P. J. Alling observed: "Does anyone remember the argument that the K mount wasn't wide enough for a full frame sensor, that only Canon had a lens mount wide enough to support it, and every other manufacturer would have to redesign their lens mounts."
Reply: I think that argument was a bit of a furphy*. Canon may boast the biggest mount in the class, but some of that size is lost to the internally located electrical connections. By putting the data transfer on the surface of the mount, Pentax made much more of the mount's interior usable for image formation. Dropping mechanical aperture support was, I conjecture, as much about reducing clutter inside the mount as about reducing costs. (JCO needn't debate this point with me because I'm not interested beyond this brief observation.) * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furphy regards, Anthony Farr > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of P. > J. Alling > Sent: Wednesday, 2 July 2008 1:01 AM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: OT: Nikon D700 hands-on > > I just find this little tidbit interesting. Does anyone remember the > argument that the K mount wasn't wide enough for a full frame sensor, > that only Canon had a lens mount wide enough to support it, and every > other manufacturer would have to redesign their lens mounts. Well > Nikon's F mount is a smaller diameter than the K mount and they seem to > having no problems at all. > -- 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.
