PL> Hmm interesting. Unfortunately this is impossible with pre-A pentax lenses
PL> due to the non-linear motion of the aperture lever.
PL> I assume, then, that Nikon lenses have always operated the same way as far
PL> as this goes (be it linear or non-linear?
Well, sorry for the Nikon excursion, but:
No, Nikon was always somewhat chaotic in its system compatibility.
Pentax is much easier to grasp. Nikon was non-linear, and used the
little prongs (rabbit-ears) to connect to meter. Then came AI lenses,
which had aperture simulator lever like everybody else. I *think* they
were linear in motion, but I am not sure. To muddle the waters more,
you could have the old non-AI had AI'd. But then it was still
non-linear... There were no lenses like Pentax A. No few contacts until AF
lenses which used CPU chip. But to make it even worse, there were
original MF lenses which had the chip from the start. Called AI-P. And
there are several generations of cameras and lenses which key
information in different ways. Some lenses have drilled out keys or
mechanical pins for telling the focal length ("short" "normal" "long")
for different programs. Some lenses have mechanical way of telling the
body what the physical maximum aperture is, but mechanically, and
there are like two bodies (!) which use this to have Matrix metering.
Now, some lenses have body motor AF, some lenses have lens motor AF.
Of course some older film bodies don't work with the USM af...
About the only fully, all features compatible body was the F4. Which
is still, according to many people, Nikon's best body ever. Designed
by Italian designer house, it has several options of motor advance but
you can always rewind the film by hand, et cetera. It even autofocuses
with the 1st generation AF lenses, which were similar to what ME-F's
AF 35-70/2.8 is...
All in all, it makes the Pentax compatibility seem
overly simple.
Good light!
fra
