Re: DFA 70-200 failure
For what its worth the 70-200 is a star lens that is wholly Ricoh designed and manufactured. I'm really sorry this happened. I would be complaining a lot if a $1800 lens fell off the camera. The ring on the camera is threaded into plastic. At least on the aps-c bodies. Plastic threads are easier to repair to be honest and bayonet rings can be replaced, so its likely by design. It seems to hold my 60-250 vertically OK. Why they would use plastic for the internal construction of a pro grade lens at the mount is beyond me frankly. I have a bigma and I try to never put the weight of it on the mount if I can help it, which makes changing AF options on the k-3 annoying. My 60-250 has been very sturdy. The hood is getting a little scuffed up, but its only plastic. Such is life. For what its worth, you can take the 60-250 apart from the rear and there is a baffle for APS-C. You can hack the baffle off and put what's left back in as a spacer and the lens is fully full frame. It was designed as a FF lens from the start if you look at the patent for it. I love the 60-250. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: DFA 70-200 failure
Thanks for the comments Paul. The 150-450 is the one addition I may consider once I clear out my shelves and simplify my kit. Igor, glad to hear that your own lesson in the fallibility of photo gear was not very costly. I recall a Pentax lens I used to own (I don’t remember which one) whose tripod mount frequently loosened and I regularly carried a compact screwdriver in my kit to tighten it up before use. Back in the long ago Before Digital days when Film was King and ASA400 was too grainy for most purposes, there used to be photography magazines printed on actual paper and sold at newsstands or via subscription. Those magazines periodically ran stories about how to travel (e.g., how to maintain the quality of a few bricks of film while on safari in Africa). In such articles they always cautioned that the vibrations in airplanes would loosen screws on the camera, and cautioning of the need to check that everything was tight and secure after a flight and before using the equipment. I think we now have less vibration aboard aircraft, and we may have better screws (or Loc-Tite to hold the screws). And fewer magazine articles to remind us of the possible issues. I for one had become much more blasé, assuming that my gear was going to remain intact. > On Sep 9, 2016, at 4:51 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: > > Yep. It's best to check that screw now and then. The tripod mount is very > sturdy but the screw has to be tight. I tighten it with a flat blade > screwdriver. Doing it by hand is inadequate. > > Paul via phone > >> On Sep 9, 2016, at 4:47 PM, Igor PDML-StR wrote: >> >> >> Stan, >> >> Sorry to hear about that. >> >> Just two weekends ago, I was photographing an ice-skating performance with >> the 60-250, staying at the top level of the bleechers. >> Then I hear a having piece falling down, bouncing from the concrete floor. >> (Fortunately, nobody was right below me, and my little daughter was about a >> foot to the side.) >> It was the tripod mount from the lens. >> I've never untightened it from the lens. And this time it came off by >> itself. (Actually, I've never looked at it, and if asked, from the memory, I >> would probably say that it cannot be detached easily, but if the screw is >> loosened, the collar can be rotated.) >> >> I thought I was lucky it wasn't while I was holding the lense by the collar. >> >> Igor >> >> >>> On Sep 9, 2016, at 3:04 PM, Stanley Halpin wrote: >>> >>> >>> In my recent listing of items soon to be up for sale, I made a passing >>> comment about the 70-200. >>> >>> The (Tamron?) Pentax DFA HD 70-200/2.8 is a big hefty lens that balances >>> well >>> on the K-1 body + grip. It has a detachable tripod mount. It produces >>> wonderful mages. But… >>> >>> The metal bit on the back end of the lens that mates with the K-mount on the >>> body is a thin plate about 1-1.5mm thick. That plate attaches to the back >>> end >>> of the lens via four small screws (just a little larger than the screws that >>> hold the sidepieces on your eyeglasses). Those screws go into a hard plastic >>> (not metal) portion of the lens construction. When one or more of those >>> screws is loose or otherwise weakened, then the lens body will detach from >>> the K-mount plate. Leaving the plate attached to the camera, the other 99% >>> of >>> the lens on the table or floor or ground. You needn’t ask how I know this. >>> >>> I like this lens and the images it produces, I like the versatility of this >>> zoom range, I am not ready to give