Isnt the istD series PENTAX'S top line bodies now? They don't make anything higher in cost or with more features do they? I refuse to buy into this B/S that the aperture cam is or was too expensive to incorporate when you can easily see all the much more expensive parts and labor and DEVELOPMENT COSTS in the body. If the aperture cam raises the price $50 then this would be a $3000 camera not a $600 one...
It IS a key feature of the K/M lenses, they didn't build these for stop down metering and non automatic use only. And I think you are mistaken the amount of K and M lenses out there especially M series. These were made for many years and were very popular. There are far more K/M lenses in existance than A and problably than A and FA combined. Add in all the third party lenses in K/M configuration and I wouldn't be surprised if there are more K/M lenses than any other series or all other series combined...Its not even close... jco -----Original Message----- From: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 2:49 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: green button wars (again) The thing is that this is not a Key Function. The vast majority of Pentax lenses are fully functional on these bodies. It's only a small fraction of lenses, used by an even smaller fraction of potential customers, that aren't fully compatible. $600 DSLR's are bottom of the barrel, not top of the line. Top of the line DSLR's are multi-thousand dollar beasts like the D2x and 1Ds mkII. $600 film SLR's are mid-range bodies. Note that Nikon, the only other maker to offer any backwards compatibility, has even less compatibility in its equivalent body (D70 to the *ist D, F80 to the *ist). There's essentially little advantage to Pentax to include this capability on the film bodies, and little more on the DSLR's. I'm glad they gave us an option with the DSLR's, it works well even if not ideal and it's MORE than anybody else offers. I'm quite satisfied with that. -Adam J. C. O'Connell wrote: > NOT PROVIDING THE FUNCTION AT ALL > is far worse than a long term possible or > potential failure of the function that MIGHT happen, > it's a guaranteed immediate point of failure. > HOW MANY TIMES do I have to say this? > > You don't simply remove key functions because they > might fail someday, you only remove features that get too expensive > for the benefit they provide and this part is so dirt cheap and > provides tremendous benefit for dozens of excellent PENTAX > brand K/M lenses that it shouldn't be > deleted in top line $600 plus bodies > at this time IMHO. > > jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 1:43 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: green button wars (again) > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >>Personally, I don't want any more moving parts in my digital SLR. >>Moving parts wear. Wear creates dust. Dust contaminates the sensor. >>Keep the moving parts out of my SLR. The green button is an optimum > > solution. > > Between the mechanical linkage and the potentiometer, it also > introduces two more potential points of failure. > >
