Product Recall: Power Leakage Problem of the K-3 II

http://news.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/rim_info/2015/20150710_009081.html

RP Closes Canada Sevice Centre and Outsources Service

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3706129

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."

Pentax Japanese Customer Support Email

FWIW, it is:

pentax.gs@pri.pentax.co.jp

Via: http://forum.xitek.com/thread-1194052-1-1-1.html (in Simplified Chinese)

The case is about what happened back to May. It seems that the customer service was really good for that particular case and the supporting staff who handled the case was really helpful. But I just wonder if the above email address still works as it does contain the "pentax" name in it, which should have already been killed by Ricoh since August 1st! Damn, Ricoh! >:-(

Loyal Pentax Merchant and PR Tool is Pissed Off by Ricoh Recently! >:-o

I seldom quote Mr. Bourque actually, but this time I really can't help myself! :-(

http://pentaxdslrs.blogspot.com/2013/07/sometimes-it-just-feels-good-to-be.html

The following is told, quoted:

"I'm not sure of what's going on with Ricoh/Pentax. They used to loan me the new cameras so that I could write my e-books about them. I also have a  singed  NDA agreement with them but I haven't heard anything from them when the K-50/K-500 were announced. lately, all my emails have been ignored and I will have to purchase the cameras to write e-books."

Well, if guy like Bourque who is a loyal, die-hard and persistent Pentax promoter and merchant is being ignored like this, the Public Relation job of Pentax Ricoh* does really suck! >:-o And, after all, I guess no one will promote the brand more for them any further, at the Internet or not, except me?! ;-p Or, do Ricoh really hope particular brand fanboys who seldom buy to do the job for them for free? :-o (Frankly, those fanboys always only make things worse!)

As for the e-books from Bourque, I think they maybe good for the Pentax new-comers and beginners, but may not be so useful for those more experienced users with longer experiences, IMHO. But at the same time, it is obvious that Ricoh now targets at the entry level market more than Pentax used to be and thus beginners are yet more important than ever before! So, WTF for what Ricoh is doing?!

Last but not least, the good thing that I can still see is that Bourque does have the heart to write his books and he does love the brand as it appears, nonetheless, which I do appreciate his heart and huge effort paid! :-) Albeit he is also earning money at the same time from it and thus there might exist some conflicts for what he writes, especially when he might need to write about the bad things of the Pentax gear or even about he brand - but now it's all over, anyway!

*N.B. For what I have just checked, Pentax Ricoh companies are still named PR as on today, as the soon-to-disappear names containing the word "Pentax" are still shown at their global website page, below:

http://www.pentax.jp/english/globalsites/


Related:

Reactions of Pentaxians for the Deletion of the "Pentax" Name from Companies!

Ten Things that I Want Ricoh to Do for Pentax

Metz 58AF-1 Hotshoe Upgrade (Old to New Version, from Plastic to Metal, plus New PCB)

Read this:-

http://www.pentaxfans.net/thread-138657-1-1.html
(in Traditional Chinese, but posted pictures are self-explanatory.)



So, the hotshoe base material has been changed, from plastic to metal. The PCB inside/underneath has been updated too. It can be seen that the whole circuit board design has completely been revamped.

Speaking of those Metz flashguns for Pentax, last time they released an update of the firmwares for their newer models that enabled the HSS on the newer Pentax bodies but there existed a major bug that caused the A and M modes disabled. They soon released an updated version of 4.1 which contained the bug fix very shortly. For instance, the following link is the firmware download page for the 58 AF-2 flash:

http://www.metz.de/en/flash-units/firmware-download-flash-units/mecablitz-58-af-2-digital/pentax.html

After the above was released, I have checked on the web for the feedbacks from some Pentax users that the firmware update does work for them and there is no other major bug and issue found and reported so far.

Disassemble a DSLR and Inspecting a Mirror-Locked MZ Body

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvFMFb9JylQ (EOS 50D)



URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3cCTv7JbrY (EOS 1000D)

The procedures are shown clearly and it is carried out in a professional manner.

