Sorry you don't want to continue
to discuss but that's always your
perogative but I have mine too.

As for he EXIF usage you don't
want to discuss, fine. But you
do realize if you don't discuss
it than you really cant use it
as a basis argument why K/M
lenses don't need any further
support because it would have
to be something so essential for
most users makes them virtually obsolete
without EXIF and I cant think
of what it could be so I asked.

Regarding K/M lenses current
exact population in fully working
condition, that will never
be known, but your limited experience
with only 4 lenses bought that
way is not as good as mine because
I have bought way more and I have
way more years of ownership/usage
with mine. None of mine have failed
since I bought them and very few
have had any wear issues whatsover
even though they were mostly used.
I have seen a few with slow aperures
but very few and this is usually
a cheap easy fix if the lens is
worth fixing. Like I said I don't
think there is any way to get an
exact number but if there were over
9 million made than I think its
safe to say based on my experiences
that at least most of them, probably
the vast majority of them are still
fully usable as designed so you can
do the math. 

JCO

-----Original Message-----
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
S)


On Sep 21, 2005, at 9:36 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote:

> Not to say its unimportant to you because
> you are the one doing it, but I don't
> understand WHY its important to you.
> what are you doing with this EXIF data
> that you find the lack of with KM lenses frustrating
> or pain in the neck?

What I'm doing with EXIF data in my images is my business. Sorry to  
not be forthcoming about it.

> Secondly, anyone who doesn't own K/M
> lenses or want to ever own K/M lenses
> shouldn't comment because of course
> this doesn't matter to you, its not
> your fine PENTAX product getting disabled
> without cause.

I own and use a Pentax-M 85/2, which I find an excellent lens.  
Pentax' modern equivalent is the FA77/1.8, which I'll probably  
purchase when I can justify the expense (it's not a focal length I  
use very often). I find the M85/2 works very nicely on the DS and I'm  
satisfied with the body's support of it for metering and focusing.

The M85 was one of four K/M-series Pentax lenses I purchased, all  
rated in BARGAIN to EXCELLENT condition. All of them needed service  
in one way or another, the other three I decided weren't worth the  
trouble. That was even before I realized fully that the EXIF data was  
not populated with several important parameters (January-February).  
But I think the repair statistics are telling: I've purchased a total  
of 28 Pentax lenses since the beginning of the year, 7 new and 21  
used, 4 of which were K/M series. All of the K/M series lenses needed  
repair, only two of the A series lenses needed repair. K/M lenses are  
very old; they are not worth the money for me to repair them to the  
spec I need/want.

Enough. There really is no end to this for you, is there JCO? This is  
my last post on these threads, and certainly my last response to you  
specifically. When I post to the mailing list in the future, please  
discard the email without reading it. I will not mention you or imply  
any reference to anything you've said, regardless of its nature. You  
have my word on that.

Godfrey

Reply via email to