Leandros S
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,039
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 925
Because they'd presumably want their first digital full frame camera to be a success.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Sigma lens on K1 *can mark the body*
- Thread starter Meuh
- Start date
Equally you'd assume if Sigma wish to sell PK mount lens they'd make them PK mount compliant
Pentax have no control over what Sigma choose todo when making their one size fits all lens line (£50 mount change service), If Sigma have made a mistake in their assumptions then its not up-to Pentax to spot it nor resolve it.
It seems very strange to me :- its obvious a SIgma problem , Sigma have admitted such and promised a 'fix'
i.e the manufacturer who made the non tolerant mount is going to change their design to make it fit
Yet the it's Pentax/Ricohs fault is business as usual on this forums
It get weirder and weirder every day
Lets try and make it really simple
Pentax make a 100% PKAiii compliant camera
Sigma make a non compliant physical modification to PK mounts to fit their business plan
non compliant lens does not physically fit new body ergo whose fault is this ??
Irrelevant if it would be desirable to pentax for this not to happen how could they have foreseen this without testing 35Million lens on every body before release ?
They could have made the frontage the same as the K3 and the used an aps-C sensor to ensure 3rd party FoV did not exceed light fall off limits etc etc etc
We end up with no development and no change.
If as Pentax stated their mandate was a small FF camera with best in class viewfinder the design decisions they made are obvious and smart.
Sigma choices were not in the same 'smart' category and no amount of temporising will make it anyone's fault but their own.
Your confusing cause and effect -
cause is Sigmas disregard for published standards
effect may or may not be reduced sales of K1 cameras, it may also rebound and increase sales of Pentax lens who can tell.?
Along the same thoughts I'm confident there are a number of FF designated PK lens that due to non compliant image circle (business plan profit making) on the K1 will produce excessive vignetting due to the SR of the sensor
Should Pentax have also catered for these and removed SR from this body ?
Sound familiar
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/article/notice-to-our-canon-mount-lens-users
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/article/information-regarding-the-nikon-d5300-cameras
http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/index.php?route=information/news&news_id=194
AT least with Pentax it only physical design and APS-c/FF detection the lens actually still work (as much as they ever did)
And if worse comes to worse you find out where you stand with your Sigma product
"* For some discontinued products, we may not be able to offer the firmware update due to the discontinuation of related repair parts. Please contact your nearest authorized Sigma distributor for further details."
Personally my effected lens will be joining Sigmas repair program (when announced) for them to sort it out.
--
My PPG
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/andrewwaldram
My Photo Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/awaldram/
1x.com
http://1x.com/artist/awaldram/wall
Last edited:
nothing to do with firmware. This is a physical problem
※This phenomenon is due to the interference with the shape of the upper part of the mount on the PENTAX K-1 camera body and it does not occur to any cameras other than PENTAX K-1.
It's great that Sigma fix Pentax problem free of charge.
How about Samyang Tilt&Shift lens, and other potential problem cases?
You should read the Sigma advisory again there are two issues
1 physical mount is to big
2 aps/c and FF detection doesn't work
How is Sigmas mount being bigger than specification a Pentax issue ??
This is why Sigma have owned up to it and agreed to clean up their own mess
Does the Pentax 28mm Shift lens fit without issue - Guess we know the answer to that so yes Samyang also need to clean up their own mess if there was an expectation of full movement....
But the Smayang already has 'restricted movement on some bodies' so no action required by Samyang or Pentax buyer bought it with that proviso anyway.
--
My PPG
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/andrewwaldram
My Photo Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/awaldram/
1x.com
http://1x.com/artist/awaldram/wall
Last edited:
Barry Pearson
Veteran Member
Two people (including me) who have been using tilt/shift lenses say "it's not a big deal".
See the relevant thread.
And, of course, the Samyang tilt/shift lens hits the overhang on the K-3II as well!
But how much fuss has that caused over the last year? I have both, and I didn't even notice it!