up on it. We’ll see what the verdict of >>> the repair technician is. But I must say that I am a bit miffed that a >>> 2-month-old $1800 lens should fall apart in the wilds of Alaska with no >>> possible replacement. ( Off the grid, no way to order another or find a >>> rental. Too close to the end off the trip, the timing was off, even if I had >>> somehow smoke-signaled an emergency shout-out to B&H for a replacement with >>> next day delivery, it would still have taken 3-4 days to get to me…) >>> >>> So anyway, for those of you with this lens, be careful. Don’t put undue >>> pressure on the lens. Do use the lens tripod mount in lieu of mounting the >>> body and letting the lens hang off. And watch for symptoms of impending >>> disaster. Reflecting later, I realized that there were signs which I didn’t >>> pay attention to. Specifically, there were times when the in-camera >>> viewfinder display of F-stop etc. behaved as though I had an M-series lens >>> mounted. I.e., no F-stop was displayed. Wiggling the lens a bit would >>> correct >>> the problem, and to the extent that I gave it any thought I figured I had >>> dirty contacts. In retrospect, the mounting plate was probably coming loose >>> and that was causing the display issue. Or maybe I had dirty contacts and >>> this wasn’t symptomatic of an impending failure. I don’t know. >>> >>> I don’t abuse my camera equipment, but I also don’t treat my gear as though >>> it w
Re: DFA 70-200 failure
There are two screws involved here. One, which looks more like a knob allows the tripod collar to rotate when loosened. The other, which is slotted, secures the tripod foot to the lens. When doing handheld work, like the Porsche pans I shot last week, I remove the foot. Paul via phone > On Sep 9, 2016, at 4:47 PM, Igor PDML-StR wrote: > > > Stan, > > Sorry to hear about that. > > Just two weekends ago, I was photographing an ice-skating performance with > the 60-250, staying at the top level of the bleechers. > Then I hear a having piece falling down, bouncing from the concrete floor. > (Fortunately, nobody was right below me, and my little daughter was about a > foot to the side.) > It was the tripod mount from the lens. > I've never untightened it from the lens. And this time it came off by itself. > (Actually, I've never looked at it, and if asked, from the memory, I would > probably say that it cannot be detached easily, but if the screw is loosened, > the collar can be rotated.) > > I thought I was lucky it wasn't while I was holding the lense by the collar. > > Igor > > >> On Sep 9, 2016, at 3:04 PM, Stanley Halpin wrote: >> >> >> In my recent listing of items soon to be up for sale, I made a passing >> comment about the 70-200. >> >> The (Tamron?) Pentax DFA HD 70-200/2.8 is a big hefty lens that balances well >> on the K-1 body + grip. It has a detachable tripod mount. It produces >> wonderful mages. But… >> >> The metal bit on the back end of the lens that mates with the K-mount on the >> body is a thin plate about 1-1.5mm thick. That plate attaches to the back end >> of the lens via four small screws (just a little larger than the screws that >> hold the sidepieces on your eyeglasses). Those screws go into a hard plastic >> (not metal) portion of the lens construction. When one or more of those >> screws is loose or otherwise weakened, then the lens body will detach from >> the K-mount plate. Leaving the plate attached to the camera, the other 99% of >> the lens on the table or floor or ground. You needn’t ask how I know this. >> >> I like this lens and the images it produces, I like the versatility of this >> zoom range, I am not ready to give up on it. We’ll see what the verdict of >> the repair technician is. But I must say that I am a bit miffed that a >> 2-month-old $1800 lens should fall apart in the wilds of Alaska with no >> possible replacement. ( Off the grid, no way to order another or find a >> rental. Too close to the end off the trip, the timing was off, even if I had >> somehow smoke-signaled an emergency shout-out to B&H for a replacement with >> next day delivery, it would still have taken 3-4 days to get to me…) >> >> So anyway, for those of you with this lens, be careful. Don’t put undue >> pressure on the lens. Do use the lens tripod mount in lieu of mounting the >> body and letting the lens hang off. And watch for symptoms of impending >> disaster. Reflecting later, I realized that there were signs which I didn’t >> pay attention to. Specifically, there were times when the in-camera >> viewfinder display of F-stop etc. behaved as though I had an M-series lens >> mounted. I.e., no F-stop was displayed. Wiggling the lens a bit would correct >> the problem, and to the extent that I gave it any thought I figured I had >> dirty contacts. In retrospect, the mounting plate was probably coming loose >> and that was causing the display issue. Or maybe I had dirty contacts and >> this wasn’t symptomatic of an impending failure. I don’t know. >> >> I don’t abuse my camera equipment, but I also don’t treat my gear as though >> it were egg-shell delicate jewelry. It bugs me that I may not be able to >> trust this lens after it is repaired and I will probably trade up if/when >> Pentax offers a 70-200 in lieu of what is said to be a rebranded Tamron. >> >> stan >> -- > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: DFA 70-200 failure
