At this point, it's the concept that's being considered. The ultimate desirability would, obviously, follow the normal course of individual evaluation. I'm pleased there are the beginnings of a move to develop the technology.
Jack --- Graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The thing here is no one who is saying the Minolta > system is better has ever > used one. Why not wait to make these determinations > from experience rather than > guess work. Lot's of seemingly great ideas turned > out to be not so great in > practice. > > -- > > J. C. O'Connell wrote: > > > The $64,000 question is do you want or need a > smaller > > body more than you want or need a BODY integrated > > IS system? If the answer isnt clear than the MFGRs > > could offer different models with and without the > feature. > > > > > > JCO > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 10:57 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Minolta Maxxum wth BODY IS > > > > > > they don't. take a look at the room around for the > AF system. putting in > > what Minolta did will make the bodies much larger. > > > > Herb... > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 10:06 PM > > Subject: RE: Minolta Maxxum wth BODY IS > > > > > > > >>pentax doesn't have IS system in body or lenses do > they? > > > > > > > > > > -- > graywolf > http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html > > > _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com
