K-01 Review (and several Pentax lenses)

<p>DCResource has posted their review of the K-01. They also had some "interesting" experiences with several Pentax lenses. It appears that Pentax quality control has not yet improved. Let's face it, it's got to be bad when a brand-new $1500 DA* 16-50 produces softer results than an old "version 1" DA 18-55.</p>

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

<blockquote>

<p>No comments? Really?!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>What is there to say?</p>

<p>I never heard about dcresource before. The 16-50 is not the greatest Pentax lens, but the fact that it performed worse than the 18-55 clearly indicates a bad sample. So dcresource tried to test the K-01 and found out that one of their Pentax lenses was bad. That is certainly bad luck for them, so they should exchange it and try a new one. They should also check the carrier packaging for evidence of mishandling. I was unable to purchase a DA*300 last year (my luck in hindsight), because all three lens samples sent to me were damaged during shipping - the last package was almost open, so I returned it on the spot and then I cancelled the order.</p>

<p>There is hardly any data here to allow us to elaborate on Pentax QC or anything.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>"I never heard about dcresource before."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's a good site. They've been testing and reviewing digital cameras longer than just about any other site on the web. They didn't get to where they are today by writing biased, unfair reviews.</p>

<p>Not sure if you read the review or not, but in addition to the defective 16-50, they also received a defective K-01, a defective 18-55 WR, and a defective 55-200. The only lenses they didn't have any problems with were the 40 XS, a borrowed 50-135, and their pre-existing 18-55.</p>

<p>Short fair-use quote from the review:</p>

<blockquote>

<p >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. Lenses were a different story -- here's a quick summary of my experiences:</p>

<ul>

<li ><strong>F2.8, 40 mm pancake</strong>: my kit lens worked great -- no complaints!</li>

<li ><strong>F3.5-5.6, 18 - 55 mm #1</strong>: returned it early on due to the blurry photos issue mentioned above; seemed okay aside from corner blurring.</li>

<li ><strong>F3.5-5.6, 18 - 55 mm #2</strong>: this lens arrived to replace 18-55 #1, and was a brand new water resistent (WR) model; it was decentered, meaning that sharpness drops off rapidly as you move away from the center of the frame; I did not have focusing problems with this particular lens.</li>

<li ><strong>F3.5-5.6, 18 - 55 mm #3</strong>: I bought this lens years ago just to have around, and used it to reshoot the photos taken with the WR model; this lens had the same blurriness issues as lens #1 did with my original K-01 body, but it did okay with the second one; this is a Mark I lens, so it had issues with vignetting that the other two 18-55's did not.</li>

<li ><strong>F2.8, 16 - 50 mm</strong>: this $1500 lens is in Pentax's DA* lineup, so I was expecting great things; it arrived brand new and guess what -- it was decentered, too. My 18-55 actually produced sharper photos (see example below), with <a href="http://www.dcresource.com/sites/default/files/galleries/pentax-k-01-photo-gallery/IMGP0465.JPG" target="_blank">one exception</a>.</li>

<li ><strong>F4.0-5.6, 50 - 200 mm:</strong> another one of the possible kit lenses, this lens also appeared to be decentered, and had <a href="http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/pentax/k01-assets/IMGP0090.JPG" target="_blank">horrible purple fringing</a> in my first pass of night test shots.</li>

<li ><strong>F2.8, 50 - 135 mm:</strong> borrowed this $1600 DA* lens from a friend to take over night shot duty, and it worked great.</li>

</ul>

</blockquote>

<p>They're reviewing cameras on a regular basis -- dozens of cameras per year -- so one would assume that if it was a shipping problem, it would effect the other cameras they review, not just the Pentax cameras. One also assumes that they woudn't go out of their way to bash Pentax if the packages were obviously damaged or mishandled.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>They didn't get to where they are today by writing biased, unfair reviews.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br>

Well, AFAIAC, they didn't get anywhere because I wasn't even aware of their existence until you mentioned them. :) And in my experience, reviews suffer more from incompetence than they do from bias.</p>

<p>We had plenty of stories about Pentax QC over the years - SDM, AIV, sensor spots - I am not sure why you think this review is bringing forth any special information. QC issues are everywhere - look at the 5DIII long exposure LCD light leak or the D800 lockup issue. I am more concerned about Ricoh's long term strategic plan for the Pentax brand than about whatever QC issues they may still be having today - QC issues can be resolved, but if few care about the products you're putting up, what good is their high quality construction?</p>

<p>It's a curious review site. They complain, for example, in their review of the Nikon D700 that "corner blurriness (is) a big problem with kit lens" and in their Canon 5D2 review that the camera (and this was listed as a negative) "requires a good lens for best results."<br>

<br /><br>

<br /></p>