Yep. It's best to check that screw now and then. The tripod mount is very sturdy but the screw has to be tight. I tighten it with a flat blade screwdriver. Doing it by hand is inadequate. Paul via phone > On Sep 9, 2016, at 4:47 PM, Igor PDML-StR wrote: > > > Stan, > > Sorry to hear about that. > > Just two weekends ago, I was photographing an ice-skating performance with > the 60-250, staying at the top level of the bleechers. > Then I hear a having piece falling down, bouncing from the concrete floor. > (Fortunately, nobody was right below me, and my little daughter was about a > foot to the side.) > It was the tripod mount from the lens. > I've never untightened it from the lens. And this time it came off by itself. > (Actually, I've never looked at it, and if asked, from the memory, I would > probably say that it cannot be detached easily, but if the screw is loosened, > the collar can be rotated.) > > I thought I was lucky it wasn't while I was holding the lense by the collar. > > Igor > > >> On Sep 9, 2016, at 3:04 PM, Stanley Halpin wrote: >> >> >> In my recent listing of items soon to be up for sale, I made a passing >> comment about the 70-200. >> >> The (Tamron?) Pentax DFA HD 70-200/2.8 is a big hefty lens that balances well >> on the K-1 body + grip. It has a detachable tripod mount. It produces >> wonderful mages. But… >> >> The metal bit on the back end of the lens that mates with the K-mount on the >> body is a thin plate about 1-1.5mm thick. That plate attaches to the back end >> of the lens via four small screws (just a little larger than the screws that >> hold the sidepieces on your eyeglasses). Those screws go into a hard plastic >> (not metal) portion of the lens construction. When one or more of those >> screws is loose or otherwise weakened, then the lens body will detach from >> the K-mount plate. Leaving the plate attached to the camera, the other 99% of >> the lens on the table or floor or ground. You needn’t ask how I know this. >> >> I like this lens and the images it produces, I like the versatility of this >> zoom range, I am not ready to give up on it. We’ll see what the verdict of >> the repair technician is. But I must say that I am a bit miffed that a >> 2-month-old $1800 lens should fall apart in the wilds of Alaska with no >> possible replacement. ( Off the grid, no way to order another or find a >> rental. Too close to the end off the trip, the timing was off, even if I had >> somehow smoke-signaled an emergency shout-out to B&H for a replacement with >> next day delivery, it would still have taken 3-4 days to get to me…) >> >> So anyway, for those of you with this lens, be careful. Don’t put undue >> pressure on the lens. Do use the lens tripod mount in lieu of mounting the >> body and letting the lens hang off. And watch for symptoms of impending >> disaster. Reflecting later, I realized that there were signs which I didn’t >> pay attention to. Specifically, there were times when the in-camera >> viewfinder display of F-stop etc. behaved as though I had an M-series lens >> mounted. I.e., no F-stop was displayed. Wiggling the lens a bit would correct >> the problem, and to the extent that I gave it any thought I figured I had >> dirty contacts. In retrospect, the mounting plate was probably coming loose >> and that was causing the display issue. Or maybe I had dirty contacts and >> this wasn’t symptomatic of an impending failure. I don’t know. >> >> I don’t abuse my camera equipment, but I also don’t treat my gear as though >> it were egg-shell delicate jewelry. It bugs me that I may not be able to >> trust this lens after it is repaired and I will probably trade up if/when >> Pentax offers a 70-200 in lieu of what is said to be a rebranded Tamron. >> >> stan >> -- > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: DFA 70-200 failure