Besides, there is a guide for how to check and try to repair a Pentax MZ film body that had its mirror locked up in the following thread:-

http://forum.xitek.com/forum-redirect-goto-findpost-ptid-1125971-pid-46046531.html
(in Chinese) 



The mirror locked up issue is actually a common issue amongst those MZ bodies, which would show up after some years of use, including mine. I shall try to open the bottom of my locked MZ to check and do it myself later, when I have the time. These cameras are not supported by my local Pentax service centre anyway, I bet. Their usual excuse was that "the body was discontinued for more than ten years ago and the required spare part is not available anymore."! >:-(

SDM DIY Repair II - Go Further to Succeed!

Here is a new guide with additional tips for an enhanced method, on top of the original one:-

http://www.soomal.com/doc/20100003594.htm

The article is in Traditional Chinese, but the pictures are self-explanatory. Each picture of the series represents each step of the whole repair procedures. The new trick is to turn further from the underneath of the motor module, which should be further dismantled, just in case if the screw on the top is locked too tight and cannot be turned. See the two key diagrams for what to turn:-



As for the force applied, the author hints that you should try it by yourself - do not apply excessive force and try different directions, depending on how the SDM motor and the associated gears are locked.

Good luck if you are yet one of the SDM failure victims and still want to try the repair DIY! As for me, I have none of the Pentax SDM lenses, just because the SDM issue has been so infamous but then the service and support of Pentax to deal with the issue usually sucked as widely reported, so that I have been avoiding it as far as possible over these years.


Related (Oldest First):-

Repair a Stuck SDM Yourself!

Repair a Stuck SDM DIY - An English Guide

Hair Dry and Repair the SDM! :-o

SDM DIY Repair Method Also Works for the DA17-70

Improved DIY SDM Repair Method!

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

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!

Improved DIY SDM Repair Method!

Read: http://forum.xitek.com/thread-1055994-1-1-1.html
(in Chinese, with diagrams)

Actually, the method is more or less the same as the original DIY method but now the "CRC" Contact Cleaner is applied in addition (and then doing the massage) which does help even more, as it is told and confirmed.

After all, the OP has saved $250 (1500 RMB) repair fee as officially quoted and now his DA*16-50's SDM is revived and has been operating smooth and flawlessly! Congrats, man and well done! :-D

Non Light-leaked Version of the 5D3 Has Arrived!

Just seen in the street of Hong Kong for a brand new batch of 5D3 bodies (kit sets) which are with a serial number of 3 for the 6th digit.

So, it seems that the non light-leaked version of the 5D3 has arrived and Canon has actually located the problem and updated the design. But then why they still requested their customers to wait for mid-May for only body inspection and checking? Why they did not tell exactly what's the problem and how come and do not immediately rectify it for all the affected customers? Is this fair and responsible enough? >:-(


Last Related:-

5D3 Hands-on Impressions and Quick Review

K-5 New Firmware V1.12 is Up

http://www.pentax.jp/english/support/digital/k-5_s.html

Changes to V1.12

• Corrected --- When O-GPS1 is mounted on the K-5 and taking a picture of starry sky with long exposure tracing by ASTROTRACER function, a band of light green noise rarely occur on image depending on photographic condition.

*Contents of [Version 1.11] will be also updated.

So, once again, the last "error" and "mistake" (for what I reported at the end of last year) is actually true. Sometimes, I just really scratch my head hard for what to defend about by those Pentax fanboys and why they needed to do so everytime! :-o

And now, it is clear that the K-r has already completely been abandoned and the support by Pentax for the model has ended. If this O-GPS1 bug exists when it is attached to a K-5, K-r should suffer from the same problem as the astrotracer algorithm(s) used should be the *same* for *both* cameras for what it is embedded in the last firmware revision of the 1.11.

But after all, what I feel disgusted about the case is that the O-GPS1 supports only two K-mount DSLR models, i.e., the K-5 and K-r, why Pentax Ricoh should suddenly drop the support to the K-r? If I am a K-r user who has purchased this expensive GPS unit, I am really much pissed off, undoubtedly! >:-[

Hair Dry a Dead SDM Does Work (Again)!

