What was it about the old Canon mount? Too narrow? Too far from (or too near to) the film plane? Have Nikon and Pentax been able to keep cobbling along because their mount dimensions were more generous? Somewhere this must have been written about, but I've never seen an article or discussion.
-Lon
Michael Perham wrote:
Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
From photo.net:
"Can anyone think of a single valid reason why a new lens mount should be necessary? " Ask Canon or Minolta. They did such a stunt and made a lot of business sense.
-- P�l Jensen
Actually, when Canon changed their mount, it was ostensibly to accommodate new and upcoming technology; today, Pentax and Nikon are not making that assertion. They are simply changing the mount to reduce manufacturing cost by allowing electronic control of the aperture as opposed to a mechanical control, which is more expensive to produce. Now, I dnk whether or not Canon's rational was an accurate statement or simply a spin to appease the owners of old FD class lenses and in fact was just a way of forced obsolescence of the old lenses. At least with Nikon and Pentax old lenses can still be used, although with reduced functionality. That's how I see it anyway ....cheers! Mike.