Stan, Sorry to hear about that. Just two weekends ago, I was photographing an ice-skating performance with the 60-250, staying at the top level of the bleechers. Then I hear a having piece falling down, bouncing from the concrete floor. (Fortunately, nobody was right below me, and my little daughter was about a foot to the side.) It was the tripod mount from the lens. I've never untightened it from the lens. And this time it came off by itself. (Actually, I've never looked at it, and if asked, from the memory, I would probably say that it cannot be detached easily, but if the screw is loosened, the collar can be rotated.) I thought I was lucky it wasn't while I was holding the lense by the collar. Igor On Sep 9, 2016, at 3:04 PM, Stanley Halpin wrote: In my recent listing of items soon to be up for sale, I made a passing comment about the 70-200. The (Tamron?) Pentax DFA HD 70-200/2.8 is a big hefty lens that balances well on the K-1 body + grip. It has a detachable tripod mount. It produces wonderful mages. But… The metal bit on the back end of the lens that mates with the K-mount on the body is a thin plate about 1-1.5mm thick. That plate attaches to the back end of the lens via four small screws (just a little larger than the screws that hold the sidepieces on your eyeglasses). Those screws go into a hard plastic (not metal) portion of the lens construction. When one or more of those screws is loose or otherwise weakened, then the lens body will detach from the K-mount plate. Leaving the plate attached to the camera, the other 99% of the lens on the table or floor or ground. You needn’t ask how I know this. I like this lens and the images it produces, I like the versatility of this zoom range, I am not ready to give up on it. We’ll see what the verdict of the repair technician is. But I must say that I am a bit miffed that a 2-month-old $1800 lens should fall apart in the wilds of Alaska with no possible replacement. ( Off the grid, no way to order another or find a rental. Too close to the end off the trip, the timing was off, even if I had somehow smoke-signaled an emergency shout-out to B&H for a replacement with next day delivery, it would still have taken 3-4 days to get to me…) So anyway, for those of you with this lens, be careful. Don’t put undue pressure on the lens. Do use the lens tripod mount in lieu of mounting the body and letting the lens hang off. And watch for symptoms of impending disaster. Reflecting later, I realized that there were signs which I didn’t pay attention to. Specifically, there were times when the in-camera viewfinder display of F-stop etc. behaved as though I had an M-series lens mounted. I.e., no F-stop was displayed. Wiggling the lens a bit would correct the problem, and to the extent that I gave it any thought I figured I had dirty contacts. In retrospect, the mounting plate was probably coming loose and that was causing the display issue. Or maybe I had dirty contacts and this wasn’t symptomatic of an impending failure. I don’t know. I don’t abuse my camera equipment, but I also don’t treat my gear as though it were egg-shell delicate jewelry. It bugs me that I may not be able to trust this lens after it is repaired and I will probably trade up if/when Pentax offers a 70-200 in lieu of what is said to be a rebranded Tamron. stan -- -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: DFA 70-200 failure
Ouch. Sorry to hear that. Hope you can get it repaired or replaced for a minimal amount. A bit of whining might motivate Pentax to replace it! It has worked for me in the past, although that was in the pre-Ricoh days, and I recited three magic words: New York Times. I was ready to buy the 70-200s at one point, but then I discovered that my 60-250/4 doesn’t vignette noticeably on the K-1, at least not at the stops I generally use — f4 to f8 max. I would like that extra stop of aperture, but I haven’t found a pressing need. And the 60-250/4 is built like a tank. The 150-450 is sturdier still. I just checked both to make sure I wasn’t working with ticking time bombs.. The mounts are solidly screwed in to the thick metal lens body. Best, Paul > On Sep 9, 2016, at 3:04 PM, Stanley Halpin > wrote: > > In my recent listing of items soon to be up for sale, I made a passing > comment about the 70-200. > > The (Tamron?) Pentax DFA HD 70-200/2.8 is a big hefty lens that balances well > on the K-1 body + grip. It has a detachable tripod mount. It produces > wonderful mages. But… > > The metal bit on the back end of the lens that mates with the K-mount on the > body is a thin plate about 1-1.5mm thick. That plate attaches to the back end > of the lens via four small screws (just a little larger than the screws that > hold the sidepieces on your eyeglasses). Those screws go into a hard plastic > (not metal) portion of the lens construction. When