If you can't identify those problems, why should it be expected that Ricoh could?
(Dare I say "unknown unknowns"?)
If you are worried by such unknown potential problems, (which can obviously never be ruled out), I suggest you decide right now that the K-1 is not for you, and turn your attention to other cameras.
If you can find any that don't have unknown potential problems, of course!
--
http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Barry_Pearson
Last edited:
Alex Sarbu
Forum Pro
Very much so.I'm just not sure what kind of currency "understandable" is.It's a problem of perspective, I'm not claiming that I'm absolutely right and you're absolutely wrong. I accept your point of view.No, OEMs should alter their product in response to the business situation. Here, we're trying to make the full frame platform float on the market, and remove any obstacle thereto. Incompatibility with third party lenses is such an obstacle, management should have known it and asked engineering to ensure everything fits and works.You're overestimating the "extra space"; compare with elements with known size (sensor, registration distance etc.). IMO there's less than 1mm there, perhaps less than half a mm.Yup, looked at all of that before I posted. There looks to be about 2mm of extra space right where the scratch would be, and it really looks like their zeal for aesthetics came and bit them in the letter A on this.Take a look at the larger image posted by Barry:It looks to me like there is space exactly where the collision now occurs - look closely! At the cost of making the camera look a bit less "seamless", they could have made an additional recess there - would have added less than 5g of weight.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57768184
And please, re-read the post I was responding to.
I disagree with your premise as well, which is that the OEM should alter their product in order to cope with a 3rd-party manufacturer which was lazy and used lens mounts oversized by various amounts (from what I understand, they're not even consistent about it).
However, mine is that not acting to alleviate interference with intentionally non-standard products is understandable.
It was Sigma who took a risk of using obviously larger mounts on their lenses. It's Sigma who's reverse engineering the K-mount. They should bear the risk, not Ricoh/Pentax.
Nothing to do with my posts.
Your 'if' was used to introduce a nonsense "argument" in this discussion, just to deepen the illusion that Ricoh is to "blame".
Come on... I never said that! How could we discuss, if you make up things?
Again, something I never said; I'm not discussing in absolutes. Thus, no fallacy.
If you can't recognize the camera's or lens' basic parts, what are we discussing here?
Alex
Ari Aikomus
Veteran Member
How older 50-500 Bigma? Will it mount to the K-1 without trouble? Does anyone know?
....This is actually quite a strange problem.
- Ari Aikomus -
'Why should I feel lonely ? is not our planet in the Milky way?'
....This is actually quite a strange problem.
--
- Ari Aikomus -
'Why should I feel lonely ? is not our planet in the Milky way?'
Last edited:
#2. isn't a big deal (you can choose manually, and of course firmware update is possible),
but physical incompatibility is much worse case!
Please, don't be so cheeky. You understand this very well. Sigma mount isn't so extreme oversized! Same Sigma lenses fits to any other Pentax K mount camera, but not to K-1. That's is a issue!
Since the Pentax was arrogant and designed K-1 poorly! Cramped space is always a problem. Not only with Sigma lenses.
Just think different adapters, macro bellows, mirror tele lenses.
For example how this TILT&SHIFT adapter works with K-1?
This kind of "Tilt Shift Adapter for Hasselblad V Mount CF Lens to Pentax K PK Camera" is very useful for Pentax K mount, since T&S selection is modest anyway!
what is the answer to that? How Pentax shift lens fit, and can you use it without limitations??
No, Pentax need new K-1 model!
Last edited:
I know your experience with Samyang T&S. But that doesn't convince me. I don't want compromise on such a simple matter.
Just think different adapters, macro bellows, mirror tele lenses.
For example how this TILT&SHIFT adapter works with K-1?
View: original size
This kind of "Tilt Shift Adapter for Hasselblad V Mount CF Lens to Pentax K PK Camera" is very useful for Pentax K mount, since T&S selection is modest anyway!
Maybe I have to wait for the new Pentax FF model, K-1 mark2? With improved design.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum