The Quickly De-coloured 100th Anniversary Hotshoe Cover

A Xitek Pentax user complains about his brand new O-HC171, which was purchased from official Ricoh channel, has turned its colour from silver to black just within two days after he removed the protective film of it:

https://forum.xitek.com/thread-1896215-1-1-1.html
(in Simplified Chinese, Google translation to English here)

And, another Pentaxian in the above forum thread reported that his O-HC171 had also turned dark.

Seems like oxidation took place. What a Quality of Ricoh! :-o

Pentax Aperture Block Problem Class Action Lawsuit

https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/consumer-products/electronics/pentax-camera-class-action-alleges-aperture-defect/

"A camera owner has filed a class action lawsuit against Ricoh USA Inc. over claims that the company’s line of Pentax camera products are defective in a way that causes them to produce useless, almost completely dark photographs."

1st Dead AF Report of the DFA*50/1.4

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4354286#forum-post-62128519

K-1 Mode Dial Failure

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/58-troubleshooting-beginner-help/323158-k1-mode-dial-failure.html

Seems to be a common fault as reported.

My K-1 Impressions (Pure Text Quick Review)

The ergonomics of the K-1 is superb. It feels very comfortable to hold in hands and feels very solid and balanced. The overall build of the K-1 is very good, but the camera top feels a bit plasticky and hollow.

AF is really accurate, but hit rate is not 100%, sometime it missed, especially when focusing in a hurry or under low light. But when it hits, it is really accurate. Tried the three FA Limited wide opened, no problem. Tried several other A, FA, FA*, DA and DA* primes, they all focused accurately wide opened. The K-1 probably is the most accurate Pentax AFSLR ever made, since the MZ-S. I really like it! :-)

Focusing is faster and quieter than before. But the speed is not particularly fast when it is compared to other FF bodies of Canon and Nikon. Forget about focus tracking with multiple AF points for moving objects, the points are still not enough and are too much centred. There is still some room for improvement. 

Exposure accuracy is good, probably maybe a bit bright for its tendency, especially with film glass. Seems a bit more accurate with digital lenses. Nonetheless, the EV compensation is always there. It is quite easy to use with the quick function dial. I set it to +/- by default. Or, one can customise the e-dials to directly control the EV compensation.

Resolution of the images from K-1 is really superb. The per pixel sharpness is better than the Canon and Sony FF bodies that I have, even with the same lenses put on them. That's only my own subjective impression, though and no scientific measurbation has yet been made, because I am now busy with shooting with a good camera, instead of doing endless measurbation tests for faulty cameras.

Colour rendition is contemporary, which is now very Canon alike. It do taste very CMOS, the AWB is very white, maybe too white IMO than one would like to preserve the atmosphere even under the warm sunlight. But K-1 do really "catch up" with the game. ;-) I found it works best in the Natural mode, with the Saturation turned up one step.

Dynamic range is good, better than the Canon's. Noise is acceptable up to ISO 3200 and beyond that, use it unless it must be.

Lens correction now works very well. It is fast and there is no more delay as in older models, even with all the four corrected function enabled. Supported all DFA digital and FA* film lenses. DA lenses are supported in crop mode. Lens correction does not work in FF mode for DA lenses, even if they are actually FF compatible. On the other hand, for supported FF lenses, lens correction does work even when crop mode is selected.

Liveview operation is good, the liveview image will change according to the FF or crop mode selected (and of course). The LV AF is fast but unfortunate insensitive. It often missed focus with lower contrast, even under bright light situations outdoor.

There is nothing special for the video recording (movie) mode. And there is no live AF under movie mode. AF can be remeasured upon pressing of the AF button on demand by the user. It is not possible to capture any still photo during video recording.

The super articulated monitor is sturdy and easy to use, better than imagined before. Most importantly, the closed position is well aligned.

Mirror action is crisp but yet gentle, resemble the old feel of the MZ-S film flagship. The *ist D had similar feel in the mirror but however its movement is obvious too slow. Now the K-1's is quite good but I still hope that it could move faster anyway.

Viewfinder clarity is not as good as my Canon 5DIII which is brighter and clearer to see than the K-1, despite both have an overlaid LCD information display on the finder frame.

The electronic level indication is now very easy to see and follow. It is sensitive and accurate provided that you got a good copy. My first copy has good accuracy for the horizontal sensor but the vertical sensor is a little bit off.

