See my last post, your entire second paragraph is WRONG because these are NOT expensive mechanical couplings ( even bottom line cameras like K1000/P3 has it) it's a super simple dirt cheap pot, spring, and and a single A/D channel. you know what that costs nowadays? Virtually nothing compared to the many other extremely complex and expensive parts and engineering in the DSLR. I am not saying it wouldn't add ANY cost to the body but there is something called "VALUE ADDED TO CUSTOMER" in engineering and production. The VALUE ADDED TO CUSTOMER to the body by incorporating this virtually no cost item is HUGE compared to the TINY TINY cost of adding it and it should be done ON AT LEAST ONE OF THE DSLR BODIES in my opinion.
Secondly, your last comment makes no sense to me because the film bodies with AE don't need a green button, with AE and AE lock you already have something better than green button because its like the green button is being continously done for you all the time so why would you want that on those bodies? JCO -----Original Message----- From: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 9:41 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Pentax K 2.5/200mm Considering that Pentax currently offers by far the best compatibility between MF glass and Digital SLR's in it's market segment (Only the rather pricey Nikon D2x and D2hs offer better compatibility) it's going to be hard to go elsewhere. Frankly, it's the compatibility offered that spurred me to switch from Nikon to Pentax, sinec the Nikons in my pricerange don't even meter with MF glass, and have issues actually mounting lenses from the same era as K lenses (pre-AI lenses should not be mounted on a D70 or D50 unless AI-Converted) Shel is correct on the issue of diatribes. Several people have posted that they find the current situation acceptable, and you've posted a couple of rants about the issue (By the definition of diatribe, the post I'm responsible certainly is one). As to getting a full KAF mount, I can see why Pentax abandoned it. They saw no point in continuing to add expensive mechanical couplings that duplicate electronic couplings. It does cause problems for the minority of users (like myself) that still use K and M lenses, but overall it's a big cost savings for Pentax with relatively little downside. Now I'm significantly more annoyed by the film bodies with this mount, as they do not have the workarounds that the digital bodies do, and thus are essentially unusable with K and M lenses unless an external meter is used. I'd love to add an *ist to my collection in order to have a relatively modern film body,but until pentax adds the Green Button functionality to the *ist, it's not an option. -Adam J. C. O'Connell wrote: >You're the guilty of diatribes not me, and I am the one discussing the >subject matter instead of making unjustified personal attacks.... > >Secondly, it doesn't help matters when people like yourself ACCEPT the >unacceptable as "OK" without cause. It creates an envelope of >"acceptable" degradation that just gets pushed further on their next >"strategic" move if you don't complain about this one... > >As far as complaints with pentax go, its simple, if they don't produce >a product that suits me I will buy from someone else who does. I never >said that the "green button" thing is a deal breaker for me as far as >whether I would buy their DSLR or not but I do feel its a very slippery >to go down when a company leaves out a key simple body function just to >DOWNGRADE all your former purchases from them without ANY technical >reason or new gain/feature. There has been no new gain/feature with >regards to the lens >mount that necessitated this removal of the EXTREMELY SIMPLE full K/M >support.... > >JCO > >-----Original Message----- >From: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 8:31 AM >To: [email protected] >Subject: RE: Pentax K 2.5/200mm > > >Then stop posting your diatribes and let people who don't mind the >adjustment go on about their business of using their gear, and you can >go on about yours, with the result being greater harmony on the list >and less stress for you. Perhaps you should take up your complaint >directly with Pentax. > > >Shel > > > > >>[Original Message] >>From: J. C. O'Connell >> >> > > > >>I have about had it with this insulting "dreamworld" crap. >> >> > > > >