Further to the last big discover for how to revive a dead SDM even the last method didn't work, I've seen this report lately which verifies that the new (escalated) method does work to bring back live again for a dead (stuck?) SDM! :-o

http://www.pentaxiani.it/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=49524&start=15#p678566

(Google English Translation Here)

Nice! Should Pentax should include these two methods into their service manuals of all the SDM lenses such that they need not to provide expensive quotations to the SDM users anymore for total SDM replacements and at least Pentax should try these low-cost repair methods at the first place instead! ;-D

SDM DIY Repair Method Also Works for the DA17-70

Since this DIY repair method was first discovered, there have been a lot of SDM users who had their SDM died have reported success of repair by themselves, at least momentarily. Whilst most of them were dealing with the DA*16-50 lens, today I have seen yet a DA17-70 user has reported a successful repair for his DA17-70 SDM lens:-

http://forum.xitek.com/showthread.php?threadid=883516

(in Chinese, English Page Here (Google-translated))

Whilst this is a positive news to all SDM users I believe, I just wonder why Pentax just not doing the repair in the same way? >:-o


Related:-

Hair Dry and Repair the SDM! :-o

Repair a Stuck SDM DIY - An English Guide

1,000 Signatures of the Pentax SDM Petition Online! (Now 1,229 Signatures)

Ten Things that I Want Ricoh to Do for Pentax

1. Build a FF K-mount DSLR System (at least for a Body First):

One of the most valuable asset of Pentax is their complete 135 lens designs in K-mount. In fact, It is very easy to update all those old film FA lenses with very little modifications and thus minimal efforts and costs. The modifications involved could be only the incorporation of newer technologies like ultrasonic AF motor and updated lens coatings.

I know that some Pentaxians would argue that it is just a suicide for Pentax to make a FF DSLR body. But I just wish to ask, what "suicide" would it be? Would the Pentax Q be a suicide either btw? Besides, if the 645D body plus two new lenses haven't killed Pentax so far, why a 135 FF DSLR will??

If they never try, how will they succeed? I think the key point to succeed is the uniqueness in product and market positioning. I think Pentax should make a truely compact FF DSLR body, which is their good old tradition for what they were good at. If they make one and it is in K-mount, I shall buy one, provided that it is not dearer than $2500 (US) dollars, I suppose.

2. Build a K-mount Mirrorless:

The Q is indeed helpless for the IQ. It is clear that the Q is targeted to novices and ladies who knew little about digital cameras but wish to buy a new beautiful/elegant-looking (maybe well-built also) ILDC just for the sake of lenses are being interchangeable but nothing else.

It does no harm to simply make a K-mount ILDC straight away. My guess is with all those pancake DA lenses that are already there, this new *system* is going to be strong. People will then say that the body will be too thick than desired, but then I think it will still be much smaller than the current K-mount DSLRs, with the removal of the mirror housing and pent-prism/mirror, won't it?

At the end of the day, Sony NEX is very slim for the body, but all the new lenses are made to be very long. So, what is the point of a thin body if so? After all, my opinion is that Pentax should try to make a K-mount mirrorless, and to put every effort to minimize it, but not making a new mount. Yes, Pentax could then make a K-mount adaptor to it even if they are really going to build from ground yet another new mount of theirs, but this will be so indirect and incur too much development cost to themselves and ultimately to the consumers as well. If we just want a K-mount, just do it straight away, in one-off!

Another short-term alternative is to make a K-mount A1x module for the GXR, but then this would not be the true Pentax gene, as we all knew.

3. Re-build the Full K-mount Specifications for High End Models:

Since the film *ist and the *ist D back to 2001, Pentax has crippled the K-mount "permanently" (up till now and for too long) and the harm to themselves and the K-mount community is unmeasurable. Now, under the new leadership of Ricoh, if they want that their old Rikenon lenses can be used for wide-opened/real-time metering and exposure control on upcoming Pentax bodies. They have to re-incoporate the full K-mount specifications, at least in new higher-end Pentax bodies, just like what Nikon has done for their D300 and upper models.

For low end models, I do not object to cut corners so as to save costs, as most of the new users might not use those old lenses anyway.

