Let the market decide, Shel. If you want to collect lenses and that floats your boat, by all means do. But the only delusions are indeed yours if you think a) they're consistently and noticably superior optically to their younger AF siblings and b) they're worthy investments. By all means collate the relevant data as you see it, talk to someone who actually designs lenses for a living, preferably with the company concerned, learn the history and find yourself completely debunked as I did.
Anyway we're here to learn not impose idiosyncratic mindsets but if it were larger items such as older cars the (de)merits of collection become immediately apparent. On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 06:09:10 -0800, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > HAR! If you pay much attention to anything this antonymous poster, Quasi > Modo, says, you'd be deluding yourself. Rob Studdert is probably right. > There's still a very strong demand for manual focus lenses throughout the > world, both from users and collectors. > > Shel > > > > [Original Message] > > From: Cory Papenfuss > > > > On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, Quasi Modo wrote: > > > > > Manual lenses = too much hassle in this day and age. We are the > > > Instant Gratification Generation. If I didn't filter my lens > > > browsing to auto-focus only I'd be there all day. (I think that > > > captures the sentiments of ~90% of ppl in the market for Pentax > > > lenses) > > > > > > > > Great news then... so the 10% of us that like to tinker with > > quality old gear won't have to pay as much for it. A DSLR with manual > > lenses is still instant gratification, there are just a few more steps to > > > do along the way. > > >
