-----Original Message----- From: Tom Reese [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 11:47 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Camera engineering (was Re: Rename request)
From: "J. C. O'Connell" > So you are agreeing THAT EVERY K/M > LENS BOUGHT BY ANYONE NOW is bought > by some insane person or stupid > person? I can't speak for other people. I have no interest in buying more than I already have unless one comes along that is historically significant. I would buy it then for its sentimental value. It is my opinion that those lenses offer very little functional value with modern cameras. 8888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 JCO REPLIES: TOM REESE- "I can't speak for other people." JCO- If you cant then don't call them fooish like you did in an earlier post essentially saying that anyone who doesn't buy or use the equipment you like is a FOOL and all the ebay K/M lense buyers were just loonies like people who use hand cranked washing machines. you were speaking for other people and you were speaking in error. I guess you have offically made a change in postion on the matter? 88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 > Secondly you ONCE AGAIN have not responded > to my second point, WHY DOES THE K/M > GREEN BUTTON PATCH EXIST? Are you now > saying that Pentax created a patch for > NO ONE??? I suppose the patch exists because Pentax wanted to provide a few Luddites with a means to continue using their obsolete lenses and they could do so without compromising their future plans for the lens mount. 88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 JCO REPLIES: See how hypocritial and illogical you are? you just said in your last breath you cant speak for those other people but now in you next breath you call them "LUDDITES" for wanting to maintain the technology they paid for in their lenses. That is so blatanlty not understanding on this whole issue its beyond belief....you shouldn't really even be in this thread because you don't understand the issue and don't care because you don't understand.. 8888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 > Thirdly, you say you want newer lenses to > take advantages of the CAMERAS capabilities. > What about wanting CAMERAS that take advantage > of the LENSES capabilties???? I want lenses that have capabilities. When I look at those old lenses all I see are incapabilities. 88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 JCO REPLIES: Just more evidence of you near total lack of any real understanding of lenses, cameras, etc. Believe it or not these these are still very good' very useful lenses. Your hangup that unless it has every possible feature known to mankind its not useful is quite narrowminded. No wonder you stated K/M buyers were crazies. You don't even know what these lenses can an cannot do or even what they are BETTER at than your lenses.... 8888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 > These components > work together as a system. Would you want > a DSLR that cant AF your AF lenses???? > Well this is the same damn thing > these K/M > lenses can do AE but the stupid body > design cant support them because of some > missing cheap parts. That's BAD. I don't > need to provide any further proof. BAD IS BAD. > Just try to do AE with the camera with K/M > lenses, it doesn't do it...Thats not damned > little evidence...Thats a fact.... Those lenses can't do lots of things including autofocus. That's bad. That's why they're not suitable for new cameras. It is your opinion that the bodies can't support the lenses because of a few cheap parts. You're supreme arrogance is preventing you from considering any other possibility. I don't want to try to do AE with K/M lenses. I'd rather try it with new modern lens designs. 88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 JCO REPLIES: You are losing my patience. No these lenses don't autofocus. They do manual focus. What has that got to do with removing the AE functions of the lenses?. That convoluted "logic" means if a product has one less feature then its smart to just go ahead and remove them all even if these features are unrelated and AF and AE are unrelated in this case? DUMB ARGUMENT The "supreme arrogance" is being put out by you. WHY? - you don't even know the issue let alone the cost let alone even put up a reason to counter my contention and you call me arrogant? No I am not arrogant for wanting a smart camera design. You are arrogant for trying to tell me it since isnt desireble or needed by YOU then anyone else who needs or wants it should do without. I am not saying to remove features and am saying to ADD them back to make a better model. that's not backwards , that's progress. and your last comment is the ultimate in totally cluelessness. We are discussing K/M feature support. Trying the AE function on other lenses? What the hell are you talking about? I am beginning to think most Pentax list members are really really bullheaded or just plain mindless "new" freaks who think all they have to do is buy new and they know what they are talking about and what they are doing... JCO 8888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 Tom Reese
