Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
My following comments are a duplicate of what I sent under the title It ain't like it used to be but are a follow up in this thread as well, perhaps even more germane. On Oct 2, 2010, at 09:16 , Carlos R wrote: El 02/10/2010 13:26, paul stenquist escribió: What's DC? Have you had trouble with an SDM lens, Ecke? I know Robb and Celio did. Has anyone else on the list had a failure? I'm genuinely curious. I have three that SDM lenses I've used extensively since they were first released, and they work very well. Maybe I got lucky. Or perhaps failures are magnified on the web, because the victims complain loudly, while those of us who are satisfied are mum for the most part. Paul DC is a new type of AF motor in Pentaxland. It will appear first in their 18-135 WR zoom. By the way, the SDM motor in my 50-135 also died, after very little use. Carlos On Oct 4, 2010, at 21:54 , Joseph McAllister wrote: Well PDML'rs, you forced me to break out my DA* 50-135 ƒ2.8 today. I hadn't used it since I tested it when I bought it almost two years ago, at least as far as I can recall. I used the DA* 16-50 ƒ2.8 and the DA* 60-250 ƒ4.0 for all my canine action shooting. The 16-50 only occasionally. (It's redundant in that FL range) So I hooked it up to the K-7 figuring after all, it's getting dark earlier, the AF could use the extra stop a half. Focused on a few things around the house. Zip zip. No focus problems. Batteries charged a few days ago still good. Packed it up and headed off to a sunny late afternoon of shooting. Got to the dog park, set up, (that means sitting on a bench and turning the camera around to shoot as I carry it upside down on it's strap so it doesn't bang into doorways and nearby walls) and start shooting. Couple of shots of dogs playing 5 feet away from me, zip zip - sharp focus. Took another shot about 25 feet away — that didn't look so sharp… Another about 6 feet away — ok - that looked sharp didn't it? Woah. Now there's a pooch running and coming at me… Nothing. Removed and reset lens on body with power off. Power on. Prefocused lens so it could follow action. Nothing. Went through everything I could think of, moving switches on camera body and lens that would affect focusing. Nada. By the time I got home the batteries were indicating half charge, both of them. Mounted the DA* 16-50 ƒ2.8 to see if low voltage was the problem. Nope - it focused fine, and fast, even in room light after dark. So does the DA* 60-250 ƒ4.0. I'll finish this paragraph after both batteries are charged. I know one should do, but if it's sticky, the amps of two might free it. This could take all night - laeter After inserting a freshly charged NiMH battery in the body alone (couldn't wait), I mounted the DA* 50-135 ƒ2.8 and turned 'er on. Nada. Messed with the switches again. Nada. Ran the focus back and forth manually from end to end, taking care not to slam into the stops that I guess are physical limits of some kind. After a dozen tries going from manual focus to SDM, the darn thing started working, and continued to do so until I got bored and watched TV some more. This is similar to what I recall having to do at times to get the DA* 16-50 ƒ2.8 to do it's SDM thing. I think I will let this slide for now, even though it is a crappy system that makes these kinds of side-show shenanigans (worked that into a sentence) with Pentax's top of the line DA optics. I'm sure they are working on it and all will be well in the world again soon. I wonder if the electrical energy to move these circular disks/plates is shaped in the camera body or the lens itself. If Pentax comes out with this new-fangled DC focus drives, then I would think the body will have to ascertain the lens's needs and supply it through those two contacts or… or… or… turning the drive shaft ! That makes me wonder if the polarity of the supply is reversed in the body controlled by the FAFOX system, or just supplied and letting the lens's circuits determine the polarity in situ based on data from SAFOX. I think about these things too much! Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com “ It is still true, as was first said many years ago, that people are the only sophisticated computing devices that can be made at low cost by unskilled workers!” — Martin G. Wolf, PhD -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
2010/10/2 John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com: Well, to the extent that they reduce a business cost, but what I mean is Pentax doesn't make X number of Dollars, Euro, Yen ... profit off of each repair as was implied. It's just a bad business practice to manufacture shoddy goods, and then expect to make money off of repairing defects, especially if you don't actually repair the defects meaning the item has to be repaired again and again. If Pentax does that, they won't be in business long. They've got their faults as a company, but I just don't think they're that stupid. agreed. not as a business objective and repairs aren't a profit center either I hope but I'd think parts are cost (including warehousing and administration) plus X and I'd think there'd be a kickback of sorts from CRIS also but can't know for a fact of course. Amen to the shoddy goods bit though, SDM doesn't cut it - I just hope DC does... Ecke -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
