I thought it was a bit rash too, considering I've heard a lot of good stuff about the 50 and 100 Sigma Macros, and I know that the 28-70 2.8 can produce reliably outstanding results on a film body.
However, Wally probably was getting a bit frustrated after taking a beating on the dpreview forums from some other posters who didn't really seem to get the issues he brought up. If I understand correctly, he's an electrical engineer an came to the logical conclusion that it was a lens compatibility issue not a camera issue. I'm not sure myself, but I'll have to wait and see if my ist D comes back fixed (whether the new circuit board works) before I make draw any conclusions. I'll paste some of my correspondence with Wally below, if you're interested (interesting read, more interesting if you're into conspiracy theories). Anyway, I suppose if you can afford to go out there and try it all, and you're not in a rush, why not. :) Cheers, Ryan -snip- ----- Original Message ----- From: "tpx20" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Ryan Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 10:50 PM Subject: RE: The ist D/ 28-70 2.8 DF issue.. > Hi Ryan, > > I saw your posting on dpreview. > > Today, 3 people I trust who have Pentax and Tamron lenses have confirmed > that the *istD does not alter the focus point when the aperture is changed > in AV using Tamron or Pentax lenses. > > All my sigma lenses including a DC lens do, all theses other people's sigma > lenses DO. > > I have tested my lenses on another brand new *istD, no difference. > > I recall reading a thread on dpreview that Tamron paid the Pentax royalties > for the Pentax lens communications protocol while sigma would not pay and > only reverse engineered it, looks like they got it WRONG. > > There is no one at CR Kennedy Victoria who now doesn't know about this > problem and see it as a very serious issue. > > It will be interesting to see what they come up with since CRK also import > sigma lenses. > > I firmly believe the *istD is NOT at fault, it is the sigma lens and it can > be fixed by a very quick simple reprogramming of the chip inside the lens > with the CORRECT PARAMETERS, I can only see it happening if Sigma hand over > some money to Pentax, but I feel it has to happen or Sigma lens sales will > suffer badly. > > In your particular case it matters not that your lens is out of warranty [I > think you said it's out of warranty], it wasn't correctly manufactured to be > compatible with Pentax like it claims on the box and in sigma's > specifications, look at it much the same as a free RECALL. > > Cheers > Wally. ---another snip---- > Hi Ryan this old post on mis focus on the pentax forum mentions > "confidentiality" > > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1028&message=8235029 > > extract below > > Cheers > Wally > > Now onto the mis-focusing issue. You didn't miss any previous posts of mine, > in relationship to my discussions with Pentax and their response. In fact > because of a promissed confidentiality agreement I made (and I certainly > know you can respet this), I honestly should not have relayed as much as I > did already did. I think sharing info is an important ingrediant in this or > any hobby or profession...but when info is requested to be kept in the > private domain till a proper response by a company is forcoming, we can all > agree it's important to honor that request, otherwise the working > relationship with that company is severed. Thats why I have to limit what I > discussed with them. As I already mentioned, they are well aware of the > issue of mis-focusing under the circumstances thats been very well described > and are aware of the underlying problem. The problem is two fold and thats > why it's not as easy as a simple re-write to the software. They are > currently looking into a working solution but keep in mind that the > marketable lifespan of any digital camera is extremely short and the time > and effort and cost into a fix may not be worthwhile, especially that the > number of individuals who utilize many of the offending fast lenses are > relatively small. It's unlike film based SLr's that lasted in current > inventory for sometimes yesrs, such as the Lx...and we all know the running > changes made to that camera. Even Nikon and their most diasterous digital > issue (band with the original D1), took the sceems of thousands of pro's to > get them to perform a" silent fix," but even to this day have yet to > acknoledge there is a problem. Threats of a class action law suit probably > helped the Pro's cause in that particular case. In any case they have > acknowledged that some of the main concerns or issues of the istD will be > addressed in the forthcoming model, even if a lower end version of the istD. > It's much more cost effective to address issues this way then with a model > that has a short life span relative to the digital SLR world. I give Pentax > credit, they have always been a company responsive to issues, much more so > than many others in the photographic relm. if there is more info forthcoming > or a resolution realted to this issue that I am free to discuss, you can be > sure I would let you and everyone else know, thats a certainty. I know you > would do the same. I too have resorted to MF with certain lenses hen used > wide open (years of shooting all those Spotmatics, Mx's Lx's and medium > format). Still as yoy mentioned, there are times when Af becomes a necessary > reuirement to be compeitive under certain demanding circumstances and it's > nice to know it's there and reliable. Thanks again for your vey useful > comments. > Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Graywolf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 12:31 AM Subject: Re: update on my ist D's status > Interesting, your friend has the same problem you do which apparently > turns out to be a defective circuit board. So he is going to dump the > lenses, never mind that when it does not work with all the lenses, it is > probably not the lenses that are the problem. Then he is going to get a > genuine Pentax lens. > > What makes him think that will fix the camera problem? --Your friend > seems to think emotionally, rather than rationally. > > -- > > Ryan Lee wrote: > > > I rang CR Kennedy to check when I was going to get my ist D back (sent it in > > for AF inaccuracy with the Sigma 28-70 2.8 DF, and battery depleted message > > when connecting to the laptop with battery grip) and they told me they were > > waiting for a part. I asked which part and they told me they were replacing > > a circuit board in the camera.. How bizarre. > > > > But anyway, it better be working when I get it back (they told me it'd be > > another 2 weeks! :( ) > > > > And another poster on DPReview (WallyOZ) updated me on his woes with the > > same camera and the same lens, apparently he's returning the Sigma 28-70 > > 2.8, 50 2.8 Macro and 100 2.8 Macro, and going to cash it in for a Nikon D70 > > and lens, and also get a Pentax lens for the Pentax. He also told me he was > > on the waiting list for the 20D! Apparently he's sick of opinions and > > decided to try them all out himself. I told him to wait for the Maxxum 7D, > > and from what he replied, I won't be surprised if he gives that a try when > > it's out.. > > > > Cheers, > > Ryan (on an epic quest towards budget liberation..) > > > > > > > > -- > graywolf > http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html > > >
