> >>Umm.... Hello! It's another moot question! Samsung bodies are, and
> >>will always be, re-named Pentax bodies. They will not produce a unique
> >>k-mount body.
> >
> >
> > Bold statement. Do you have a source for it?
>
> Of course not; just the same rumor and speculation the rest of you have.
> The Samsung deal is all about marketing and (hopefully) resources
> (such as factories, advertising and distribution).
It's an awfully absolute statement to say without a source. I
can, in all honesty and good conscience, say that it's essentially
technically TRIVIAL to add an aperture simulator. I feel I can say that
because I have personally designed, built, and implemented extremely
similar apparatus' in both hardware and software. It's basically 1-axis
of a regular computer mouse.
To say absolute statements such as your above, "Samsung bodies
are, and will always be, re-named Pentax bodies." ... or (paraphrased
from previous posts), "The aperture simulator is dead, never to return."
Without proof, I think those are rather bold statements.... Might be true,
but certainly might not just as easily.
> > It would make more sense for both companies and for the potential
> > customer. Same for lenses: rebadged DA's are quite pointless, a seperate
> > K-mount Schneider lens line would be welcome.
>
> Re-hashing the Schneider brand is pointless. It's marketing. Who's
> going to design these lenses if not Pentax (or Tokina/Tamron/Sigma)?
>
... but most here have agreed that marketing is what got us into
the lack of aperture simulator mess to begin with.
-Cory
--
*************************************************************************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
*************************************************************************
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
