Of course they don't have features they were not Designed to do. That's not incompatibliity, that's simple Lack of those features in those models at time of mfgr. jco
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 10:32 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: K1D aperature simulator survey, part Deaux But they are incompatible with the features I'm talking about. -Adam J. C. O'Connell wrote: > K/M lens lens functions ARE NOT imcompatible > With Pentaxes latest mount. That is what > I am talking about. Its both the body and lens > Mounts not either. Current mount has NOT > Precluded full K/M lens functions. > jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Adam Maas > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 9:45 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: K1D aperature simulator survey, part Deaux > > Yes they are. They can't do either, therefore they aren't compatible > with either. The newer lenses are backwards compatible, in that they > support the aperture-ring based methods (apart from DA and FA J lenses, > which don't). > > However the older bodies could do both methods. You are mistaking lens > compatibility with body compatibility. > > -Adam > > > J. C. O'Connell wrote: >> No they arent. Where do you come up with this bullshit? >> When linear stop lenses and electronic communication >> Were introduced in pentax lenses and bodies, it was >> Implemented in such a way that none of the KM functions >> Were affected whatsoever. I.E. The lensmount was still >> Fully backwards compatable and still is to this day! >> JCO >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of >> Adam Maas >> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 8:42 PM >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Subject: Re: K1D aperature simulator survey, part Deaux >> >> But K/M lenses ARE incompatible with linear aperture stop-down and >> electronic lens communication. >> >> -Adam >> >> J. C. O'Connell wrote: >>> FD/EOS is a stupid analogy because it's the WRONG >>> Analogy. Cant you understand the difference between >>> Incompatability and lack of support of something >>> That isnt incompatble? Obviously not or you wouldn't >>> Be going on and on about Canon FD/EOS mounts. >>> jco >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf >> Of >>> William Robb >>> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 4:38 PM >>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> Subject: Re: K1D aperature simulator survey, part Deaux >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "J. C. O'Connell" >>> Subject: RE: K1D aperature simulator survey, part Deaux >>> >>> >>>> K/M are NOT FULLY SUPPORTED you moron. We are talking about K/M >>>> Aperture cams, open aperure AE and metering here. Cease and desist >>>> With your meaning trash posts. I am getting tired of having to >>>> Reply to this garbage which is exactly what it is. >>> So stop replying. >>> Partial support is still support. >>> Unlike what Canon FD users went through. >>> >>> William Robb >>> >>> >> > > -- 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
