I agree about the lens issue. Months ago I was excited about the Pentax digital offering because I, like others, thought all the K mount lenses I own would function on it. I'm not one who wants to ruin a perfectly good K mount lens by having it fall off the camera using the technique you described.
Jim A. > From: Arnold Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 07:20:54 +0200 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: *istD and the future (WAS: Re: Digital Formats and Partial > Coverage Lenses) > Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 01:16:56 -0400 > > As one of those who have had opportunities to hold and try the *ist D > repeatedly I would like to say that the look, the feel and the user > interface of the *ist D are really really nice. I had similar feelings > when I first tried the MZ5N, but the *ist D looks and feels a lot more > more solid. The design of the *ist may lack anything sensational except > size, but I would advise everybody to hold and try the *ist D before > calling it ugly. I am absoultely happy with the design! > > It is only the compatibilty issue of course which makes me wait and see > for something better. However, yesterday I was able to try and confirm > that the *ist D works with K lenses that are disengaged and then turned > 15� anti-clockwise. The lens sits still firmly, the aperture is closed > to the selected value, of course, the camera meter really works in AV > mode, and the shutter speed is selected according to the selected > aperture. However, the danger of dropping the lens is there, and I am > not going to drill holes into the mount of the lens for another locking > position, so I still ask for better compatibilty. > > Arnold >
