On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 03:14:16 +0100, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Accuracy is no more guaranteed with a mechanical system entirely in the > lens than with some of it in the camera body and part in the lens. It's > still an electro mechanical system. The only advantage is that it makes > some things easier to design or manufacture. It's much like front > engine drive automobiles. The cost much less to manufacture and > design. Repair becomes much more problematic, and the advantage to the > driver isn't necessarily that great. The advantage to the driver is a cheaper car. John But the propaganda continues. > > Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > >> lol >> >> I'd like to see them be brave and design new lenses with completely >> electronic couplings and iris actuators. Forget all that inaccurate, >> slow, old fashioned mechanical stuff. >> >> ]'-) >> >> G >> >> On Jul 21, 2006, at 6:03 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: >> >> >> >>> We'll see USM in Pentax when the aperture simulator returns... >>> >>> >>> >>>> This is purely speculation but... >>>> It would make sense to introduce new teleconverters when USM lenses >>>> start appearing. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Well, I guess a 300/4 would do particularly if Pentax (finally) >>>>> make a >>>>> matching 1,4X AF converter... >>>>> >>>>> >> >> >> >> > > -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
