The funny thing is they always win.

Oggy : I can not follow you for very well, are you joking?

Thank you Gwyn.
Jackie also has the DA*60-250 but don't know about the other lens she has.

DA 17-70 - 3 (0)
DA*16-50 - 2 (0)
DA*50-135 - 4 (0)
DA*60-250 - 2 (0)
DA*55 - 0 (0)
DA*200 - 0 (0)
DA*300 - 1 (0)

Good find Mike, it really proves something.

Around 3:50 when the phone rings, that's was quite funny ^^
When can we expect the first camera with a phone you think?

Yep put up a wrong link, here you go.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/techniques/image-sharpening.htm

Btw, am I the only one that finds them too sharp, no one mention it and I feel such a bad person now

Actually this isn't a duplicate because I was asking for the horror stories, not my fault every one commented that they didn't had a failure or story too tell

The purpose was to see if it truly was the SDM motor or that it could be something else that was at fault.

edit: Actually let's take the opportunity to make a list of failure per lens so Gwyn and Thordell, which SDM lenses do you've?


The first number is the number of times the lens is mentioned and the one between the (#) is the number off them that failed

DA 17-70 - 2 (0)
DA*16-50 - 2 (0)
DA*50-135 - 3 (0)
DA*60-250 - 0 (0)
DA*55 - 0 (0)
DA*200 - 0 (0)
DA*300 - 1 (0)

Take one photo with your shortest focal length at the highest f-number and please show it too us

SP is only applied to the newer lenses so you won't find them on the older lenses.

Could UV radiation or something like that change the composition slightly off the coating?

I've heard that too much this week so lets gather all the SDM stories of all the members here too see how bad it is.

I didn't have had any problem with my DA*16-50 and DA*50-135 so I can't tell you off any horror stories.
Although my view on the SDM failure is if the SDM motor is that bad then the DA*200, DA*300, DA*55, DA*60-250 and DA 17-70 would also suffer a lot since they use a SDM motor so for how much can the SDM motor be to blame for all the failures?
Wouldn't a poor AF system design be a better explanation of most failures?

Let's find out shall we.

Don't really like the ghosting, I would like the ghosting if it at the illusion of motion but that isn't the case and the photo looks a bit flat.

Do you maybe have some shot with less flash, I'm curious to see those.

Yes Mhuni, I've already looked but lets keep it quiet or else the rest know how good or bad I did it

#1 feels over-sharped, the flowers on the ground feel too crisp and there is a halo around the guy.

#2 also halo around the boys you get with over-sharpening.

#3 halo at the dark side off the column, the news paper and some at the guys clothing.

#4 halo at the horizon and the people.

#5 halo around the girl and at the elements off the top of the arc at the door and the stair way feels too crisp.

#6 this one is good although I've the feeling you're on the edge here but it still looks good.

#7 this one is also good no remarks about the sharpening either.

#8 pushed it too far, halo around the chair's at the bar, the guy and the tv and you see that the details on the wall are too crisp.

With crisp I mean that the details are too harsh too my taste.
This might be a good read if you want to read more about sharpening www.cambridgeincolour.com/techniques/image-sharpening