Why? So that you can curse that they don't have aperture rings? Give me a break. If a lens incidentally covers a larger format but doesn't do it well, or doesn't have the mechanics to make it useful, then to do what you suggest would be a disservice, as well as asking for complaints and bad publicity.
J. C. O'Connell wrote: > I disagree, the lenses that fully cover 24x36 should be marked so > so there is confusion if you are using both aps and ff bodies. > jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > P. J. Alling > Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 6:52 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: DA70 and 24x36 coverage > > > No it's not bad. DA lenses are guaranteed to cover 16x24 but may cover a > > larger format. That's the only guaranteed there is. It hurts nothing if > they cover a larger format. > > J. C. O'Connell wrote: > >> If the comments below are true, it's bad. The lens designation should >> convey if a lens wont cover 24x36mm IMHO. A APS-C only lens is not the >> > > >> same thing as a 24x36 lens and there should be an easy way to know by >> the lens designation IMHO. jco >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf >> Of Godfrey DiGiorgi >> Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 3:37 PM >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Subject: Re: DA70 and 24x36 coverage >> >> >> On Oct 1, 2007, at 11:46 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: >> >> >>> I am asking my question mainly because if it indeed covered full >>> frame >>> >>> >> >> >>> and there were no image deterioration past the APC frame, Pentax >>> probably would have given it FDA designation instead of DA. >>> >>> >> The D-FA mount includes an aperture ring control. DA lenses do not. >> >> The DA70 has no aperture ring control, it was design for use with the >> digital SLR bodies. Whether it actually covers 24x36 mm format isn't >> really relevant to the mount designation. >> >> Godfrey >> >> --- >> Not really relevant but interesting: >> >> In the course of researching my latest lens acquisition, I saw an >> article about someone who took an M42 mount Pentax Fish-Eye-Takumar >> 17mm lens and cobbled up a mount to fit it on a 6x6 rollfilm folder >> with behind-lens leaf shutter. His goal was to make circular fish eye >> > > >> images inexpensively ... it produced an image circle ~ 45mm in >> diameter on the 6x6 format film, which suited his needs perfectly. >> --- >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- Remember, it’s pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
