Apparently someone had to get it.
Bob Blakely wrote:
> Am I the only person who's DA* 16-50 worked great out of the box and
> continues to do so?
>
> Regards
> Bob...
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> "I don't mind if you don't like my manners.
> I don't like them myself. They're pretty bad.
> I grieve over them long winter evenings."
> -- Philip Marlowe (Humphrey Bogart)
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>
>> I suspect that quality control issues are what has delayed the DA*
>> 60-250. Hopefully, this long delay is a sign that Pentax is revising
>> manufacturing and/or quality control procedures.
>>
>> My first DA* 16-50 was defective (misaligned focus plane). My second
>> one is great. My DA* 50-135 was fine, and I haven't heard many
>> complaints about that lens.
>> Paul
>> On Aug 6, 2008, at 9:22 AM, William Robb wrote:
>>
>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Antti-Pekka Virjonen"
>>>
>>>
>>>> I am a bit hesitant to buy another DA* lens now. Should I sell all my
>>>> Pentax gear and follow Cotty to the dark side now ;-)?
>>>>
>>> I would be very hesitant about buying any Pentax lens via mail
>>> order at this
>>> point, I am hearing far too many quality control complaints to
>>> trust them to
>>> be able to put a piece of equipment together properly.
>>> I think it is appalling that a lens as expensive as the 16-50 has
>>> generated
>>> as many complaints as it has.
>>>
>>> William Robb
>>>
>
>
>
--
You get further with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone.
--Al Capone.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
