Of course I would want a FF M42 DSLR... JC O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cymen Vig Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 5:01 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: ANY M42 DSLR rumors (yet)? On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 10:39 AM, JC OConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Man, I would die for a basic M42 DSLR at this point. After reading this whole thread, I have to ask: How soon are you likely to die? In my opinion, one day building a digital camera from close to scratch will no longer be particularly expensive. Sensors will settle down so what you build today is not obsolete in 9-13 months. At that point: 1) You will likely get a chance to buy an M42 DSLR. If no manufacturer makes it, a few from the hordes of engineers who are growing up on the Internet will. So perhaps no support but community support may be enough. We are already seeing changes in how small runs of products are made. The demand for bespoke hardware and electronics is high. The focus now is on bespoke hardware and mass produced hardware. There is little between and a lot of improvement to be made in the bespoke hardware market. 2) There is little point in salvaging a broken DSLR right now and trying to mate it to an m42 body. Those saying JC should do this are not being reasonable. Putting your money where your mouth is means, to me, getting a body manufacturer (Cosina?) to agree to a steady supply of bodies, getting a sensor manufacture to commit to providing sensors and putting all the electronics worked out. Mating a broken DSLR to an m42 body is a dead end. How many more broken DSLRs are you going to find and how much time are you going to spend figure out what is broken, adjusting to slight changes in even the same DSLR depending on when it was made or drastic changes to new bodies, etc... (in #2, I use you in a theoretical stance not meaning any specific person) I hope you get your M42 DSLR one day just like I hope I get a K mount camera that (uhoh!) fully supports the lenses and is full frame. Statistically, I have a while before I die but I lack patience so my current view is to settle for full-frame with a used Canon 5D (as the 5D II drives down prices). Finally, while I agree Pentax and Nikon did spend time making non-current lenses compatible with their bodies how much of this do you think was simply to convince those that had already brought into their systems to stay with them in digital land (and then sell them hordes of current lenses). I would wager that those who prefer to use m42, old K mount (K, M series), and other non-current lenses most of the time are a very small part of the market. Cymen "who is doped up on some good drugs after wisdom teeth surgery so..." Vig -- 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. -- 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.
