SDM failure list update

Started Jul 8, 2010 | Discussions
Russell Evans Forum Pro • Posts: 12,617
SDM failure list update

It think we added 18 more SDM issues since the last time I posted the list. If I don't have you listed, and you have had an SDM issue, please post a reply in this thread and I'll add your issue to the list.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AoOE9_TdlzaNdHl0U0ljXzUyR1FvX2pkRU1YZGNFbWc&hl=en

Lens - # of reported issues
16-50mm - 40
50-135mm - 34
17-70mm - 6
60-250mm - 0
55mm - 0
200mm - 2
300mm - 6
Number of lenses with issues - 88

Thank you
Russell

-- hide signature --
Stringmike Contributing Member • Posts: 597
Re: SDM failure list update

While interesting, the data would be a whole lot more useful if someone could make an estimate of the number of SDM lenses in service. If there are 8800 or more out there, then we only have a failure rate of 1%, which might not be so bad. If only 100 or so lenses, then it's pretty dreadful.

Someone, somewhere must have a guesstimate.

-- hide signature --

Mike

There are holes in the sky
Where the rain gets in,
But they're ever so small
That's why rain is thin. ....... Spike Milligan

justin23 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,347
Re: SDM failure list update

Its quite obvious to me that the DA*16-50 and DA*50-135 probably have some issue with them, although that could be quite a small percentage. The other SDM lenses probably have an acceptable failure rate but are being tarnished by the SDM is bad brush.

-- hide signature --

Justin
--------------------------------------------------------
Photobucket
http://s107.photobucket.com/albums/m313/justin-23/

 justin23's gear list:justin23's gear list
Pentax K-5 Pentax Q Pentax K-3 Pentax 01 Standard Prime Pentax 03 Fish-Eye +11 more
pundit Senior Member • Posts: 1,477
DA*16-50 SDM repaired in June (n/t)

(n/t)

awaldram
awaldram Forum Pro • Posts: 13,271
Re: SDM failure list update

justin23 wrote:

Its quite obvious to me that the DA*16-50 and DA*50-135 probably have some issue with them, although that could be quite a small percentage. The other SDM lenses probably have an acceptable failure rate but are being tarnished by the SDM is bad brush.

Seems obvious to me that the 16-50 and 50-135 have out sold all other sdm's by a factor of at least ten, due to their excellent IQ and first availability by nearly 2 years.

Given that it appears there's a real issue with the 17-70 and DA*300 but the 16-50 and 50-135 are within acceptable tolerances.

Seriously without any sales figures the failure rates are meaningless.

-- hide signature --

Justin
--------------------------------------------------------
Photobucket
http://s107.photobucket.com/albums/m313/justin-23/

 awaldram's gear list:awaldram's gear list
Pentax Q Pentax K-3 Pentax Q7 Pentax K-x Olympus PEN E-PM2 +17 more
Stephen Wood Regular Member • Posts: 171
Re: SDM failure list update

16-50 repaired November 2008

 Stephen Wood's gear list:Stephen Wood's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R +11 more
Kikool Contributing Member • Posts: 601
Re: SDM failure list update

Exactly,

Valuable efforts, but meaningless if one can't compare to the number of owners on the forum. Even that figure would not be significant as someone experiencing an issue might subscribe to find help and/or complain.

Well... Thanks anyway

 Kikool's gear list:Kikool's gear list
Pentax K-5 Pentax K-7 Pentax K-1 +1 more
OP Russell Evans Forum Pro • Posts: 12,617
Re: SDM failure list update

Stringmike wrote:

While interesting, the data would be a whole lot more useful if someone could make an estimate of the number of SDM lenses in service. If there are 8800 or more out there, then we only have a failure rate of 1%, which might not be so bad. If only 100 or so lenses, then it's pretty dreadful.

Do you think that there are enough forum members to own 8800 SDM lenses here? How about 880?

Thank you
Russell

-- hide signature --
OP Russell Evans Forum Pro • Posts: 12,617
Re: DA*16-50 SDM repaired in June (n/t)

Updated the link to point to this one.

Thank you
Russell

-- hide signature --
OP Russell Evans Forum Pro • Posts: 12,617
Re: SDM failure list update

Added you to the list. Thank you for posting and sorry about your lens.

Thank you
Russell

-- hide signature --
ayewing Contributing Member • Posts: 708
Re: SDM failure list update

Russell Evans wrote:

It think we added 18 more SDM issues since the last time I posted the list. If I don't have you listed, and you have had an SDM issue, please post a reply in this thread and I'll add your issue to the list.

To get meaningful results you would reall need to invite members who have had no issues with their SDM lenses to report. Even then I suspect the unhappy owners of defective lenses are more likely to report the problen than the lucky owners to declare that they have healthy lenses.

For what it is worth I have owned three SDM lenses with no failures. (DA*16-50, DA*300, DA17-70).

Archie

 ayewing's gear list:ayewing's gear list
Leica M Typ 240 Olympus PEN-F Olympus E-M1 II Leica CL Leica Elmarit-M 28mm f/2.8 ASPH +6 more
Stig Vidar Hovland Senior Member • Posts: 1,744
Re: 16-50

SDM was recently replaced on my 16-50 because it was slow to focus. OK now.

