OK, I'll try elaborating further.
1 - Provided that the D2 will sport KAF3 mount, capable to drive USM lenses,
my idea is that the D2 will include a rather weak AF motor (at best, the
same used in previous D-series, or maybe even a weaker type), as it could be
seen (by Pentax, not by me) as enough to barely (in case of action shooting
with longer lenses) drive older lenses, while USM control will assure better
performance with top end lenses. I don't expect the D2 to be a true break
(dropping in-camera AF motor and only allowing USM lenses).
2 - Of course, if the D2 won't support USM, I expect it to have at worst the
same AF motor of the previous D-series, or maybe one with higher torque, so
that it can drive lenses faster than the previous D-series do.
In any case, I'm expecting more data processing power, so that AF speed will
improve in certain circumstances, if not always. I don't expect the D2 to be
worse than the D2. However, I expect it to be a good leap upward, not a
giant one. I'm not so optimist to think that Pentax will include BOTH more
powerful AF motor and USM support in the upcoming D2, as Paal thinks.
However, I'd be happy to be wrong and Paal to be right.
Dario
----- Original Message -----
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 10:58 PM
Subject: Re: DFA lenses
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dario Bonazza"
Subject: Re: DFA lenses
Please re-read my whole sentence, quoted here.
It is my belief that the D2 will include a rather weak AF motor (maybe
the
same as previous D-series) just to barely drive older lenses, and USM
control for better performance with top end lenses. I don't expect the D2
to
be a break (only allowing USM lenses).
I read it the first time, the meaning hasn't changed, from all
appearances.
"Barely drive" implies (in English) very poor performance.
I realize Pentax AF isn't world class, but it is better than what you are
saying.
William Robb
