Ok, I stand properly corrected. I posted the Nikon / Canon argument to bait you, and true to form you bit, and bit hard.
And your right, I haven't been reading all your posts, but those I've read I've understood just fine thank you. I freely admit and agree with you, Pentax could / should have kept meter coupling, it's a backward step in Pentax's history of backward compatibility, and that the current "fix" is a bit dodgy. But either I'm not stating my point clearly enough or your missing it. K & M lenses can still be used to take photographs. And as someone more interested in taking photos than the mechanics of cameras, that is all I ask of any lens. Calm down, take a deep breath and don't let us uninformed types get you so worked up. Dave On 9/20/05, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am sorry but you certainly can not have been > reading or comprehending all my posts because > if you had read them you would know I was forced to say > it repeatedly, possibly for the third time > now, this is totally different than NIKON > OR CANON FD situations. > > With CANON FD- they > lost FD mounting because they totally updated > and substantially IMPROVED the entire mount to EOS - > That was more like the screw to K upgrade > but with much better upgrades than just > mounting technique. With this pentax > situation there IS NO NEW MOUNT or NO NEW MOUNT > FEATURE which necessitated the drop of support > of K/M aperture setting communication like > FD>EOS DID. > > With NIKON- THEY STILL SUPPORT those lenses > you mention for customers who want and are > willing to pay for it, that's much better > than Pentax because Pentax does NOT offer > it all at this time and might not ever offer > it again for all we know. > > And I do listen. But I do not agree that all > opposing opinions are created equal because > responses like yours, which grossly overlooked > the REASONS behind the FD support changes vs this new pentax > change miss the point entirely. Its like we > are talking apples and organges because you > don't see the key difference between legacy > support whenever possible vs. compatibity > issues caused by the need for progress. There > is NO PROGRESS assocated with this pentax > change in policy, it's not even staying > the same, its pure regression... > > JCO > > -----Original Message----- > Wrom: MEPYOQKEDOTWFAOBUZXUWLSZLKBRNVWWCUFPEGAU > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 9:33 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Camera engineering (was Re: Rename request) > > > JCO, > > The thing that you seem unwilling to concede or admit is that these "legacy" > lenses CAN still be used, ARE still being used, and still take fine > pictures. > > Your point about them doing away with the "metering coupler", or whatever > it's called, has been made already. Pentax chose to do away with it. For > whatever reason, they decided it was good enough. Maybe at some later date > the might put it back (I personally doubt it). > > You say that you no longer trust Pentax because they abandoned 100% > compatibility with K & M lenses. That this marks a major shift in Pentax > policy. Fine. Buy a Canon and a stack of FD lenses. Oh wait, they wont even > fit on the current crop of SLR / DSLR's without the use of an adapter. OK > try Nikon and a bunch of AI & AI-S lenses. You can fit some of them, but > you can't meter with them at all unless you spring for the top of the line > Nikon body. We Pentax users have it pretty good as far as I'm concerned. > > Also, you keep hammering away at anyone who posts an opinion contrary to > your views. And your doing it in such a rude and aggressive way that any > credibility you had at the start has vanished. As the saying goes "You'll > catch more flies with honey than vinegar". Try backing off the > confrontational tone and people will be more inclined to listen. > > Dave