On Oct 2, 2010, at 5:02 AM, eckinator wrote: 2010/10/2 John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com: Well, to the extent that they reduce a business cost, but what I mean is Pentax doesn't make X number of Dollars, Euro, Yen ... profit off of each repair as was implied. It's just a bad business practice to manufacture shoddy goods, and then expect to make money off of repairing defects, especially if you don't actually repair the defects meaning the item has to be repaired again and again. If Pentax does that, they won't be in business long. They've got their faults as a company, but I just don't think they're that stupid. agreed. not as a business objective and repairs aren't a profit center either I hope but I'd think parts are cost (including warehousing and administration) plus X and I'd think there'd be a kickback of sorts from CRIS also but can't know for a fact of course. Amen to the shoddy goods bit though, SDM doesn't cut it - I just hope DC does... Ecke What's DC? Have you had trouble with an SDM lens, Ecke? I know Robb and Celio did. Has anyone else on the list had a failure? I'm genuinely curious. I have three that SDM lenses I've used extensively since they were first released, and they work very well. Maybe I got lucky. Or perhaps failures are magnified on the web, because the victims complain loudly, while those of us who are satisfied are mum for the most part. Paul -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
-- From: paul stenquist Subject: Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but... What's DC? Have you had trouble with an SDM lens, Ecke? I know Robb and Celio did. Has anyone else on the list had a failure? I'm genuinely curious. I have three that SDM lenses I've used extensively since they were first released, and they work very well. Maybe I got lucky. Or perhaps failures are magnified on the web, because the victims complain loudly, while those of us who are satisfied are mum for the most part. We rarely talk about equipment on list anyway. You go over to PentaxForums, which is much more gearheaded, and there are a whole lot of failures being talked about. My 60-250 failed while riding in a gadget bag, probably after less than 50 pictures (I can't say for sure because frigging Adobe STILL doesn't support that lens in Lightroom) This is a technology which should have zero, or practically zero failure rate, but one of the wonks on PF indicated that the actual failure rate is closer to 5%. If this is an accurate number, it is unacceptable in a high end and expensive product. Even if it is incorrect by a factor of 100%, it is still an unacceptably high failure rate. Canon has been doing in lens AF for some 25 years now, and they have virtually no lens failures. The fact that there is a perceived problem is indicative that there is a problem with these lenses, your bullshit luck to the contrary. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
On Oct 2, 2010, at 11:23 AM, William Robb wrote: -- From: paul stenquist Subject: Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but... What's DC? Have you had trouble with an SDM lens, Ecke? I know Robb and Celio did. Has anyone else on the list had a failure? I'm genuinely curious. I have three that SDM lenses I've used extensively since they were first released, and they work very well. Maybe I got lucky. Or perhaps failures are magnified on the web, because the victims complain loudly, while those of us who are satisfied are mum for the most part. We rarely talk about equipment on list anyway. You go over to PentaxForums, which is much more gearheaded, and there are a whole lot of failures being talked about. My 60-250 failed while riding in a gadget bag, probably after less than 50 pictures (I can't say for sure because frigging Adobe STILL doesn't support that lens in Lightroom) This is a technology which should have zero, or practically zero failure rate, but one of the wonks on PF indicated that the actual failure rate is closer to 5%. If this is an accurate number, it is unacceptable in a high end and expensive product. Even if it is incorrect by a factor of 100%, it is still an unacceptably high failure rate. Canon has been doing in lens AF for some 25 years now, and they have virtually no lens failures. The fact that there is a perceived problem is indicative that there is a problem with these lenses, your bullshit luck to the contrary. Doesn't Pentax Forum whine about everything? I believe there is a problem, but it's blown out of proportion. My lack of failures or luck isn't bullshit, it's fact, and you'd be hard-pressed to find a set of SDM lenses that get more use than mine. Paul William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