GPS is sensitive and accurate and is very easy to turn on and off, with the dedicated button. WiFi is also easy to on and off with the special function dial. The red and blue LED indicators is a good design. However, the Ricoh Image Sync App is just a piece of junk, undoubtedly. It is difficult to use, with limited features and its operations are completely nonsense, even for the basic functions of browsing photos and for downloading.

Frustrated Pentaxians

Go read yourself for those frustrating stories..

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3743352

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54699218

Not Official: Pentax K-3 Mirror Flop "Fix" from Ricoh

http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/k-3-mirror-flop-fix-from-ricoh.html

"Thank you for contacting RICOH.
We have been informed that there is now a shop adjustment that can be made to help resolve/reduce the reported K-3 "mirror-flop" issue. I recommend you return your camera directly to RICOH Imaging Company at the address listed below for examination."

K-3 Mirror Flapping and Locking Up Issues

"This is my second K3 body... first one was exchanged because of this problem."

Via: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3638230

Again, that RICOH logo is really disgusting! >:-(

AF Fine Adjustment: "Apply All" and "Apply One" Fully Explained

Quite some time ago, I explained how to focus adjust a K-5 camera using Live View. However, there are some confusions amongst Pentax users over time for the meanings and effects of the "Apply All" and "Apply One" settings. So, I opt to explain more this time. Well, the user manual tells nothing useful about these once again, just see page 126 of the K-5 user manual! >:-(

For a camera like the K-5 and K-30/50/500 which lacks a f/2.8 sensors, this "AF Fine Adjustment" is crucial so as to compensate the spherical aberration that exists on all lenses when stopped down against wide opened, which causes the camera to mis-focus depending on the amount of differences. It is because the AF system actually measures the more central part of the lenses optically for those f/5.6 AF sensors.

So, here we go, we have four scenarios:

1. Nothing is Set:



This is essentially the same as to set in the Custom Function that the "AF Fine Adjustment" is Turned Off / Disabled.

2. "Apply All" is Set but "Apply One" Not:



So, All lenses will use the "+5" setting as shown in the above example which is obvious. Do note that a +ve setting is meant to instruct the camera to focus fronter (to compensate back focusing) and vice versa for a "-ve" value to instruct the camera to focus backwards (to compensate front focusing).

3."Apply All" is Not Set and "Apply One" is Set (for Individual Lenses):



This is also obvious, the "Apply One" setting will take effect when individual lens is mounted of which the lens identity number is detected (for a Pentax F AF lens or later). So, I now know why the official user manual just tells you "Apply All" means apply all, "Apply One" means apply one or something like that but no more! ;-p

Choose this only if your camera does not contain any AF error primitively by itself, like my own K-5 unit which is a perfect copy already! :-D

4. Both "Apply All" and "Apply One" are Set:



Well, what does it mean under this case? Is it actually +2, +5 or +7?? What do you think? :-o For what I checked, it is actually +2, that means that the "Apply One" setting overrides the "Apply All". Whilst this does make sense somehow but however, the "Apply One" is not applied on top of the "Apply All" as many Pentax users wished!

Btw, if you have a copy of your Pentax camera which needs some slight adjustment by itself for *all* lenses, i.e. sample variations with some system errors, set both and remember to individually calibrate all your lenses unless the "Apply All" already works for all your lenses, i.e. scenario #2! Frankly, if you have more prime lenses like me, calibrating each lens is inevitably unavoidable!

Last but not least, some people would be puzzled for what to do with a cheap DAL or even "DA" lenses which does not have a focusing mark (namely, the DA35/2.4, DA50/1.8 and the DA40/2.8XS lens). Well, what you need to do is to put on a sticker and make the mark yourself before doing any further calibration! See the following example. :-)



Besides, some people would still wonder, do the K-5II/s need such "AF Fine Adjustment"? My answer is Yes, if you are using really Fast Prime like the DA*55/1.4 or just an old FA50/1.4 and etc., of which spherical aberration still occurs in between the widest aperture of f/1.4 down right to the f/2.8 aperture where the AF is detected and measured. So, the above techniques do still always apply! And also don't forget that not every copy of the K-5II/s is perfectly quality controlled when it was produced from the Pentax' (and now Ricoh's) factory.

Colour Rendition Shootout: 6M CCD Vs 16M CMOS - *ist DL2 Vs K-5

It has been almost ten years since Pentax launched their first DSLR, the *ist D, almost ten years ago. I did buy my *ist D very shortly after it hit the streets and it may be interesting to read back my old textural review of it which was first published back to fall 2003.

