YOU ARE THE IDIOT. THE PART IN QUESTION COSTS ABOUT $5 TO PENTAX AND THE SOFTWARE IS TRIVIAL (LESS THAN THE FREE GB CODE). THAT'S WHY I STATED $50. WHAT NIKON DOES IS IRRELAVANT, IT'S WHAT PENTAX DOES THAT MATTERS, DO YOU REALLY THINK THE CAM SENSOR ADDITION WOULD NECESSITATE A $1200 PRICE INCREASE? IF YOU DO YOU ARE A FOOL BECAUSE ITS CHILDS PLAY AND CAME IN COMPLETE CAMERAS THAT SOLD FOR ONLY $150 FOR YEARS AND YEARS. JCO
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Godfrey DiGiorgi Sent: Friday, October 20, 2006 4:28 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: The JCO survey - Bodies from other manufacturers that support legacy mechanical lens couplings (Nikon is the only other manufacturer I know of that supports legacy, pre-cpu lenses with their DSLR line) run from $1800 and up (Nikon D200 or better). That's come down a bit ... it used to be $3000 and up. That's a far cry from a $50 retail price increase. The mechanism to do the aperture position sensor in the Nikon is almost identical to the mechanism in the Pentax (biggest difference is that the coupler is external rather than internal), I believe it is a fair indicator of what kind of pricing you should expect for a Pentax body that supported this stuff. - Used lenses do not return any further profit to a manufacturer. Nikon still manufactures and sells new AI-S lenses that require these kinds of sensors to enable metering, and sells them to their professional customers. Pentax does not, as a result there is no realistic motivation for Pentax to design and develop this legacy support in their top line DSLR bodies. - On what criteria do you base the notion that these pre-cpu lenses are "superior" to the later series Pentax lenses like the A* and FA and FA*, DA and DA* models? A manual focus lens might have a nicer feel to the focusing ring, but a superior feel does not guarantee superior contrast, resolution, rectilinear correction, flare control, etc. - Manufacturers don't care what third party lens manufacturers do. They are normally seen as a way for the camera manufacturer to lose money, not gain money. What would help Pentax from a third party lens manufacturer is for them to develop alternative offerings that enable customers to get benefit from the new, in-servo features of the K10D, not use ancient lenses that return profit to no one. JCO, get a life, and the first inkling of a clue, and shut up. Or be an idiot all your life and live in the 'filter to trash' bucket. It's your choice. Even my heartfelt understanding that you are a neurotic, foul-mouthed, useless waste of human protoplasm could change if you would just shut up. You would then simply be a neurotic waste of human protoplasm. G On Oct 20, 2006, at 12:53 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > You consider the tiny savings about $50 retail on > A body a plus when the ability to get > Full function out of the superior K/M Pentax > Lenses is lost? I DON'T. Secondly, there were/are > Many great unique lenses made by third parties too that > Are not availble in "A" or later mounts. Its NOT > A plus, it's a minus. > jco -- 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