Btw, I do see the mentality behind for camera makers to cripple things and support in new bodies as they just want the old users to buy new lenses. Yes, this is true to some extent. But for Pentax and Ricoh, if they want to be more competitive, they have to do something more. Also, I think sometimes brand loyalty is magical, some users (I guess including me), the most old lenses they could use, the more new lenses they will buy! Just believe it or not! ;-D

4. Update the Pentax SLR AF system:

A f/2.8 AF system is just a must. Those "f/2.8" or even wider AF sensors measure focus from the peripherals of the glass instead of in the centre and thus could have to eliminate a lot of those focusing error when using faster primes. I knew that Pentax has been trying to programme different compensation factors into new bodies so as to guess better for where the actual focus *would* be at. But at the end of the day, no guess work is good work and do remember every lens on this planet was actually produced differently, even for the same model. In fact, the manufacturing process and materials etc. are ever changing and alignment for each lens could be somehow different. So, real and actual/exact measurement is the only way to go, as long as accuracy is the prime concern!

Sometimes, I really just don't understand the stubbornness and "insistence" of Pentax of not incorporating any f/2.8 AF sensor into their SAFOX AF system which was first designed exactly ten years ago! Well, Canon, Nikon and Sony had that many years ago and Canon even included the f/2.8 sensor into their entry level DSLR since their 450D. Why not Pentax alone should not and still do not have it (and thus created so many problems)?

When many Pentax users always wonder why when they suffered from those endless BF/FF issues especially when they used older Pentax lenses, many of them just don't know it is just the in-born limitation of the Pentax AF system. I bet not until Pentax is willing to incorporate at least one f/2.8 sensor for the central AF point, this problem will NEVER be cured!

5. Debug/Remove the SDM Sadam; Build a Ring-Type Ultrasonic AF Motor

The fact is SDM has too low the service life time and too low the reliability and yet too low the serviceability either. Ricoh should try hard to see how the design could be improved. If not, just disregard it and find a new design. At last, true ring-type USM should be made, this is still the best current technology on Earth that has the highest performance and to be far more reliable!

6. Build an In-Lens IS System

Whilst I do not object to body SR system, which has its value, the value of in-lens IS should not be ignored. The fact is that in-lens IS is more efficient for long focals and that it is better to use in-lens IS to avoid heating problem for pro-longed video recording and that in-lens IS can also help for making slimmer camera bodies, too.

Some people would then suppose that in-lens IS could have conflict with in-body SR. But I think what will the conflict be if they are made by the same maker? Is it so difficult to write a simple sub-routine in the firmware to teach the camera to turn off one of them when an IS lens is put onto a SR body? :-)

7. Build an Updated Flash System; Re-incorporate the True TTL Measurement for Real-Time Flash Exposure!

The P-TTL system is infamous for P equals to Pathetic for long now. Indeed, it has been proven that the K-5 is yet far more inaccurate with external P-TTL flash guns than the K-r. I think Ricoh should look more seriously on why the P-TTL system of Pentax is so pathetic in accuracy and reliability.

As I have been asking for so many years now since the *ist DL, why Pentax should really disregard the plain old TTL real-time off-the-"film" flash measuring sensor after the *ist DS2. I still recall the indeed very high accurate of my *ist D with my old Pentax TTL auto flash will just win any of the P-TTL flash combo in terms of exposure accuracy and predictability. Yes, the old Pentax centre-weighted TTL-Auto is not having any "intelligence", but it is just a super reliable workhorse.

To think a bit more, with the new CMOS sensor technology, I suspect that even the CMOS sensor could be used for that real-time exposure measurement or maybe the sensor built-in electronic shutter could also be used to control flash exposure, too? But anyway, how much additional cost for such plain old technology for such an additional photo diode and some very simple associated circuitry? If reliable output and backward compatibility could be reassured, it worths! How about to put it in the flagship, at least? If people just want that *feature*, they will buy it! (Pentaxians are always worrying about no one will buy costly Pentax flagship and bodies - but there are always some major issues to force me not to buy the pseudo "flagships" in these years, frankly! If they are just not good enough, why should more people buy? >:-()

8. Improve Qualities

Less design issues, less manufacturing issues, less QC problems. Yes, more manufacturing costs will incur, but the brand reputation will be re-gained and more customers will be attracted (both old and new)! Not even to mention this also saves all those after-sales "support" and repair costs which should not be necessary if qualities were made better!

