On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 09:34:21PM +0300, Boris Liberman wrote: > On 9/24/2013 9:02 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > >What if the new high end, full frame sensor, camera coming from > >Ricoh were not a Pentax mount, but a Leica mount? Ideally a mount > >that is mechanically compatible with traditional Leica glass, but > >with contacts for autofocus etc. And what if, just for the hell > >of it, they also sold an adapter that allowed use of K-mount lenses > >in full auto focus? Even if it were just full autofocus on the SDM > >lenses. > > > >When you get down to it, Ricoh does almost sound like Leica said > >with a Japanese accent. > > Why would you need AF, Larry? No, seriously, Leica M-mount is > inherently manual focus. The idea of mounting something like DA* > 16-50 on a camera that small is bizarre to me. There is already a > variety of K-mount-to-M-mount adapters, one of which I have and > which works wonderfully in terms of aperture control and ease of > ergonomics.
Why would I need AF? When it focuses on the right thing, AF can focus more precisely than manual. Why would Ricoh need AF on the mount? Because these days, to all intents and purposes you cannot sell a camera that isn't auto everything. > > I don't know though in terms of business, agreements, royalties and > patents, whether your idea would make sense to Ricoh business > people. Neither do I, but I find the concept entertaining. > > We've just returned from the trip to Holland, Germany and Belgium > where we met some wonderful PDMLers. I should tell you that my photo > bag had no AF lenses, and in fact no Pentax gear whatsoever, beside > little P&S camera that Anat used all along. The thought that AF > might benefit me never crossed my mind Well, I admit, I got lazy in > the wineries in the region between Cologne/Bonn and Koblenz and so I > used the AF modules. Galia used AF modules most of the time. Her > pics are lovely. So are mine (allowing myself a certain amount of > immodesty here)... Sounds wonderful. I shot for about 35 years without autofocus, except on a pocket camera that I always carried with me in Singapore. One of the things that I needed to learn when I got back into photography a few years back was when to admit that the camera could do a better job than I. When it works, AF tends to be faster and more accurate than manual focus. I would not expect an M-K adapter to have a screw drive, but I thought that it could have contacts to control an SDM AF lens. There are a lot of engineering reasons for a new mount to be a completely new mount, large enough in diameter and short enough in register so that anything could be adapted to it. > > Honestly and may be somewhat brutally I am thinking that > Pentax/Ricoh should put limits as to how unusual their gear might > be. Niche approach is good, but the niche has to enjoy sufficient > market demand nonetheless... > > Also, technically, either your idea will give birth to something > fairly frankenstatic :-) or you will loose at least some of the > backward compatibility with older lenses. Just imagine the variety > of mount version (in terms of exposure control and AF) that the > adapter you suggest would have to support. The idea that some of > electronics/mechanics necessary to operate K-mount lenses will be > present in M-mount body is pretty alien to my mind, however limited > the said mind may be. > > Boris > > > > -- > 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. -- Larry Colen [email protected] http://red4est.com/lrc -- 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.
