See, Stan? You should have sold it to me! I would never have noticed
anything! ;^)
At 11:16 PM -0600 12/17/08, Stan Halpin wrote:
Pavol, I know you didn't intend to put your question here on the
list, but I will reply here for the general interest (?) of others
who have already commented.
1. If there is a problem with lens or camera, they can be fairly
easily and cheaply adjusted/repaired, or so people say.
2. If you are unhappy and/or unable to get the service done at a
reasonable price, send the gear back to me and I'll refund your
money.
3. I won't swear that either lens or camera was perfect. Certainly
there was a lot of talk here on the list over the last two years
about focus problems with both of these, so I was paying attention
but not compulsively. Never had any reason to suspect a systematic
problem. And the PDMLer from whom I bought the camera would have
said something if he had seen any problem. But he, like me, may just
not have been paying close enough attention.
4. I did a quick search in LightRoom. Of the 53000+ images I have
stashed (not all my own), zero, zilch, ninguno, none represent a
combination of this camera with this lens. By the time I got this
camera body as a 2nd body, I had already gotten the DA*16-50 and
pretty much retired the DA16-45.
5. I did a quick grab and upload of 8 shots taken with this camera
body (#'s 1-8 in the referenced gallery), and 7 shots taken with
this lens on my earlier K10D body (#'s 9-15). I did not check the
"minimize Exif data" box, so there should be additional data there
for you to examine that may tell you more about the circumstances of
the particular shots (e.g., aperture, shutter speed).
See http://photos.stanhalpin.com/p1026746522 You and others can
judge my results with this equipment for yourselves.
Bottom line: thanks for letting me know you are concerned. I would
not knowingly sell a defective piece of equipment (and it would be
very foolish to try and do so among this group!) And I'll refund
your purchase price if that is what you think is best for you.
Oh, and to answer a couple of your questions - this was my 2nd,
back-up body. So I used it, but not that much. Maybe 2500 images
total? The lens was a mainstay for a couple of years, particularly
when traveling. DA16-45 on one body, DA50-200 on the other was a
typical usage pattern for me. particularly when traveling. Sometimes
a prime lens on the 2nd body (77mm or 100mm macro). Could the
adjustment issue have happened in shipping? I have no clue, since I
am not sure what aspect of the lens and/or body might be out of
adjustment. If it is something mechanical rather than electronic,
then I suppose rough handling during shipping could cause a problem,
but I do pack things fairly carefully, so I just don't know.
--
Steve Sharpe
[email protected]
http://earth.delith.com/photo_gallery.html
--
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.
