You openly admit that it was a biased guy who works for pentax that told there wasn't sufficient market feature to benefit ratio?
If you read or remembered the thread I already explained to you the "official" company reason given for questionable decisions is NOT the real reason. You cant give that persons explanation too much creedance. Whats he going to say if it wasn't true, the real truth? jco -----Original Message----- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 11:23 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Camera engineering (was Re: Rename request) ----- Original Message ----- From: "J. C. O'Connell" Subject: RE: Camera engineering (was Re: Rename request) > THEN- but that hasn't happened > so the K/M lenses are not causing ANY compatabilty > issues whatsover NOW. What youre saying is someday > the K/M might get it the way if they redesign the mount so its time to > get rid of it now. DUMB. Pull you head out of your ass John. You don't get to play with your K/M lenses the way you want to on a DSLR, and from what my local Pentax rep told me at the trade show this past spring, you never will. Pentax has never made a DSLR with the mechanical aperture follower, and my rep is pretty sure they never will. He didn't see the feature benefit ratio being there in enough volume to warrant it. Mind you, he just represents the company and knows his brand's marketplace, he's not a world famout swimming pool photographer, so his opinion is supect. It's time for you to grow up, stop whining, and move on. This horse is dead, and it is starting to smell bad. William Robb