Okay, nine years something has elapsed and now the new Pentax cameras have climbed up to 16 megapixels in pixel count and resolution. Yet, as we all know, they are all equipped with an APS-C sized cropped (still!) sensor in 16M. The noise level of the new CMOS sensor is undoubtedly lower and they are video capable. But how about the image quality besides resolution? What have we gained, or, actually lost?

So, I decided to do a shootout test myself, side-by-side and head-to-head for my two old and newer Pentax DSLRs, namely, the *ist DL2, which is the last *ist body actually, and the K-5, which is the first Pentax DSLR using the same never-upgraded but ever recycled Sony 16M CMOS sensor or its variant in all the newer Pentax DSLRs up till now! :-o

Test Conditions:

Both cameras set in RAW mode, manual white balance in daylight, fixed at ISO 200, the same lens of DA21/3.2 was used in Av mode, the same scene was then shot consecutively in pairs;

Custom image mode was set to "Natural" with all centre/zero/default settings except sharpness was set at +1. Pictures were then all converted from RAW to 6M Jpegs without any adjustment (using camera settings) with original Pentax Digital Camera Utility (Laboratory) Version 4.3, for both the *ist DL2 and K-5 pictures. The results are posted in the following album of mine:

http://smg.photobucket.com/user/RiceHigh/library/K-5/Colour_Test_Vs_DL2?sort=9&page=1

Full size original images are available for downloading per popped-up picture page in the above.

What I can tell is that the *ist DL2 images are far more natural and faithful to the actual scene in real world than all those made with the K-5! The K-5 images are yet whiter than the DL2's, though, despite that both cameras were actually set to daylight preset manual white balance already.

If you look at the leaves of the trees, the green colours of the K-5 pics are actually looking rather fake and odd. Ditto for the brown colours of the trunks of the trees. In fact, the flower I shot is in orange red, but not that red colour that K-5 has produced and rendered!

Besides, to my surprise, the dynamic range of the *ist DL2 pics is shown to be yet better than that of the K-5 despite that the DR mark measured by DxO is far higher for the K-5 and its 16M CMOS sensor! Just observe the shadow details.. :-o

In fact, the favourable colour rendition was top one big reason why I still stayed with Pentax system regardless of the low performance of the Pentax bodies plus all the various technical and quality issues that were associated with the Pentax system and Pentax themselves. Now, it seems that this main point and reason has also gone with the later and latest Pentax bodies! >:-[

At the end of the day, I am afraid that now putting those excellent Pentax glass on a Canon body do produce much more favourable results even in term of colour rendition, see my this set of recent examples here.

After all, you may have a different opinion than me, but I think my pictures have clearly spoken for themselves! And, this test should be scientific enough as I have already tried to keep all the possible variables and affecting factors to minimal, FWIW.

New K-30 Firmware V1.04

Since the last firmware release for the K-30 (V1.03) was buggy (for instance, quite some K-30 users reported that the machine hanged up from time to time), Pentax has released a new firmware version to correct the errors:-

http://www.pentax.jp/english/support/digital/k-30_s.html

I hope this time it will work.

On the other hand, the new Q firmware of the V1.11 was withdrawn just within one day after it had been published. Up till now, the debugged version has not been out yet. Now, people has been guessing what the bugs are actually about. Someone reported that it is the wrong metering, someone reported that it is the wrong shutter count, someone reported that the camera locked up when doing AF at low light and so on..

After all, I have lost my confidence on the software quality control of Pentax. Next time when a new firmware is released, I shall wait and see if it is yet once again "not yet ready"! >:-(

The Large Air Blower Model K-5IIs! :-o

A K-5IIs user complained about his new K-5IIs body had an air leakage problem which is demonstrated in the following YouTube video that he uploaded:-



(http://youtu.be/1WFT5sQinlo)

He hence requested for a replacement unit. After the replacement unit arrived, he did the following comparison test:-



(http://youtu.be/6qt4FmiP8vI)

Via: Post @ Pentax Fans Club (Taiwan)

Wow, what a difference and what a QC! Pentax just built and marketed a supposedly sealed-model which is actually not completely sealed! :-o After this incident, I think Pentax should add a toilet paper test in their QC line for what this end-user has done, so as to check if the sealing of their cameras is proper, frankly!

