I don't believe you posted the Nikon/Canon comments as "bait" but if you have any thoughts about doing it in the future to me or anyone else I think you should know that doing that type of thing is very unprofessional and extremely rude and I don't think the list owners would tolerate that from anyone who expected to remain on the list....you have to make honest posts, not fake ones, this isnt a place for practical jokes.
jco -----Original Message----- From: David Savage [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 11:56 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Camera engineering (was Re: Rename request) 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
