Web Analytics RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: Vulnerability of the DAL Plastic Mount

Sunday, August 14, 2011

Vulnerability of the DAL Plastic Mount

See these two recent reported cases..

1. http://forum.xitek.com/showthread.php?threadid=880398 (machine-translated English page here) and the picture showing the damage is as follows:-


(The above picture is posted at Post #32 in thread.)

It is told that his DAL lens was dropped to the mattress of his bed (for a short distance) where the user sat on and the plastic lens mount of his DAL lens was broken immediately!

2. Yet, there is another DAL user reported (in Post #74 of the above thread) that his lens mount was broken so suddenly without his attention for just using for several times for his new lens! The mount of his DAL55-300 lens was found broken just when he picked out his Pentax DSLR camera from his backpack with the lens mounted! Here is his posted picture showing the damage:-



It can be seen that the break is different from the first user's that the base of the plastic mount was broken. To be somehow different, the second DAL user had one of the three bayonet petals disintegrated into small pieces under normal use and without any dropping, he insisted. He has tried to contact dealer about this issue and asked for a replacement but of course he was denied. It is just because the user could not prove that there was no mis-handling by the user and the dealer firmly "believed" that it was just the user's own fault and that the Pentax gear would not be as vulnerable as that! :-|

After all these, the first OP decided to mod up his DAL lenses so as to improve the reliability of the mount, which is just so vulnerable in his eyes. Look! Here they are! Have you ever seen those DAL lenses in metal mount?! :-o


(Above: Modded DAL 18-55 in Metal Mount)

(Below: Modded DAL 55-300 in Metal Mount)


Wow, excellent job indeed! Bravo, guy! :-D

Comments (28)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
It must be a very hard mattress ;)

One question about your "Important Notice": what is "the original content"? I see you're only copying stuff from everywhere, e.g. none of those pictures are yours. Were you authorised to use them?
6 replies · active 437 weeks ago
A reasonable conclusion after reading Ricehigh's posts is that he doesn't like Pentax. The flagship dslrs are consistently criticised and the performance of autofocus, exposure and flash performance of all models is portrayed as below an acceptable standard. Mechanical integrity is also questioned, as again this post demonstrates.
Once you read one series of posts you have basically read all that are to follow.
With the considerable time it must take to maintain the Blog, I ask why not devote time to promoting a brand or brand that he does like? What is your preferred brand, Rice?
3 replies · active 708 weeks ago
Does anyone know where can i buy one of these metal mounts? i would be interested in change my DAL lenses mount too
3 replies · active 708 weeks ago
These plastic mounts really suck and I thought Pentax was all about durability and ruggedness. They're crap!
7 replies · active 708 weeks ago
Plastic, used with expertise, is a perfectly fine engineering material
2 replies · active 707 weeks ago
I agree that plastic is okay if the quality is higher. Heck, they can manufacture engineering plastic that's almost impossible to break, not that it is required standard on a lens. Better plastic would satisfy the photographers in terms of weight/quality & Pentax's need to reduce cost.
What amused me was the absolute fury expressed by numerous photographers that a “professional quality” lens might have a plastic mount. I’ve looked up the term ‘professional quality’ everywhere and nowhere have I found it defined as ‘having an all-metal mount’. But some people are livid that it isn’t so. If you’ve read one of these posts on the internet lately, you’ve learned all kinds of things. . . none of which are true.<a href="https:// www.jx-plastic.com/custom-coroplast-box /" target="_blank"> custom coroplast boxes

Post a new comment

Comments by