VERY LIMITED support would be a better term than "quite adequate" support in my opinion. Not only is it not automatic if you need automatic, its STOP DOWN which dramatically reduces the meter sensitivity at small fstop settings which does not occur with full OPEN APERTURE metering K/M lens support.
Just because you tend to like metered manual, fine, but that doesn't mean its quite adequate for everyone or every situation. AE is not something that should have to be given up on any really good expensive lens that has the capability simply because YOU don't use or need AE... I think its wrong to apologize for Pentax for things that suck that don't have to suck. It only encourages pentax to do more of this BS.... And full support of a K/M lens is not "BACKWARD" compatability in my opinion, those are standard pentax K mount lenses. Those lenses have the ability to do more but Pentax is currently not giving you the ability and they COULD. Its not like there is ANY NEW FEATURE that is causing the limited support, this is pure NON SUPPORT of these lenses when there isnt anything new preventing it. That's a BIG DIFFERENCE than when you HAVE TO limit old features to get new ones. There is no new lens feature which is preventing the full support of the standard K/M lens features. EVERY Pentax K lens series was an extension of the standard K/M series K/M/A/F/FA etc only added new features and didn't prevent or replace the old ones in the process. They could very easily build a DSLR that supported K/M basic features that they arent supporting now. They did it with film cameras for years and years so its already been done. Would it be OK with you if they start building cameras that wont AF with F/FA lenses anymore but these are "adequately backward supported" via MANUAL FOCUSING? I don't think so, well it's the same with this K/M metering in my opinion, the lenses were bought with that BASIC and IMPORTANT open aperture metering feature and if there isnt anything preventing the support of them then its not OK to just ignore them for no valid reason.... -----Original Message----- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2005 10:05 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Pentax K 2.5/200mm Of course I haven't forgotten. I use FA and A lenses as well. But as many have said here so many times, the green button quickly becomes an automatic. It provides quite adequate backward compatibility. The loudest objections have usually come from those who haven't tried it. Paul On Sep 17, 2005, at 9:48 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > I don't want to start up again but you DON'T have to do > that step over and over and over and over and over > and over and over with fully supported K/M lenses. > AE is about 30 years old, have you already forgot > what it its like to NOT have to DO that "little" step?? > Just because YOU don't mind doesn't mean these lenses > are fully supported, they WERE with nearly all the K film bodies..... > JCO > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2005 9:37 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Pentax K 2.5/200mm > > > I use K and M lenses every day on my *istD. No problem. Once you > become accustomed to the button, it's not an inconvenience, it's an > automatic. Paul On Sep 17, 2005, at 9:04 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > >> too bad pentax has yet to make a DSLR to fully support >> them. There were/are some really nice K/M lenses that >> arent getting the digital bodies they deserve. We need a higher >> resolution body with full K/M mount lens support and full frame >> wouldn't hurt either IMHO. Its really sad too because it would only >> take one really good body to take advantage of dozens of really great >> K/M lenses.... >> jco >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mishka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2005 8:55 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: Pentax K 2.5/200mm >> >> >> i have K200/2.5 and K135/2.5 and consider them some of the very best >> lenses. definitely way above average. >> >> best, >> mishka >> >> On 9/17/05, Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> Not very long ago, someone posted a very nice shot (brown/yellow >>>> leaves) made with this lens. About the same time someone posted a >>>> messaage saying a lens like this was auctioned for a rather large >>>> price. I guess we were making jokes about the "unfortunate" buyer. >>>> What is it with this lens? Is it good, bad or average? I thought >>>> "the leaves" looked excellent! >>> >>> 1. I once had an A* 200/2.8 and a K 200/2.5 at the same time (I had >>> the A* 200/2.8 first and I stumbled into a mint K 200/2.5 later on). >>> I sold the >>> A* 200/2.8. I kept the K 200/2.5. >>> >>> 2. The K 200/2.5 is one of only two Pentax SMC K (pre-A) lenses >>> (the other being the sweet SMC K 135/2.5) that I plan on keeping for >>> use, along with a bunch of A lenses and a few F and FA lenses, on my >>> new DS. >>> >>> 3. The above three lenses (K 135/2.5, K 200/2.5, and A* 200/2.8) >>> are the only three Pentax lenses that have the exact same basic >>> optical design (according to lens element diagrams). It was an >>> excellent design. >>> >>> I'd say that the "unfortunate" buyer would have been "unfortunate" >>> only if he/she paid far too much for the lens or if the lens was >>> defective. In any event, ~I~ consider myself very ~fortunate~ to >>> have a K 200/2.5. It's a superb lens. >>> >>> Fred >>> >>> >> >> > >
