1 - You can do this, the case does have a top cover which will flip over the lens, but you would risk loosing the lens if you accidentally tipped the case to it's side if you bent over or knocked it. I usually just pull the zipp round a short distance so that it can't happen.

2 - I think so. I tried using my own belt, but it's a right PITA having to unbuckle your trouser belt (:blush to slide the case(s) off when you need to drive your car, sit down for a beer etc.

The lens cases are not that bad as they have a slip lock fitting, but the topload zoom case (and some others) just have loops for a belt.

It's much easier to release the quick clasp and quickly remove the whole darned thing.

I have the lens case #2 and have used it for the DA55-300 mainly because I used it for my FA*300 f4.5 and kept it because I always intended to upgrade to the DA*60-250 when it became available.

It's a pretty loose fit for the 55-300, but if you want to keep the hood in place, then it's probably the best choice, otherwise the lens case #1 is a better fit. Once on your hip it's pretty inconspicuous and not too bulky, you can just about see it in this photo of me and the boss.




I use mine now with my DA*60-250 with the hood reversed (and the tripod bush removed) where it's a snug but practical fit. I use it in conjunction with the Topload Zoom 2 (for my K20D + DA17-70 and accessories). I fit both on to a Lowepro belt and buckle which I find easier to use rather than my trouser belt as I can easily release it for removal, rather than mess around with my trouser belt!

Personally, if I was never intending to have a larger lens than the 55-300, I would get the lens case #1 and have the hood reversed as I don't find it inconvenient.

I use Fotospeed link, they have a fast free calibration service to profile their papers to your own printer which is the right way to do profiling, as even printers of the same model have small discrepancies.

Pricing and help is top class. Their continuous ink system is also one of the best, which even has pigment inks available for some printers that don't normally have them.

Highly recommended.

The motor used in the Pentax SDM lenses does use an supersonic drive system, it's just that it's a small supersonic "micro" motor similar to those used by Canon in some of their their USM lenses that don't feature the larger ring design which is much larger, much faster and more expensive. Stefans post showing the different Canon assemblies is relevant as the smaller USM motors are not as fast as the large ring type.

Please don't confuse the word supersonic or ultrasonic with fast, it's the method used to energise the motor as opposed to a DC micro-motor. An explanation can be found here:
link

This is a picture of the Pentax supersonic motor




This is a picture Nikons SWM motor assembly




This is a Canon assembly which is very similar to the Nikon.




This is a (somewhat rough) diagram of the Pentax SDM/screw drive system.




I believe that the (in reality) very few SDM failures, mainly with the early lenses, are due to alignment errors that may have happened during transit from the factory to the user (we've all experienced the kind of handling that happens in transit!). I suspect that the tolerances are very tight and that even a very slight misalignment can cause failures over time due to excessive strain on either the motor or gearing mechanism.

From what I've heard from various trade sources, I believe that the number of Pentax failures is similar, if not less than, the percentage that occurs with other makes, especially with the newer production units.

The increased complexity of modern AF lenses (plus the ability to pixel peep!) has put ever increasing strains tightening tolerances and on product reliability.

As far as I'm concerned, Pentax products are as good as the best out there. Notwithstanding that, I know for a fact that long term reliability of modern electromechanical products is somewhat less than it was a few years back due to the introduction of non lead based solders and similar restrictions, it's no surprise that military and medical electronics are exempt from the RoHS regulations.

Very similar conclusions to the Imaging Resource review. link

There has been a raft of positive reviews recently.

UK Trusted Review link

The Online Photographer link

Just hope that Pentax capitalise on all this very positive review coverage and reap the benefit from increased sales.

It's about time they started to shout from the rooftops!

I suggest you contact Pentax USA at Golden CO, and ask to speak with John Carlson (head of customer services in the US) as it does seem you spoke to a bit of a numbnut! Unfortunately, like Pentax UK, the US have contracted out to independent regional service companies rather than handle "all" service work in house.

Give them a call:
Customer Service (if calling within the U.S.)
Phone: 1-800-877-0155
Monday – Friday
7:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m., Mountain Standard Time

So far, my (slight) experience with communicating with the UK service centre (Photopia) about a service query was handled professionally and my questions were intelligently answered. I haven't actually used them as yet.

I'm trying to identify if the few failures are lens specific and time related and also to discover if the failure rate is now much lower than earlier production examples.

Just wanting to obtain a better, truer picture of events, rather than any emotive reactions.

As an owner of mainly SDM lenses, I find the results interesting and also encouraging as it does seem (at this early stage) that current lenses are much less liable than the first production units (early adopters beware! :lol

Ooop's sorry about the 200 & 300, I plain forgot!

Problem is I can't update the poll section.

The results may be skewed somewhat, but I did ask those with multiple lenses to post their details. So can I ask those with any failures of DA*200 or 300's to tick the more than one box and detail which lens in a separate post as well.

Unfortunately the poll system can only handle a single selection to a single question, so it's very hard to garner solid data.

Did you return it via your dealer, direct to Pentax, or the new service centre at Johnsons (Photopia)? You don't say what the pathetic responses were.

Returning via the dealer is always the best course of action as they should have much more clout with their suppliers and anyway the contract of supply is with them in law. Was it a Pro dealer as they offer a 2 year warranty?

As a footnote, I would say that having "funnies" since it was new was an indication that something was amiss with it.

I sincerely hope that things are sorted quickly for you.

In order to fine tune my earlier post, I'm posting this to try to identify the spread of SDM issues by lens model.

Please tick the appropriate box and please can you post how old the lens was when it failed, or any other relevant information.

It is for SDM AF lens failures only, i.e. the SDM ceases to function completely. Hunting, AF speed, and optical issues are separate to this poll.

I thank you for your indulgence and for your participation.