DA*200, DA*55 1.4, and DA*60-250.
If I don't use them for a while, this happens. Once used they will be good for weeks. It's been an issue with my DA*60-250 for over 5 years now and I've never had an SDM failure.

I'll go with the original title.

Well, it is the same problem as with the solenoid:
Those who never had that problem claim, it isn't a big thing.
But once it is studied in detail, one knows it is a problem.

I have 2 x DA'55/1,4 here.
One won't wake up anymore.

The other is fine.

Having had a DA*16-50 SDM with failing SDM motor (but chance to swap to screwdrive) I'd say

a not working SDM motor which needs to wake up, i.e. is already weak, is failing.
No complete failing (yet) but failing the original specs.
No more, no less.

Frame it however you want. I could care less.

But you do care! Quite a lot!

Wouldn't use the word failure to describe the situation. But language is flexible.

Language and its interpretation yes, physics not.
The motor is not up to its specs anymore, so it is failing its specs.
When I compared my two lenses and the one with the SDM Motor in need to be woken up:
Focusing speed was slower compared to the other lens with a fully working SDM motor.
So yes, it is failing!

What would you call one of your failures if the lens didn't wake up? A double failure?

That's a useless comparison. If my car can speed up to 100km within 9 seconds but now needs 24 seconds, something is wrong, something fails!
Maybe in need of a good enema

Maybe now you can see the issue with your choice of nomenclature. Personally, I consider a part to have failed when it permanently doesn't do what it's supposed to do.

But it doesn't!

[normhead]

But it doesn't!

But it does. I've used all three lenses in the last two weeks. They work exactly as advertised. You have to leave them for months before they need to wake up. You exaggerate, and we all know, exaggeration is the worst thing in the whole world. Your assumption that your experience, waking up slowly and then failing is not supported by my experience. All electric/electronic systems fail eventually. Any behaviour could be interpreted this way. As in "Any camera that uses an electronic AF system will fail eventually." That doesn't mean they are failures, until they fail.

All you've established here is, they all may wake up slowly, and some of them eventually fail. But the inevitability of failure based on a slow wake up after months of sitting idle is not in any way established.

You're free to state what you think. I'm free to think about it the way I think about it. Maybe you shouldn't pin your hopes on trying to prove me wrong.

You have no data to suggest that a slow wake up leads to failure and that any lens that wakes up slow will eventually fail, more than any other lens that doesn't wake up slowly. The two things could be related, or they could be unrelated random occurrences.

My three SDM lenses with about 20 combined years of usage, one more than 10 years, would say slow wake up is not a sign of failure. However, buying a lens with electric/electronic components, you know it will fail eventually. It's just matter of when. And bottom line, given my current usage, it's quite possible none of them will fail during my life time. So your prognosticated failure is just as likely nothing more than your cynicism. Why would I want to ruin my day with such nonsense? My lenses are fine.

My DA*200 was a demo from a store and several years old, and clearly hadn't been used for few years when I bought it at a discount. It needed to wake up right out of the box. It's been fine for about 5 years now. Seriously, quit worrying.

[photogem]

- I've used all three lenses in the last two weeks.

But not 3x DA55*/1,4's.

All of 'em use a different SDM Motor

They work exactly as advertised.

Advertised? You must be joking. If Ricoh/Pentax would advertise this behaviour your 3 lenses got used to:

I have the same issue with my DA*200, DA*55 1.4, and DA*60-250.
If I don't use them for a while, this happens.

then nobody would buy them!

You have to leave them for months before they need to wake up.

WRONG! You have maybe to leave your lenses on for month until the become sleepy.

My bad sample of the DA55*/1,4 needed 1 night! Period!

You exaggerate

Wrong: You asume I exaggerate. Big difference:

.. and we all know...

who is we?

... exaggeration is the worst thing in the whole world.

I wish I could agree with this. There are many much worse things in the world. I even would then accept this strange "we"... it would change the world were it true.

Your assumption that your experience, waking up slowly and then failing is not supported by my experience.

Well, your assumtion is one against many. I know quite a few DA55*/1,4 lens owners who had the same experience as I had.

You're free to state what you think.

I am stating what I verify

I'm free to think about it the way I think about it.

you're welcome

Maybe you shouldn't pin your hopes on trying to prove me wrong.

Well, you have a strange view on my hopes. Hope would be the least valuable factor here.
Also I am not interested to prove you wrong.
I state verified facts, whoever has a DA55*/1,4 will make own experiences.

[normhead]

I am stating what I verify

Everybody states what they verify. Get over yourself. You're not some kind of infallible god of research or you'd be embarrassed to even make such pronouncements based on two (or even 5) samples.

Verified facts my verified derriere.

But why don't you provide some useful information. When do you think my DA*200 or DA*60-250, both of which went to sleep over 5 years ago, and maybe two or three times since, will fail? How about my DA* 55?Put your reputation on the line here. Tell me you know something I can verify.