El 02/10/2010 13:26, paul stenquist escribió: What's DC? Have you had trouble with an SDM lens, Ecke? I know Robb and Celio did. Has anyone else on the list had a failure? I'm genuinely curious. I have three that SDM lenses I've used extensively since they were first released, and they work very well. Maybe I got lucky. Or perhaps failures are magnified on the web, because the victims complain loudly, while those of us who are satisfied are mum for the most part. Paul DC is a new type of AF motor in Pentaxland. It will appear first in their 18-135 WR zoom. By the way, the SDM motor in my 50-135 also died, after very little use. Carlos -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
-- From: P N Stenquist Subject: Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but... Doesn't Pentax Forum whine about everything? I believe there is a problem, but it's blown out of proportion. My lack of failures or luck isn't bullshit, it's fact, and you'd be hard-pressed to find a set of SDM lenses that get more use than mine. They live to whine, but this doesn't mean they have nothing to whine about, and there are some pretty sharp cookies posting over there. The consensus among the techno types over there is that SDM failures are markedly high in lenses that see very little use, and substantially lower in lenses that see quite a bit of use, so I suspect that your shooting pattern is what is keeping your lenses working. Having said that, a lens shouldn't stop working from sitting for a few months in a camera bag. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
On Oct 2, 2010, at 12:16 PM, Carlos R wrote: El 02/10/2010 13:26, paul stenquist escribió: What's DC? Have you had trouble with an SDM lens, Ecke? I know Robb and Celio did. Has anyone else on the list had a failure? I'm genuinely curious. I have three that SDM lenses I've used extensively since they were first released, and they work very well. Maybe I got lucky. Or perhaps failures are magnified on the web, because the victims complain loudly, while those of us who are satisfied are mum for the most part. Paul DC is a new type of AF motor in Pentaxland. It will appear first in their 18-135 WR zoom. By the way, the SDM motor in my 50-135 also died, after very little use. Well it's good to know they're working on a better version. Hopefuly, they'll also develop a reliable repair for existing lenses. Paul Carlos -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
On Oct 2, 2010, at 12:39 PM, William Robb wrote: -- From: P N Stenquist Subject: Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but... Doesn't Pentax Forum whine about everything? I believe there is a problem, but it's blown out of proportion. My lack of failures or luck isn't bullshit, it's fact, and you'd be hard-pressed to find a set of SDM lenses that get more use than mine. They live to whine, but this doesn't mean they have nothing to whine about, and there are some pretty sharp cookies posting over there. The consensus among the techno types over there is that SDM failures are markedly high in lenses that see very little use, and substantially lower in lenses that see quite a bit of use, so I suspect that your shooting pattern is what is keeping your lenses working. Having said that, a lens shouldn't stop working from sitting for a few months in a camera bag. Agreed. I hope they at least are working on a good fix for repaired lenses. I don't use my 50-135 very often. Paul William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
On 10/2/2010 5:58 PM, P N Stenquist wrote: Doesn't Pentax Forum whine about everything? I believe there is a problem, but it's blown out of proportion. My lack of failures or luck isn't bullshit, it's fact, and you'd be hard-pressed to find a set of SDM lenses that get more use than mine. Paul Sorry for popping in here. Paul, you seem to be among the more active photographers on the PDML. It also seems to be a general consensus that SDM failure is more pronounced the less the lenses are put to use. It could be that you simply exercise your SDM lenses out of trouble in a manner of speaking. Another thing to take into account, Paul and Bill, is presence, quality and reliability of local Pentax service. Beside your corner of our earth-ball, there are other corners where Pentax gear is not that easy to take care of. Case to point. I had to bring my MZ-6 (ZX-L) in for AF check up and general clean up. The guy from the service lab called and told me that they'll do all they can, but Pentax, they said, keeps spare parts for just 3 years after discontinuation of its products, so he indicated, he might not be necessarily able to fix my camera should it require anything beyond plain cleaning. Although MZ-6 is ancient by modern measure (bought it in 2002), I take it his claim would be quoted to me about any other Pentax gear I have. Bummer if you ask me. Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