Bits and Pieces Today (11-6)

1. Supports Only Original Pentax Lenses!

I always suggest Pentax users buy only original Pentax lenses. It is because if you want to use Sigma or Tamron or even Tokina, there is no reason to stay with Pentax, as those 3rd party lenses are rather limited in K-mount in both models and availability. So, why to do so, to get the worst of both worlds?!

Now, more and more compatibility issues have been reported with the latest Pentax bodies and/or firmware with those 3rd party lenses, here is a latest user report about (in Traditional Chinese) that the K-01 V1.01 firmware doesn't work well with his Sigma (17-50/2.8 OS HSM).

2. Reliability of the DA Limited Lenses

It is reported by a DA 40 Limited user that (in Simplified Chinese) the aperture blade of his new lens that has only been used for two months have had its whole mechanism self-disintegrated without any good reason one-day suddenly!



3. The Relation of Rolling Shutter and SR for Video Recording with the K-01

See what this Pentax user reports at the DPR. If it is really true, it is possibly that the processing power of the Prime M processor is insufficient to do both things well at the same time!

4. I am a Pentaxian!



Via DC Home Pentax Forum (in Traditional Chinese)

Wow! I have nothing more to say!! :-o

A K-30 Died Within Seconds Upon a Small Water Splash! :-o

See this post and story: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3292877

I really feel for that K-30 user, how reliable his WR camera is! :-o

Btw, it seems that the sealing of the rear LCD is weak and the QC of that part is not really that good, see the previous similar problem reports below:-

Dust Accumulates Inside the LCD of K-5 Silver

K10D Dust Proof?

Well, I now know why Pentax has created the new  "air-gapless" design of the LCD, as it seems that they get rid of the outer window of it so that no more water and dust are trapped inside so as to avoid the problem! ;->

Disassemble (and Repair) the FA 80-320 Zoom Lens

Thanks to Blog reader MattMatic for his alert, here is the series of lens disassembling photos of his:-

http://www.photon.me.uk/pu/pentax_fa80_320/index.html

Full shared story here: http://www.pentaxuser.co.uk/forum/topic/fa80-320-37602

Btw, the MIJ label reminds me of those high quality days of those Pentax products, even a consumer zoom like this was made in Japan, where and when the QC is far better! And, the lenses are much cleaner inside out of the factory, too!


Related:-

Blog Search on "Disassemble" 

Dirty Pentax Lens Factory, Dirty Glass! :-(

Made ("Assembled") In Vietnam

Where are the Pentax DSLRs and Lenses Made?

Ephotozine DA50/1.8 Test, with Full Samples

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/pentax-smc-da-50mm-f-1-8-lens-review-20006

This time the samples seem to be look better than those of the last review at Optyczne.pl. The measurbation results seem to be better than what SLRGear measured and found also.

However, I discovered an obvious quality issue (minor or not) from the outside appearance of the lens under test at my first glance. That is, the white painting of the "focusing" mark (but which points to *nothing* for this lens design!) spilled over in the front and too much paint was applied at that position in the factory, resulting in a rather uneven white line. Indeed, this little error causes the lens looks cheaper which gives an even poorer impression on the build quality and QC of the lens! >:-o

Pentax has Modified the Design of the SDM Used in DA*16-50 and 50-135??

See the latest quick interview by the PF with a Pentax repair technician at Photokina:-

http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/jens-petersen-on-pentax-sdm-failure.html

Whilst I am rather sceptical to what are told, even if all of them true, the following questions have quickly come to my mind:-

1. Why it takes so long, i.e., for more than five years, for Pentax to cure this problem? It is worth noting that the two DA* lenses were first launched back to 2007!

2. If it is just a design problem for all those reported failure of the SDM, aka Sudden Death / Suddenly Died Motor or Saddam as creatively named by some users before ;->), which is yet "prone to failure from the get-go due to their design", WILL Pentax Ricoh make a product recall and fix the earlier production lenses prior to 2012 which have that latent design defect, *for Free*?

3. I could never agree that the DC motor is of the same design of a conventional rotary electric motor (DC or AC), they are different! To learn more, just read my previous technical article about the working principle of the DC motor and its related patent.

Well, as an UK chartered electrical/electronic engineer myself, I don't believe in "technicians" when they are talking about designs. Note that I am not saying anything bad about technicians but their knowhows are mostly limited to hands-on things, but not about designs and more in-depth engineering principles, frankly.

Indeed, see the reply comments to that PF article, Pentax users are actually raising similar questions as mine! :-)


Last Related:-

Improved DIY SDM Repair Method!

