No, he didn't get it. He was saying that this was done In the name of progress ( lens mount incapable of K/M Support anyomre) when it isnt and there is no progress In the mount. He didn't get it. jco
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 4:28 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: The JCO survey It's not that we don't get it. It's that your argument isn't convincing us. -Adam J. C. O'Connell wrote: > Im a sorry but I sometimes lose my patience when I have > To state something over and over again and people still > Don't get it and make it worse by saying I am repeating myself. > Yes I am and will continue to do so if I have to and I don't like it. > jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Tom C > Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 3:35 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: The JCO survey > > JCO, > > You probably already know this. People are now responding to how you > are > saying things, vs. what you are saying. > > > Tom C. > > > ----Original Message Follows---- > From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: The JCO survey > Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 15:03:13 -0400 > > You are an ingorant idiot, please read what I am telling you. I have > said repeatedly ALL of the things you just Mentioned did not and do not > require the removal of the Full K/M support. They were all implemented > in such a way Not get in the way of the K/M aperture cam or its sensor. > THERE IS NOTHING NEW at this time to require K/M lens > Support deletion. Why cant you get this through your > Head? As for future changes, this isnt the future, this is > Now and there is nothing NEW with the lensmount to prevent the K/M > support > In the DSLR bodies. Period. If there was something new and it was > A **worthwhile** tradeoff ( get new functons, lose old functions ) that > Would be one thing but nothing new is gained. Its all regressive loss. > DUH. > > jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Shel Belinkoff > Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 2:22 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: RE: The JCO survey > > Well, since we're all obtuse and stupid, you may have to post your > comments > about nine or ten more times, maybe twelve. > > Since the original K-mount there have been numerous features added to > the > lenses and the cameras that are dealt with through the lens mount, auto > focus being but one of them. And coming up is the new feature of > hypersonic (or whatever Pentax will call it) auto focus, where the motor > is > in the lens. This will require a connection between the lens and the > body > via - tada! the lens mount and some contact points just behind the > mount. > > Were you to read my post you'd note that a number of new features have > been > added to lenses and the camera since the advent of the K-mount in 1975. > IMO, there's just so much that poor little ol' lens mount is capable of > dealing with. Perhaps the mount is reaching the limits of what it can > be > called upon to do. > > Anyway, as Buddy Holly once sang, "Rave on ..." > > Shel > > > > > [Original Message] > > From: J. C. O'Connell < > > > How many times do I have to post this - THERE IS NO NEW LENSMOUNT > > OR LENSMOUNT FEATURE on the Pentax DSLRs. If there was and it > > Was important ( no power zoom for me thank you), that would be > > One thing, but there isnt so this isnt being done in the name > > Of progress whatsoever. Its all regression because the DSLR cameras > > Could fully support ALL K mount lens series fully. K/M support > > Isnt being removed for something new and improved. > > JCO > > > > -----Original Message----- > > On Behalf Of Shel Belinkoff > > > Strict definition? Is there a Pentax dictionary somewhere that > defines > > what a K-mount lens is? > > > > What a lot of people seem to be overlooking - or at least ignoring - > in > > these threads is that the K-mount has evolved. It now allows for > auto > > focus, passing information to the camera body, it makes it possible > to > > record EXIF data, and it's going to allow the use of the new DA* > lenses > > with hypersonic auto focus. Might it be possible that there's only so > > much > > "room" within the lens mount design that in order to have these new > > features, and the K/M lenses, the aperture simulator had to go? > > > > While it would be nice if I could use my K/M lenses a little more > > conveniently, and I do want the aperture simulator to return, I'm > happy > > to > > give it up if it means that there will be newer, more advanced lenses > to > > use on newer, more advanced cameras. I don't want to keep looking > back > > - I > > want to look forward to more interesting developments in lens and > camera > > technology. > > > > We're in a new age of photography - it's exciting and dynamic, and > > Pentax > > seems to be on the verge of a renaissance. I'd like to see it emerge > > fully > > from the past decade or so of being a photographic has-been and > also-ran > > and move forward, and perhaps even set the pace, in this decade. It > > ain't 1975 any more. > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