Boris Liberman wrote: On 10/2/2010 5:58 PM, P N Stenquist wrote: Doesn't Pentax Forum whine about everything? I believe there is a problem, but it's blown out of proportion. My lack of failures or luck isn't bullshit, it's fact, and you'd be hard-pressed to find a set of SDM lenses that get more use than mine. Sorry for popping in here. Paul, you seem to be among the more active photographers on the PDML. It also seems to be a general consensus that SDM failure is more pronounced the less the lenses are put to use. It may be the general consensus but my 16-50 has had trouble-free SDM despite often spending months sitting idle between uses. I think the less use = more failure hypothesis probably falls under the heading of what BF Skinner termed superstitious behavior. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
2010/10/2 paul stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net: What's DC? Direct Current AF motor. There was a mail here some time ago linking to the patent document. Simple, robust looking design. Have you had trouble with an SDM lens, Ecke? I know Robb and Celio did. Has anyone else on the list had a failure? I'm genuinely curious. yes I have. my DA*16-50 was both repaired and replaced under warranty following two SDM motor failures. my current copy was acting up once very briefly in sub zero temperatures but has been peaceful otherwise. I hope it stays that way. as to the less use theory expressed by some people, I was an accessory to that, it was my gut feeling also and I also read it from other people. nothing to substantiate that feeling. someone said the grease might go sticky. I passed it on in here with a pinch of salt or two. there was also a belief expressed by some that the problem was limited to the SDM+screw lenses but I have no knowledge of how likely that idea is to be accurate or applicable. I doubt it somewhat. I've had a Canon body's mirror brake (for lack of a better word) go sticky from lack of use though, apparently a common issue known as Canon Asthma in these parts -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
On Oct 2, 2010, at 5:53 PM, eckinator wrote: 2010/10/2 paul stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net: What's DC? Direct Current AF motor. There was a mail here some time ago linking to the patent document. Simple, robust looking design. Have you had trouble with an SDM lens, Ecke? I know Robb and Celio did. Has anyone else on the list had a failure? I'm genuinely curious. yes I have. my DA*16-50 was both repaired and replaced under warranty following two SDM motor failures. my current copy was acting up once very briefly in sub zero temperatures but has been peaceful otherwise. I hope it stays that way. Thanks for the replay. Apparently, the problem is very common. Keeping my fingers crossed. Paul as to the less use theory expressed by some people, I was an accessory to that, it was my gut feeling also and I also read it from other people. nothing to substantiate that feeling. someone said the grease might go sticky. I passed it on in here with a pinch of salt or two. there was also a belief expressed by some that the problem was limited to the SDM+screw lenses but I have no knowledge of how likely that idea is to be accurate or applicable. I doubt it somewhat. I've had a Canon body's mirror brake (for lack of a better word) go sticky from lack of use though, apparently a common issue known as Canon Asthma in these parts -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
I've owned numerous Pentax lenses since 1969 and have never had even a hint of an issue with them... until I got the SMC DA* 16-50mm f2.8 about a year and a half ago. It worked fine for several months but earlier this year on a photo shoot in Utah it started not to auto focus. I could manually focus but still the lense was less than a year old! I was going to ship it back for repair, but then it started to auto focus again and this on again/off again operation continues to this day. Can't figure it out. Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: paul stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net Subject: Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but... On Oct 2, 2010, at 5:02 AM, eckinator wrote: 2010/10/2 John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com: Well, to the extent that they reduce a business cost, but what I mean is Pentax doesn't make X number of Dollars, Euro, Yen ... profit off of each repair as was implied. It's just a bad business practice to manufacture shoddy goods, and then expect to make money off of repairing defects, especially if you don't actually repair the defects meaning the item has to be repaired again and again. If Pentax does that, they won't be in business long. They've got their faults as a company, but I just don't think they're that stupid. agreed. not as a business objective and repairs aren't a profit center either I hope but I'd think parts are cost (including warehousing and administration) plus X and I'd think there'd be a kickback of sorts from CRIS also but can't know for a fact of course. Amen to the shoddy goods bit though, SDM doesn't cut it - I just hope DC does... Ecke What's DC? Have you had trouble with an SDM lens, Ecke? I know Robb and Celio did. Has anyone else on the list had a failure? I'm genuinely curious. I have three that SDM lenses I've used extensively since they were first released, and they work very well. Maybe I got lucky. Or perhaps failures are magnified on the web, because the victims complain loudly, while those of us who are satisfied are mum for the most part. Paul -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
? I've owned numerous Pentax lenses since 1969 and have never had even a hint of an issue with them... until I got the SMC DA* 16-50mm f2.8 about a year and a half ago. It worked fine for several months but earlier this year on a photo shoot in Utah it started not to auto focus. I could manually focus but still the lense was less than a year old! I was going to ship it back for repair, but then it started to auto focus again and this on again/off again operation continues to this day. Can't figure it out. If you've got some warranty left, send it in ASAP. Get that thing fixed before it stops working completely. John -- http://www.jacelio.com http://www.cafepress.com/jacelio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
-- From: Mark Roberts Subject: Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but... It may be the general consensus but my 16-50 has had trouble-free SDM despite often spending months sitting idle between uses. I think the less use = more failure hypothesis probably falls under the heading of what BF Skinner termed superstitious behavior. Which take us back to Pentax laying an egg with SDM. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
Mark, please notice that said it /seems/ to be a general consensus and not everyone knows that I am not trying to shout gloom-n-doom here, but either way, a number of personal testimonies will not prove the claim. I am glad your lens works. It is very unfortunate that Ecke, Bill Robb and others had to deal with SDM motor failure nonetheless. Be it due to lack of use or not, but the problem is there. Boris On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 8:35 PM, Mark Roberts m...@robertstech.com wrote: Boris Liberman wrote: On 10/2/2010 5:58 PM, P N Stenquist wrote: Doesn't Pentax Forum whine about everything? I believe there is a problem, but it's blown out of proportion. My lack of failures or luck isn't bullshit, it's fact, and you'd be hard-pressed to find a set of SDM lenses that get more use than mine. Sorry for popping in here. Paul, you seem to be among the more active photographers on the PDML. It also seems to be a general consensus that SDM failure is more pronounced the less the lenses are put to use. It may be the general consensus but my 16-50 has had trouble-free SDM despite often spending months sitting idle between uses. I think the less use = more failure hypothesis probably falls under the heading of what BF Skinner termed superstitious behavior. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
From: William Robb From: John Celio I just got my DA* 16-50 back from repair, but I didn't have to pay for it: my email to Ned Bunnell, in which I expressed my extreme disappointment that my lens would go bad while sitting on a shelf for four months, apparently convinced C.R.I.S. to see my point of view. I don't like having to be a squeaky wheel to get problems solved, but I think in this case it was worth it. Let's hope the repair sticks this time. I really think Pentax should just man up and put a damned near forever warranty on these lenses. It's their crap technology, why should we have to pay for it over and over? At the very least, it shouldn't be a profit center for them. I don't think they make a profit from repairs. I thought Pentax had out-sourced repair work? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
2010/10/1 John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com: I don't think they make a profit from repairs. I thought Pentax had out-sourced repair work? outsourcing usually saves money (or reduces loss) plus you no longer have to worry about employee rights. you bet they make a profit. ecke -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
2010/9/30 John Celio n...@neovenator.com: I just got my DA* 16-50 back from repair, but I didn't have to pay for it: my email to Ned Bunnell, in which I expressed my extreme disappointment that my lens would go bad while sitting on a shelf for four months, apparently convinced C.R.I.S. to see my point of view. I don't like having to be a squeaky wheel to get problems solved, but I think in this case it was worth it. Let's hope the repair sticks this time. Congrats John and glad my advice was worthwhile for once =) Ecke -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
-- From: John Sessoms Subject: Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but... At the very least, it shouldn't be a profit center for them. I don't think they make a profit from repairs. I thought Pentax had out-sourced repair work? So they get to sell lots of parts and fixing it is a profit center for the repair people, whomever they are. The point I was trying to make, which seems to have been lost on you, is that Pentax should be fixing dead AF motors in these lenses without charge because it is painfully obvious that there is a fundamental problem with them. If this is done by Pentax or an outsourced repair company is of absolutely no importance, the point is that Pentax should be picking up the tab. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
El 01/10/2010 17:43, William Robb escribió: So they get to sell lots of parts and fixing it is a profit center for the repair people, whomever they are. The point I was trying to make, which seems to have been lost on you, is that Pentax should be fixing dead AF motors in these lenses without charge because it is painfully obvious that there is a fundamental problem with them. If this is done by Pentax or an outsourced repair company is of absolutely no importance, the point is that Pentax should be picking up the tab. William Robb Amen to that, William. Carlos -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
From: eckinator 2010/10/1 John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com: I don't think they make a profit from repairs. I thought Pentax had out-sourced repair work? outsourcing usually saves money (or reduces loss) plus you no longer have to worry about employee rights. you bet they make a profit. ecke Well, to the extent that they reduce a business cost, but what I mean is Pentax doesn't make X number of Dollars, Euro, Yen ... profit off of each repair as was implied. It's just a bad business practice to manufacture shoddy goods, and then expect to make money off of repairing defects, especially if you don't actually repair the defects meaning the item has to be repaired again and again. If Pentax does that, they won't be in business long. They've got their faults as a company, but I just don't think they're that stupid. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
I just got my DA* 16-50 back from repair, but I didn't have to pay for it: my email to Ned Bunnell, in which I expressed my extreme disappointment that my lens would go bad while sitting on a shelf for four months, apparently convinced C.R.I.S. to see my point of view. I don't like having to be a squeaky wheel to get problems solved, but I think in this case it was worth it. Let's hope the repair sticks this time. John -- http://www.neovenator.com http://www.cafepress.com/jacelio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
On Sep 30, 2010, at 2:46 PM, John Celio wrote: I just got my DA* 16-50 back from repair, but I didn't have to pay for it: my email to Ned Bunnell, in which I expressed my extreme disappointment that my lens would go bad while sitting on a shelf for four months, apparently convinced C.R.I.S. to see my point of view. I Congratulations. don't like having to be a squeaky wheel to get problems solved, but I think in this case it was worth it. Let's hope the repair sticks this time. I think you mean the repair continues to work rather than sticks. John -- http://www.neovenator.com http://www.cafepress.com/jacelio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
? don't like having to be a squeaky wheel to get problems solved, but I think in this case it was worth it. Let's hope the repair sticks this time. I think you mean the repair continues to work rather than sticks. Heh, yes. That. Time will tell. John -- http://www.jacelio.com http://www.cafepress.com/jacelio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but...
-- From: John Celio Subject: I don't like being the squeaky wheel, but... I just got my DA* 16-50 back from repair, but I didn't have to pay for it: my email to Ned Bunnell, in which I expressed my extreme disappointment that my lens would go bad while sitting on a shelf for four months, apparently convinced C.R.I.S. to see my point of view. I don't like having to be a squeaky wheel to get problems solved, but I think in this case it was worth it. Let's hope the repair sticks this time. I really think Pentax should just man up and put a damned near forever warranty on these lenses. It's their crap technology, why should we have to pay for it over and over? At the very least, it shouldn't be a profit center for them. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
