1. How can a point be pointless? 2. Yes, Pentax *could* support these lenses better, that is correct.
3. They chose not to some time ago. Get over it. A. On 18/9/04 9:34 pm, "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Your whole point is pointless when they can easily > support K/M AND A,F lenses. the A and F lenses are > not hindered in any way by the K/M support. > JCO > > -----Original Message----- > From: Antonio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 2:42 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: istDs - what a great camera! > > > Now you are just spinning things - what I said was that you seem stuck > in the past if you think that a camera made in 2004 should fully support > lenses made in 1975. > > Apart from anything else it is not in Pentax financial interests to do > so. 1970s lenses would canabalise any new lens sales they can make now. > > As to the regression business obviously as far as K/M lenses the support > is inferior - nobody is disagreeing with you on that score so please > turn off the caps lock. Support on the new bodies is clearly not what it > was iin the past. However, you must admit that the new lenses and new > bodies are a step forward. The new coupling mechanism *is* an > improvement over the old 1970s metal rod way of comunicating between > lens and camera. It is *progress* and it will allow for the development > of better things in future. > > A > > On 18/9/04 5:36 pm, "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Im in favor of PROGRESS. Doing things in a new inferior >> way is not PROGRESS. If it was the same or better as the past, that's >> OK. But going backwards is REGRESSION. Especially when it was not >> necessary ( nothing new was gained for this regression). Sorry, I >> don't see how you can call removal of true open aperture AE , a 1970's > >> development, without cause "pretty damn good". JCO >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Antonio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 11:16 AM >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: Re: istDs - what a great camera! >> >> >> You seem <iretrevably> stuck in the past. >> >> In any event, nobody is saying it is a better way of operating, >> clearly full K/M support wouldd be welcomed by most pentax users who >> have these lenses and wish to use them. But given that is not going to > >> happen, the support offered at present is pretty dam good. >> >> A. >> >> >> On 18/9/04 4:59 pm, "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> that is NOT the way AE has worked for the last 30 years at pentax. It > >>> has always been continuous, on the fly, and with the aperure wide >>> open. Stop down method is generally inferior because it unnessacarily > >>> lowers the sensitivity of meter. And having to take a reading before >>> every exposure and after every aperture setting change is much slower > >>> than AE on the fly. That's why it hasn't been done this way, its an >>> inferior way to do it compared to sensing the aperture setting and >>> doing everthing wide open and on the fly. JCO >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Antonio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 10:12 AM >>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Subject: Re: istDs - what a great camera! >>> >>> >>> Well, in my book if the camera takes a stop down reading then it IS >>> taking apeture into account. All I am concerned with is does the >>> camera respond to changes I make manually to the apeture setting on >>> the lens? Answer = Yes. And does it change the shutter speed >>> accordingly? Answer = Yes. And does it dow this with old K and M >>> mount >> >>> lenses? Answer = Yes. Basically it provides AE operation via the >>> green >> >>> button. Not open apeture reading, which I agree would be nice, but >>> good enough all the same given these lenses are nearly 30 years old >>> in >> >>> some cases. Not to mention the screw mounts. >>> >>> A. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 18/9/04 3:24 pm, "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> Your understanding is wrong. The camera is >>>> forced to taking a stop down reading because >>>> it doesn't have a clue what the K/M lens shooting aperture is going >>>> to be because it ignores the K/M aperture cam. >>>> >>>> JCO >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Antonio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 8:59 AM >>>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> Subject: Re: istDs - what a great camera! >>>> >>>> >>>> JCO, my understanding is that it does take the apeture into account >>>> and set the shutter acordingly. >>>> >>>> A. >>>> >>>> On 18/9/04 2:43 pm, "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> But to say that ignoring >>>>> the aperure setting of the K/M lenses doesn't mattter >>>>> (and never has) makes very little sense. >>>> >>> >> >
