However, if I was Pentax, I wouldn't add such a coaxial ring to the camera,
which is just a possible way for overcoming a mistake.
If I was Pentax,
1) I'd re-engineer the few "serious" ringless lenses for restoring an
aperture ring back in its proper place.
2) I'd restore the diaphragm simulator in any mid- to top-range camera.
3) I'd standardize the two aperture/shutter speed wheels in any mid- to
top-range camera. And , please, please, the aperture wheel must be on the
front (diaphragm side) and the shutter speed wheel must be on the back
(shutter side). Being the other way round (wrong) as they are on the *istD,
I still have to think which wheel to operate all the time.
But I'm not Pentax...
Dario
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 5:00 PM
Subject: Re: Digital MZ-5n
On 4 Jun 2005 at 8:34, Cotty wrote:
>On 3 Jun 2005 at 20:08, Dario Bonazza wrote:
>
>> What about an aperture ring around the lens throat of the camera?
>> Just a thought.
>
>Now this is an innovative, interesting and practical solution, well done
>Dario.
But unfortunately the wrong solution ;-)
Since acquiring some non-Pentax gear well over 2 years ago, I can now see
the advantages of not having to lose my comfortable grip on a lens to
alter aperture, particular while attempting manual focus as well. For me,
it's much more ergonomic to alter aperture with a wheel using the right
hand. YMMV.
There was no suggestion that one mode of control had to be forfeited to
add the
other.
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
