[dbs]

To the OP

As was mentioned above 3 pages into discussion.
Can it be fixed ?
Is it economical to do this
That would be my first thought

Dave

[reh321]

My very first DSLR K-30 failed at about 5000 clicks due to aperture block failure...….my second failed at about 50K.
I sold both as parts cameras on ebay and still get real disgusted thinking about it.
I would be happy getting 90K from any camera !

Did you not consider other options?

* replace solenoid yourself

* send to Calif for $100 fix

* send to 'Pentax' for fix

* use with manual aperture control lenses

[Ronald Oakes]

Did you not consider other options?

* replace solenoid yourself ……………….(that info wasn't available then)

* send to Calif for $100 fix ………………...(that wasn't available at the time)

* send to 'Pentax' for fix...…………….. (yes....and they wanted too much out of warranty)

* use with manual aperture control lenses...……………….. (I lived with that for quite a while)

I found it much easier to simply abandon the K-30 platform for the K-3 series. I wasn't about to let lightning strike a 3rd time !
I suggest to the OP to simply move on to a better Camera , and never look back.

[leekil]

My friend, I made no incorrect assumptions, and I don't care if you understand why or not. I don't get paid for teaching here.Believe what you want. But you can't have correct conclusions from incomplete data. Your objections are speculation, no fact, Not one cares what might be. Only what is.

Mmm, your objections were based on incorrect assumptions, so no facts there, I would say. "That study is just pure anti-Pentax propaganda repeated ad nauseam by disgruntled users." looks like you thought it consisted only of a poll, and only K-30 specific.


So therefore I guess this would be anti-pentax propaganda as well:

K-3 shutter expectancy


And this would be anti-Nikon propaganda?

Nikon D800 shutter expectancy

---------- Post added 07-25-18 at 10:13 PM ----------

I think you interpreted my original post as much more serious than I did, and then took it to the next level of seriousness, right up into offense.

[normhead]

Mmm, your objections were based on incorrect assumptions, so no facts there, I would say.

How is my statement that the conclusions are based on biased and incompletedata incorrect? Adress these three points.

Was the sample test random?

If the answer is no, I'm right, you're wrong.

Was the data submitted on the longevity of the camera collected after the cameras had actually died, or was data submitted from cameras that were still being used, and could considerably increase their shutter count over time.

If data was accepted from still in use cameras, longevity data was incomplete. I'm right you're wrong.

The easiest way to create false conclusions in a study is to use trusted research tools, and submit incomplete data. The methodology can be fooled by incomplete data. That's exactly what happened here.

How is that not factual?

I'm not going to read your silly studies. I don't study propagandists or people who use shoddy research methods. I study trusted researchers, who use the peer review process to refine their work and understand that if you don't collect your data with integrity, your study will have no integrity. The link you posted to uxses voluntary reporting of research data, universally discredited as a means of producing definitive conclusions. At best, they are used for helping formulate the data collection and design of further research, or to suggest further research is needed.

Have you ever taken a stats course, participated in a University level research project or done anything that would qualify you to understand this kind of process?

If you are really serious about this stuff, do both of those things, then get back to me.

In the meantime, quoting really bad research is probably something you shouldn't do if you want to have any credibility at all. We aren't a bunch of high school students for the most part, here on the forum.

As for never claiming the study was scientific, you do realize you used the term "average" which implies a level of scientific rigour this poll can't provide. There is no useful information about the average life of a K-30 that can be derived from that poll. It does illustrate brilliantly how you can manipulate data by using people with a legitimate complaint as your target sample.

The fact that a complaint may be legitimate does not in any way influence the results from people who never had that complaint. In this case, 91,000 actuations with no problems. The next question should be, what percentage of K-30 owners will experience this level of longevity. That has never been answered, and can't be by this poll. That's why it's biased. It can only measure the performance of cameras that have already failed and it doesn't and can't include the performance of those that haven't.

Peer review at any research program would have cleared that up in about 2 seconds.

If you want to do a longevity study, it's not 100% accurate until everyone in the study has died. That's pretty simple.

[08amczb]

I will ask the price of the repair, but I expecting more than what I would like to pay for it. When I really need a second body I can lend one. For everyday use there is the KP and the PZ-1p.
Now even the K-3 series has a very affordable used price and the used K-1's are coming too. I think I can get something better and I definitely want a FF camera when my founds allow one.

[dbs]

Sounds like a plan is in place

Go for it

Dave

[mikesbike]

No, I don't buy another APS-C body, the KP is a perfect travel/backup body. I have three local Pentaxian friends who can lend me a K-50 in emergency.
I have 24, 31, 35, 43, 50, 55, 77, 100, 200 FF/Compatible AF primes, it's time to use the whole image circle.

With all those FF primes, many of them expensive, and originally designed for a FF FOV, the K-1 does make sense for you. One of the design goals for the KP was to be an APS-C desirable 2nd body for K-1 owners.

[08amczb]

I collected them in mind of a possible full frame upgrade.

[BigMackCam]

One of the design goals for the KP was to be an APS-C desirable 2nd body for K-1 owners.

Interesting. Was that officially stated by Ricoh? It kind of makes sense, given the similarity in dial layout and function...

[MarkJerling]

Mmm, your objections were based on incorrect assumptions, so no facts there, I would say. "That study is just pure anti-Pentax propaganda repeated ad nauseam by disgruntled users." looks like you thought it consisted only of a poll, and only K-30 specific.


So therefore I guess this would be anti-pentax propaganda as well:

K-3 shutter expectancy


And this would be anti-Nikon propaganda?

Nikon D800 shutter expectancy

---------- Post added 07-25-18 at 10:13 PM ----------

I think you interpreted my original post as much more serious than I did, and then took it to the next level of seriousness, right up into offense.

Did you notice the infinitesimally small number of respondents in the surveys you link to?

[mikesbike]

Interesting. Was that officially stated by Ricoh? It kind of makes sense, given the similarity in dial layout and function...

I believe so- the similarity is unmistakable. I came across the design goals shortly after the KP was announced, but cannot recall the source. It may have been an interview with a Ricoh/Pentax rep. The KP had several design goals, some targets being K-1 owners, with K-1 like performance, controls, image quality, etc. and among others those potentially interested in APS-C mirrorless for quality with compactness.

[leekil]

Did you notice the infinitesimally small number of respondents in the surveys you link to?

Yes, if you look at my first post on it, you will see that I cited several shortcomings of the poll info.

---------- Post added 07-27-18 at 01:18 PM ----------

If the answer is no, I'm right, you're wrong.

What you're wrong about is trying to prove me wrong. I'm not disagreeing with you on the accuracy of the poll info, only your characterization of the site. If you look at my first post on it, I mentioned the shortcomings in the data. You have written two long posts going on and on trying to prove me wrong, for no real reason...

But if you would stop typing and actually look at some of the other links I sent you would see that the site is hardly "negative propaganda against Pentax"

[parinya-ekparinya]

Sorry to hear that. If everything else is still working fine, you may send it in for repair.

By the way, I think Pentax rates K-30 at 50k for its shutter count if my memory serves me right. I'm a current owner of K-50 and I expect the same 50k for my camera. Perhaps, it is a good time for me to find the official reference for this.

[pentax360]

If my K-70 lasts that long I'll be well satisfied with it, I've been taking about 5000 photos a year and I want to use it for 10 years and that's only 50,000.