Is this a double post or what? I previously posted that if a part performing a function is is failing you find a better part or redesign to make it work - you don't just remove it. So your last sentence doesn't make any sense within that context. They would have had to removed it for some other reason, not that is was trouble prone. Because if it was in there to begin with then removal with loss of the function is not a solution to any reliability problem if there was one in the first place. Based on the fact that I already posted, which was they made these for over 30 years in virtually every camera body they sold, do you really think it could have possibly still be unacceptably unreliable or trouble prone in ALL those cameras and was never corrected or improved if needed? If they built one today it would be better than ever based on 30 years of experience with them no doubt or it might even be the exact same part as 30 years ago if they had good success with it.... JCO
-----Original Message----- From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 4:40 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: green button wars (again) Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Mark Roberts wrote: > >> Between the mechanical linkage and the potentiometer, it also >> introduces two more potential points of failure. > >How often have these failed in the past? I've seen several, and those are from the days when the aperture was set from the lens, so the potentiometer contacts were moved often. If the potentiometer is left in one position all the time, as it will be when most or all of the lenses one owns are left on the "A" setting, failure will be much *more* common: Potentiometers like to be swept across their full range of motion occasionally to keep the contacts clean. I hadn't thought about all this until my previous post on the subject but I suspect this is a *major* reason why Pentax has eliminated this part. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