OP Russell Evans Forum Pro • Posts: 12,617
Re: SDM failure list update

Kikool wrote:

Valuable efforts, but meaningless if one can't compare to the number of owners on the forum. Even that figure would not be significant as someone experiencing an issue might subscribe to find help and/or complain.

If you like, take a random five or ten people on the list and click on the link. You can then view how long the poster had been on the forum in their profile. Do a rough calculation between the date of the post and date the person joined and this should give you a pretty good idea about your theory. I've been here long enough to recognize the names of a good number of the posters, so I personally discounted the new poster skew theory a long time ago.

As to the number of owners on the forums, I just do the thought experiment of: do I think there are 8900 SDM lenses owned by the members here for a 1% failure rate , do I think there are 890 SDM lenses owned by the members here for a 10% failure rate, ...? I would say the number of SDM lenses owned is a lot closer to 890 than to 8900, but each person should make up their own mind about it.

For as expensive as the SDM lenses are, and how short the US warranty is, I personally don't think even a 1% failure rate is unacceptable. My minimum would have 89000 lenses needing to be owned for a 0.1% failure rate or stated another way, 99.9% worry free, but this obviously will reflect what each person's comfort zone on spending money on their hobby/passion/maybe job is.

If the list makes you uncomfortable about buying a SDM lens, then if you really want to spend the money on a SDM lens, buy an extended warranty with your purchase at a reputable dealer. If you just shrug at seeing the list, then spend your money freely on getting the best price for whatever lens you are seeking. Of coarse this doesn't free you from having to worry about the lens failing at an important moment, but hopefully you have the eyesight and have invested the time needed to be good with manual focus to be able to just use the lens anyway.

Thank you
Russell

-- hide signature --
OP Russell Evans Forum Pro • Posts: 12,617
Re: 16-50

Added you to the list. Thank you for posting and sorry about your lens failing.

Thank you
Russell

-- hide signature --
OP Russell Evans Forum Pro • Posts: 12,617
Re: SDM failure list update

ayewing wrote:

For what it is worth I have owned three SDM lenses with no failures. (DA*16-50, DA*300, DA17-70).

I sincerely hope this remains the case for you.

Thank you
Russell

-- hide signature --
A T Cook New Member • Posts: 3
Re: SDM failure list update

DA*16-50mm - around three years old - currently away for repair.

DA* 50-135mm - year old - currently fine, but little used due to health issues

Stephen Wood Regular Member • Posts: 171
Re: SDM failure list update

.... & for what its worth, the front section of the 16-50 has developed a wobble, so after my summer holidays it will be going back again, but this isn't an SDM fault, & I love the lens.

I also have the 50-135 & no problems with that.

Both lenses bought new with a K20 in March 2008, now used on K7 & K20

Stephen

 Stephen Wood's gear list:Stephen Wood's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R +11 more
OP Russell Evans Forum Pro • Posts: 12,617
Re: SDM failure list update

I'm more sorry about your health issues than your 16-50mm, but thank you for posting. I've added you to the list. I hope both you and lens are repaired shortly.

Thank you
Russell

-- hide signature --
awaldram
awaldram Forum Pro • Posts: 13,271
Re: SDM failure list update

Nobodies saying there isn't a problem , But you figures don't go any way to quantifying it.

Your wish for a .1% failure rate I suspect is achievable.

Though it does appear Ultrasonic lenses are in the 5-10% failure rate for all manufacturers.

Current industry standards of around 2-5% are generally acceptable you will need somewhere around a 10X increase in cost to get near .1%.
Your lens will need hand delivering to ensure no transit damage.

I suspect you won't get any change from $20,000 for a 16-50 but whatever you want to spend you hard earned money on.!

But if current failure trends are correct (5-10%) then your new 16-50 with 99.9% non-failure will cost you only $100,000 enjoy.

Sensibly a longer warranty with the existing failure rate would be cheaper.

But as most of the world has a longer warranty than the US I guess the US consumer is not willing to pay for that included warranty so it isn't offered.

ie £719 ($1090)buys a 16-50 in the UK with 2years warranty standard

US £1029 buys the 16-50 with 12months warranty additional 3year plan $89

Russell Evans wrote:

Stringmike wrote:

While interesting, the data would be a whole lot more useful if someone could make an estimate of the number of SDM lenses in service. If there are 8800 or more out there, then we only have a failure rate of 1%, which might not be so bad. If only 100 or so lenses, then it's pretty dreadful.

Do you think that there are enough forum members to own 8800 SDM lenses here? How about 880?

Thank you
Russell

 awaldram's gear list:awaldram's gear list
Pentax Q Pentax K-3 Pentax Q7 Pentax K-x Olympus PEN E-PM2 +17 more
A T Cook New Member • Posts: 3
Re: SDM failure list update

I am reasonably fine - but was out of circulation for eight months due to restricted mobility. Now more mobile and able to start taking more photos.

Thanks

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads