I might be wrong, but wouldn't an usm motor add to the price, bulk and weight of the lenses?
j On 3/20/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How so? If they design the lenses and the new mount to be compatible, > it adds an option not subtracts one. > > Godfrey > > On Mar 20, 2006, at 10:51 AM, Juan Buhler wrote: > > > I hope that doesn't happen. > > > > There are a few of us who couldn't care less about auto focus. If I > > want ultrasonic motors in my lenses I know which brand to buy. If > > Pentax goes that way, I see it as having yet one less option > > available. > > > > j > > > > On 3/20/06, Sylwester Pietrzyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> K.Takeshita wrote on 25.02.06 19:44: > >> > >>> OTOH, I do not believe Pentax abandoned FF lenses altogether. We > >>> still need > >>> fast tele (200/2.8, 300/2.8 etc etc) and I just cannot imagine, > >>> Pentax > >>> being so well recognized as a superb lens maker as well, simply > >>> drop out of > >>> normal lens biz. I think the recent lens road map is really for > >>> the digital > >>> compatibility particularly on the wider end. > >> Well Ken, if my (quite reliable) source of Pentax information is > >> right - > >> then new DA f2.8 lenses will have built-in AF motor (I guess > >> ultrasonic one) > >> and that would be a reason to change whole line of long lenses ;-) > > -- Juan Buhler Water Molotov: http://photoblog.jbuhler.com Slippery Slope: http://color.jbuhler.com
