"mike wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> After discussion of how a lens with damaged mount would not go
> onto a camera with a metal bayonet after fitting one with a
> plastic bayonet, SETH wrote:
>
> Sounds more like a reason to avoid plastic lens mounts.
>
>
> I reply:
>
> If it copes with lenses with damaged lens bayonets, it sounds
> like an argument _for_ plastic mounts to me.
>
> Whilst I appreciate the aesthetics of a metal mount, this is a
> camera part which is _designed_ to wear. It is also easily
> replaceable. I wonder how many cameras of the "professional"
> ilk have lens mounts which are wholly worn out due to years of
> use and not holding the lens in proper relationship to the film
> plane? Anyone ever replaced one due to wear rather than
> accident? Anyone examined their mount to see if it is
> functioning properly in this respect?
My guess is that under similar use, the metal lens mounts will last
substantially longer than plastic ones.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
