----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: canon vs pentax
> > >>as to keep people with good old Pentax lenses from > >> selling them in disgust and buying Canon. > > >Sure, that would be the same Canon that completely abandoned their > >user base once already? > >At least Pentax doesn't have that in their history. > > > > Nikon and Leica are the only companies I know of who have maintained > one mount standard in their SLR lines. Minolta, Canon, and Contax > switched over to go AF. Pentax switched over to go K-mount (rather > late, considering the age of other bayonet-mount systems), and Olympus > basically threw in the towel and went to 4/3. Of course you'll get fewer > features with new and old Nikon gear but they WILL mount (other than a few > real oddballs). Bullshit. Have you actually looked at the lens compatability issues with Nikon and Leica? With Nikon, there is the AI lens compatability issue, then there are all sorts of issues surrounding whether a particular lens will meter or even allow shutter operation. Even the Nikon users call the lens compatability issue a minefield. In order to get away from it, you have to go to their very top line models, and even then, I doubt if a non AI lens will even mount anymore. I don't know a lot about Leica R series, but I have heard about compatability issues between 2 cam and 3 cam lenses (though I don't have a clue what this means). > > Personally, I think Canon made the right choice. Their mount was probably > the worst on the market (small, hard to operate). Actually, the M42 mount was smaller and harder to operate. The FD mount was about as easy as any other bayonet, and I never had problems with the breech lock, although I did find that the camera wanted to be sitting on it's back when mounting lenses. Agreed on dropping the FD mount being the right choice. It was, i fact, the only choice, but it was a huge gamble for them. William Robb
