J. C. O'Connell wrote:
see my last post, engineering dollars?
that cam sensor was engineered 35 years
ago dude. Do you even know what we are
talking about here? Its ONE pot with
three wires on it read by a single A./D channel?
That's freakin' childs play.
Yes, the actual part is insignificant $, and most of the R&D is already
paid for. I say most because each camera has pretty much its own unique
firmware, so there is a piece of firmware (and R&D) that has to be added
to every camera mode in order to support this. But this small delta
cascades in many directions, i.e. in the user manual, it has to be
documented, I already mentioned the firmware, the chip has to have that
extra A/D channel you are talking about or you need a different more
powerful (more expensive) chip, the support of that extra A/D channel
plus voltage to the pot requires more power, hence reduced battery life,
more wiring, a place on the circuit board to accept the wiring, hence
requiring more space, more testing to make sure the firmware works in
all the different modes, more testing to make sure the aperture
simulator works, etc., etc. the list goes on I'm sure.
rg
