william- I cant understand your comments. Are you saying all K/M lenses are obsolete on Digital SLRS or not?
Please reply, thanks, jco -----Original Message----- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 11:41 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) > We went thru this before. The defintion > of obsolete as I recall it when discussed > is way too vague. Just because an item doesn't > have some later feature doesn't make it > obsolete IMHO because that's like saying > if your current car isnt a hybrid its obsolete > because it doesn't have hybrid feature that > came out later. Or even worse, if the feature > that came out later is of little use like > saying Pentax POWER ZOOM bodies made all those > before it obsolete. Yeah right! > GET IT? Obsolete: 1 a : no longer in use or no longer useful b : of a kind or style no longer current So, what makes a lens no longer useful? I have older K/M lenses that show too much CA to be usable on digital. For digital, those lenses are obsolete. I have older K/M lenses that do not offer auto focus or programmed exposure capability. My needs now include AF and programmed exposure for what I use digital for, ergo those lenses are obsolete. Definition B needs no explanation when applied to the 25-30 year old equipment in question. Or perhaps it does. Of course, you can say Merriam-Webster doesn't know the true definition of the word, but I'd laugh and call you stupid if you did. William Robb
