Pentax had K mount lenses, (not KA or FA or F), as current lenses up
until the beginning of this year.
J. C. O'Connell wrote:
WRONG- The K/M series lenses have been supported
on every top line pentax film camera since it came out
in 1975. It hasn't been "dead" for 20 years because
EVERY change Pentax made to its lens and body lensmounts
since the K/M series ( K>M>A>F,etc.) specifically DID
NOT involve any changes or loss of functionality of
the previous generations on new bodies. This lack of support has
nothing to due with compatibility of the lenses
at all, its pure decision to just not support feature
that still easily can be supported.
As far as the loss goes, you don't seem to understand
what I am saying, LACK OF OPEN APERURE METERING
and AE with K/M lenses ** IS THE MAJOR LOSS *** . There
is nothing gained whatsoever by doing this. It not
like there is some new great lens feature that
caused this, there is nothing. This is all loss, no gain.
I could agree that its not a big loss if these features
were some weird things that nobody does anymore but
open aperture metering and AE are still offered on all
new lenses arent they? So there is no arugument
that supporing these features doesn't matter or these
features wouldn't be in the new lenses would they??
( cost savings could be achieved by removing them ).
I am not saying every camera body should have the feature
but at least one or the few top models should have the
feature as an option and there isnt one at the moment.
JCO
-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 1:20 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Pentax K 2.5/200mm
There's no major loss here either, other than the full compatibility of
a lense line that's been dead for 20 years. Not much of a doifference
between that compatibility and the compatibility of a lens line that's
been dead for 30 years.
Listen, I use the D, I mostly use K/M lenses on it, I'm not missing this
functionality much. The arguement is a tempest in a teapot, especially
considering that Pentax abandoned the compatibility in 1997 with the
MZ-50, 6 years before the DSLR's came out.
-Adam
J. C. O'Connell wrote:
WRONG AGAIN-
When they switched from Screwmount to K mount
it WAS NOT THE SAME- Why because back in early
'70's the world was still heavily into prime lenses
and lens changing was a big issue and the screwmounting
of lenses vs bayonet mount was a big disadvantage
to quick lens changing.
SO- when pentax made the jump from screwmount to
k mount a major compatability with old screw lenses
was lost BUT THERE WAS A BIG GAIN TO OFFSET THE LOSS-
namely you now got quick changing modern bayonet
lenses and bodies as a new and valuable feature.
THIS DSLR K/M support abandonment is totally different because THERE IS
NO NEW or valuable FEATURE to offset or even cause the loss. Even if
you want to try to argue that the DSLR body is cheaper without the K/M
support, how much cheaper is it? I doubt the differnece in price would
even be noticed let alone considered in a purchase so any extremely
tiny price reduction without the K/M support is not a valuable feature
gained unless the price reduction was very signifigant and we know it
couldn't be because even very cheap $125 complete cameras had it.
Understand?
JCO
-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 9:49 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Pentax K 2.5/200mm
Just a note, but when Pentax switched from M42 to K mount, they
essentially did the same thing. All auto-aperture M42 lenses are
stop-down only on K mount bodies, despite being auto-aperture on M42
bodies that supported the feature. So the current situation with the
all-electronic K mount to mechanical lenses is akin to that switch 30
years ago.
--
When you're worried or in doubt,
Run in circles, (scream and shout).
