the last 1% is not a cost saving, it's a scheme to sell new lenses. When third party
lens makers produce "Pro" quality lenses for not much more than Pentax produces consumer
quality lenses who's do you think new users will buy?
At 05:44 PM 6/7/03 +0200, you wrote:
Heiko wrote:
> I cannot see why the abandonment of the aperture simulator should help > implementing IS or USM. If they need a new protocol to implement those > features, then they will have to make changes that either abandon the > whole compatility or they will have to ensure backwards compatibilty > (e.g. by adding new contacts or using the PZ-contacts). And in both > cases I cannot see the aperture simulator being an obstacle.
You're basically right. However, the lack of cmpatibility is a cost issue first and foremost in case of the *ists. They have implemented though a new protocol and this protocol open of for electronic aperture control and control of built in motors in lenses in addition to power zoom. Pentax may want to install a user base for this new protocol before they take it any further.
P�l
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