one or more of those > screws is loose or otherwise weakened, then the lens body will detach from > the K-mount plate. Leaving the plate attached to the camera, the other 99% of > the lens on the table or floor or ground. You needn’t ask how I know this. > > I like this lens and the images it produces, I like the versatility of this > zoom range, I am not ready to give up on it. We’ll see what the verdict of > the repair technician is. But I must say that I am a bit miffed that a > 2-month-old $1800 lens should fall apart in the wilds of Alaska with no > possible replacement. ( Off the grid, no way to order another or find a > rental. Too close to the end off the trip, the timing was off, even if I had > somehow smoke-signaled an emergency shout-out to B&H for a replacement with > next day delivery, it would still have taken 3-4 days to get to me…) > > So anyway, for those of you with this lens, be careful. Don’t put undue > pressure on the lens. Do use the lens tripod mount in lieu of mounting the > body and letting the lens hang off. And watch for symptoms of impending > disaster. Reflecting later, I realized that there were signs which I didn’t > pay attention to. Specifically, there were times when the in-camera > viewfinder display of F-stop etc. behaved as though I had an M-series lens > mounted. I.e., no F-stop was displayed. Wiggling the lens a bit would correct > the problem, and to the extent that I gave it any thought I figured I had > dirty contacts. In retrospect, the mounting plate was probably coming loose > and that was causing the display issue. Or maybe I had dirty contacts and > this wasn’t symptomatic of an impending failure. I don’t know. > > I don’t abuse my camera equipment, but I also don’t treat my gear as though > it were egg-shell delicate jewelry. It bugs me that I may not be able to > trust this lens after it is repaired and I will probably trade up if/when > Pentax offers a 70-200 in lieu of what is said to be a rebranded Tamron. > > stan > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
DFA 70-200 failure
In my recent listing of items soon to be up for sale, I made a passing comment about the 70-200. The (Tamron?) Pentax DFA HD 70-200/2.8 is a big hefty lens that balances well on the K-1 body + grip. It has a detachable tripod mount. It produces wonderful mages. But… The metal bit on the back end of the lens that mates with the K-mount on the body is a thin plate about 1-1.5mm thick. That plate attaches to the back end of the lens via four small screws (just a little larger than the screws that hold the sidepieces on your eyeglasses). Those screws go into a hard plastic (not metal) portion of the lens construction. When one or more of those screws is loose or otherwise weakened, then the lens body will detach from the K-mount plate. Leaving the plate attached to the camera, the other 99% of the lens on the table or floor or ground. You needn’t ask how I know this. I like this lens and the images it produces, I like the versatility of this zoom range, I am not ready to give up on it. We’ll see what the verdict of the repair technician is. But I must say that I am a bit miffed that a 2-month-old $1800 lens should fall apart in the wilds of Alaska with no possible replacement. ( Off the grid, no way to order another or find a rental. Too close to the end off the trip, the timing was off, even if I had somehow smoke-signaled an emergency shout-out to B&H for a replacement with next day delivery, it would still have taken 3-4 days to get to me…) So anyway, for those of you with this lens, be careful. Don’t put undue pressure on the lens. Do use the lens tripod mount in lieu of mounting the body and letting the lens hang off. And watch for symptoms of impending disaster. Reflecting later, I realized that there were signs which I didn’t pay attention to. Specifically, there were times when the in-camera viewfinder display of F-stop etc. behaved as though I had an M-series lens mounted. I.e., no F-stop was displayed. Wiggling the lens a bit would correct the problem, and to the extent that I gave it any thought I figured I had dirty contacts. In retrospect, the mounting plate was probably coming loose and that was causing the display issue. Or maybe I had dirty contacts and this wasn’t symptomatic of an impending failure. I don’t know. I don’t abuse my camera equipment, but I also don’t treat my gear as though it were egg-shell delicate jewelry. It bugs me that I may not be able to trust this lens after it is repaired and I will probably trade up if/when Pentax offers a 70-200 in lieu of what is said to be a rebranded Tamron. stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