9. Better Services and Supports

Better pre-sales and after-sales services and supports are always the key-success to companies. What I could say is that the current services and supports by Pentax, are failed, or more directly, they usually suck! Yet again a recent user report, there is no spare part available for his defective DA*300 (once again the SaDaM in action!): http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1036&thread=39519041

10. Better Publicity and Public Relations

I could see that Pentax are trying to do these in short-cut ways nowadays. But the true PR is that they should not try to select/filter things to publicise in an extreme way and select people whom they think will tell mostly the goods for them, which is rather short-sighted afterall. In this IT era, people will know well about all the problems sooner or later and people will judge. The most proactive and positive ways is to let people to know as much as possible and don't try to hide anything. The more the maker tries to hide, the more issues and negative impacts it will create.

P.S. I hope Ricoh decision makers and top management guys could see my this post and more importantly I hope they could take my suggestions and analyses into account (only if they read and understand mine). I think as a really long-time Pentaxian who has supported them for over two decades and have never stopped purchased new Pentax items no matter what and how, they should really treasure my comments and I don't believe that all my inputs and contributions to the Pentax community should be something that they should completely ignore. (This site is a living example, despite that many Pentax fanboys just hated me to death, for my "negative" opinions and continuous "brand bashing"! >:-()


Further Reads:-

The State of Pentax (by Q1 2011)

Ten Reasons for Thinking Twice before Decided on a K-5..

Major Causes of Poor AF Reliability of Pentax DSLRs

My Idea of a K1000D

Reference Technical Articles:-

P-TTL Vs TTL: Is Newer Better?

K-Mount Metering and Exposure Bases - A Technical Brief

Sony has Responded Promptly to the 5N Video Clicking Issue

Yes, "every camera has issues" but the more important thing is how the maker reacts with those reported issues for a new camera.

Well, Sony USA has responded to the clicking found sound when the NEX-5N is shaken during video recording. See what Sony Alpha NEX Blog reports.

This reminds me of how long it took for Pentax to respond for the first time about the K-5 sensor "stains" and "UFO" problem for the last time. Sony only took a few days to react and found a solution and commit for repair/upgrade and Pentax had only been able to provide a vague statement after a quarter or so, since it was first reported (and then complained endlessly by many new K-5 users thereafter)! :-o

So, the obvious difference is here and the marketing success or failure has already been defined, almost! I can bet if exactly the same 5N problem was happened to any Pentax camera, they would simply ignore it as it is somehow an "user error", frankly! ;-D How should the user shake the camera like that during video recording?!

Speaking back of Pentax and the K-5, when and how has the widely reported mirror jumping issue been responded by Pentax up till now? >:-[

Disassemble the DA21 Limited (and the Secret of the QSF Mechanism)

A Chinese Pentaxian (who is actually a camera/lens hacker!) has DIY to repair his DA21 with shifted infinity collimation position (over time) so that his could not focus at infinity as the far end of the focusing ring always hit the boundary:-

http://forum.xitek.com/showthread.php?threadid=640585
(Simplified Chinese, Google-translated English Page Here)

He disassembled both the rear and front parts of his lens in order to find out what he could do. Here are two of the posted pictures:-



On the course of disassembling the rear part, he discovered the secret of the Quick Shift Focus (QSF) mechanism. Below is the key components of the driving gears:-



He tells that the gears are designed in such a way that the driving force is only transmitted in one direction. That is, when the lens is driven from the AF motor of the body, the focusing ring will turn. On the other hand, when the focusing ring is turned by hand, the gears will be de-linked automatically, and that's how the QSF works.

Whilst I think he is mostly right. But however, I think the QSF is just more than a pure mechanical thing. As none of my DA lenses works with my older Pentax film SLR bodies like the MZ ones. The movement sometimes is limited in one direction and sometimes is not. As such, I suspect there is also some kind of electromagnetic mechanism to make it fully works.

