I dont know how you guys cant like the "A" lenses either. They are plastic for the most part too, have terrible "feel" compared to the earlier K/M and screw lenses. They also have a far more common "problem rate" with the focus mechanisms than any of the eariler lenses. I dont like the "A" series lenses for this reason. I dont have a lot of exerinece with the F series and later lenses,but I can tell you for sure that the "A" series was and is a definate drop off in quality mechanically for Pentax, and that's one of the reasons I am/was an ardant defender of the need for the aperture cam sensor return to Pentax bodies. I dont want to use "A" lenses. I would much rather use the more refined K/M lenses & if they were fully supported, the only features they would lack compared to "A" would be very minor compared to the features they currently lack on the current Pentax DSLR bodies. jco
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cotty Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 4:35 AM To: pentax list Subject: Re: What Makes a Pentax a Pentax? On 22/12/06, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: >the thing that made me buy my first Pentax, a new MX, in 1979 was that >it was small, very well made, at least as good as its rivals from >Olympus and Nikon, and much cheaper. Those are the distinguishing >factors for me. I don't think it's been true of Pentax for a very long >time, although it may be becoming more so with the release of the K10D, >which seems to be from the old mould. Very similar time frame and thought. 1980 for me. > >The lenses from the pre-plastic era (ie the metal A lenses and >earlier) seem to me to have a more consistent look & feel than most of >the more modern lenses too. I find the current line up of lenses very >confusing. I don't so much find it as confusing, just that I do not want plastic lenses. I don't own any. It means more weight, but I don't associate more weight with being detrimental. All my Pentax and Canon lenses (and cameras) are metal and heavy and will last longer than I will. Just the way i like to shoot - with a bit of heft to the gear. As for the merger, it doesn't really effect me, although we do have an *ist Ds in the house. I am sad to see Pentax as a small underdog being merged with another company if for nothing other than it eventually moulds itself into something else, no matter how much reassurance is given that it won't. Sure, I have no doubt the Pentax brand will continue - in a worst-case scenario for at least a few years, probably much much longer. But after the honeymoon is over, the core people who made Pentax what it is today (Ken will know of the names) will slowly and surely be edged or bought out. Hoya will appoint people to take the company in the direction it wants to go (I have personal experience with such a merger) and that may or may not coincide with what the fans want. It may mean much better things in terms of research and development of new products [from the Imaging section] and so you will probably see better and greater DSLRs coming on the scene - probably even 'full frame' 35mm DSLRs - but they won't have the karma that current Pentax cameras have. Then again, I have always said that the Pentax of today is a far cry from the Pentax of 30 years ago. Now comes the next generation. On the whole I think it is a sad day. But Godders will be pleased - the gear will still be there and future incarnations will doubtless outweigh expectations. There's a lot to be pleased about for anyone that likes good quality photographic equipment decently priced with excellent pedigree. Pentax is dead. Long live Pentax! -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com _____________________________ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