Recent Survey and Review Articles by the Pentax Forums

First of all, the following survey results once again verified that SDM is indeed rather unreliable and vulnerable to break, although some fanboys would still argue that the sample size returned in that survey is yet "not enough to prove anything"!

http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-sdm-failure-survey-results.html

Quoted:-

"What is a little bit more alarming is the fact that three of Pentax's most popular lenses seem to have problems with SDM reliability."

Well, how dare PF is to make a statement like this?!

"If you're frightened by the AF issue, then Sigma has readily-available alternatives to all three lenses: a 17-50mm, 50-150mm, and 17-70mm."

My pardon? Are that Pentax glass so easily replaceable? And what's the point of using Pentax bodies but Sigma glass?!! >:-(

Btw, if there are still not enough of the reported cases, just view this online Pentax SDM Petition, then you should be convinced, if not yet!

Next, there is a new comparison review of the Pentax DA14/2.8 Vs the cheapo Samyang 14/2.8 lens. It is tested that there should be a design deficiency of the Pentax lens that the field curvature for far objects is always greater than DoF(!?) so that the whole frame of the image is always not sharp at somewhere in the frame, no matter how and where the user focused! :-o I now know why Jun was forced to retire after creating this lens! ;->

My Canon EF40mm Pancake Brick Wall Test (on 5DIII FF)

See: http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v313/RiceHigh/5Ds/40mm_Pancake/EF40STM/

Do note that there is heavy asymmetric vignetting at the right side of my pictures which can be seen even when stopped down, although the effect is not as dominant.

A quick comparison to another previous brick wall test by another user of the same pancake lens found that the asymmetricity can be found on his samples, but surprising at the left side instead for his samples!

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=41817473

My that copy of the lens was replaced shortly afterwards anyway. The replacement seems to have better symmetricity on vignetting at all apertures and from f/4 and onwards the effect has been far less obvious.

After all, it seems that manufacturing a pancake lens is not as easy as imagined and even tighter QC may be required. I guess and hope that Canon has learned the lesson.

I bet Pentax had the same mistake when they first produced the DA40/2.8 pancake lens, as what I can see and compare the test results of the first sample of the lens against the latest, i.e., the DA40/2.8 XS. The XS lens looks far more symmetrical now. Nonetheless, this maybe due to sample variation anyway.

Btw, if the quality of the EF40/2.8 lens is not good enough, just buy a EF400/2.8L, which can be used as a big stone for throwing during a riot! ;-D Read this Reuters story:-

http://blogs.reuters.com/photographers-blog/2012/05/16/saving-the-canon-400mm-f2-8/

DC Resource K-01 Review: Pentax QC Disaster!

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/pentax/k01-review

Quoted:-

"I want to expand on my experiences with Pentax quality control (or lack of it). The weeks I spent with the K-01 were frustrating. My original K-01 would produce out-of-focus photos about 50% of the time, with multiple lenses. I exchanged it for a second body, which did not have that issue."

And five out of seven individual lenses (same or different models) tested have de-centering defect and produced blurry photos as a result once the de-centering defect came into play! What?! My Pardon?? >:-o

"Unless I've had an incredible run of bad luck, it seems that quality control at Pentax needs some work. Having a defective camera body and two brand new de-centered lenses is not what I'd expect from them. If you get a lens that is properly built and calibrated, then you'll get very nice results. If something seems amiss, however, keep exchanging it until you're happy."

Btw, ISO samples are also provided, with that rare 'problem-less" DA40XS kit lens.

And, their conclusion may not be that favourable neither, even if the user finally gets a K-01 body with some Pentax lenses with no defect! :-(

"The K-01 is, by far, the largest mirrorless ILC on the market, due to its native support for K-mount lenses. It's about as large as an entry-level D-SLR, which sort of defeats the purpose of being mirrorless in the first place. It's shaped a lot like a brick.."

"Camera performance is where the K-01 starts to fall behind the competition. The camera starts up fast enough (in just over a second), assuming that you've turned off the startup screen. It's the K-01's autofocus speeds that are its weak point."

"If you read the introduction to this review then you know that I had some frustrating experiences with the K-01 and several lenses. It took two K-01 bodies and seven lenses to complete this review -- double what was expected."

After all, it seems that despite that now Pentax lens prices are "great", their QC is yet not that great. So, my last hope for Ricoh to improve is now proven to be in vain. Bad! :-(


Old Related:-

De-centering Defects of Pentax Lenses