Later on, the hacker discovered that it was not about the rear part for the problem he wanted to tackle and it should be about the front part. So, after some more inspections and trials, he finally found the key components that he should re-adjust and then re-applied the lubricant, here they are:-



So, he finally succeeded for what he had done in the whole course. Congrats, guy! But sometimes I just wonder, why so many Pentaxians needed to DIY but not sending their gear to the local Pentax service centres for calibration, adjustment and repairing? Is that the Pentax service quality could never meet the users' demands and the charges are too expensive and the places/opening times of the centres are rather inconvenient? ;-D


Related: Search Blog for the Keyword of "Dissemble"

As the ILDC World Turns..

Further to the last report of the new features of the new NEX-C3, some of which would be implemented in the new firmware update of the NEX-3/5, this evening, all the NEX registered users including me have just received an email notice about the new NEX firmware, which points to the firmware download link with brief description about the new firmware. (Well, Sony is doing a better customer support job here!)

I shall update my NEX soon to try out the interesting peaking feature for manual focusing shortly. I hope also that the underexposure issue when using manual lenses stopped down should be eliminated with the new firmware and I shall check about it. In comparison, my Pana Girl Friend did not have such an issue on the day one! :-(

On the other front, Olympus' new m43 bodies, including the new Pen Mini E-PM1 (1 o'clock in the afternoon? ;-D), will come very soon too. The PM1 seems to be quite compact, just see the comparison leaked photos from the 43 Rumors below:-


(Above: Oly E-PM1 Vs XZ-1)

So, under this fierce competition, could the upcoming Pentax mirrorlesses survive? :-o

Update (6-21): I have just completed the firmware update of my NEX-3 and tried the "peaking function", it works like a charm! Manual focusing with MF lenses could never be so easy and accurate! Yes, it is very accurate and now MF is super fast, indeed no magnified view is required anymore - when the peaking shows it is at the peak, even zoomed in to 14X shows that it is correct! Nice done, bravo, Sony! My hats off!!

As for the exposure accuracy when using manual lenses stopped down, for what I have quickly checked, I could say Sony has silently resolved that issue to most extent, too! :-D

Tilted Electronic Level of K-5

See this latest defect report, it seems that the Pentax "QC", if any, is just 1,000% out of tolerance (also if any!), I have to say!! >:-(

http://forum.xitek.com/showthread.php?threadid=873040
(in Chinese, Google translation to English here)

Just look at the following posted illustration of the problem, do you think that the K-5 actually aligned anything close to vertical? But do also note that the built-in electronic level meter indicates it is!? :-o



As for horizontal shooting, the same problem exists, here is one of the tilted results:-



It is told by the victim K-5 user that he is still struggling for a replacement K-5 for his defective unit, as both the retailer and the Pentax customer support are not really helpful as complained. After all, if you face the same issue, that is, when the electronic level meter is not levelled by itself, what can you do? See my this earlier article:-

When the Electronic Level Meter is Not Accurate by Itself..

K-5 Mirror Disorder

Two different K-5 users have reported that their K-5 are having the mirror in sudden movement without any reason and that the disorder does happen intermittently and is unpredictable:-

http://www.dchome.net/viewthread.php?tid=1018474&extra=page%3D1&page=1
(in Chinese, Google English Translation Here)

http://www.dchome.net/viewthread.php?tid=1010498&extra=page%3D1&page=1
(in Chinese, Google English Translation Here)

But the most unfortunate thing is that it seems that Pentax has been unable to pinpoint the cause of the issue and the affected users have both reported that the same problem persists even after repair even parts have been replaced. Let's see what the stories continue, I shall keep an eye on the cases.


Update: Thanks to Blog Reader Gow, we have this video, which shows more clearly the problem and what happens when a K-5 is affected:-


(URL: http://youtu.be/IIQ01XfG3QE)

Update 2 (5-20): This issue has been discussed widely at different Pentax forums after I made this post. Some people suspected that it is the hot weather and just higher ambient temperature that has caused the problem! Well, it looks somehow sensible for this explanation as now it's the Summer and the K-5 in the above video is at Thailand! :-o ;-D


Related:-

The K-5 Have Got a Cold! :-o