I think Chris's point here is that Pentax has so far created only two partially incompatible bodys intentionally. These body's by the way were intended for beginners who didn't have a previous investment in Pentax equipment. They are still way ahead of Canon and Minolta who abandoned their old lens mounts when they went auto focus, and Nikon who have more than a few incompatibilities in their line.
So lets set the record straight you would rather buy into a system who's manufacturer has in the past said in effect "F**k the users, they'll replace all their equipment when we say so", to one who at least tries to retain backward compatibility, and usually succeeds. I'm sure if Pentax created a new system with a new mount entirely from scratch it would be at least as consistent as the Canon EOS system, at least for a while. At 01:48 AM 9/12/2002 -0400, Ray wrote: >Christopher Lillja on Wed, 11 Sep 2002 06:18:36 wrote: > ><"Full aperture metering" simply means that the camera meters as it >should, producing a correct exposure or reading without having to stop >down. All current major SLRs work this way, including Canon. There are >only a handful of K mount bodies (ie. ZX30, ZX60) that don't support all K >mount lenses to the full extent of capabilities shared by both the camera >and lens.> > >I meant to say "open-aperture". See the ZX-50 info from pentax.com below. > >I had stated: >>> But is that any worse that a particular Pentax body that >claims to be compatible with K mount lenses but only at "full aperture >metering" or whatever it's called?<<< > >Chris observed: <This is one of the most ridiculous, ill-informed >statements I've ever seen on this list.> > >ThanX. I try my best. > >I admit I used the wrong term, "full aperture metering," when I should've >said "open aperture metering" -- whatever THAT is. I remember glancing at >an instruction manual for one of the lower-priced Pentax bodies -- it >might've been the ZX-50 -- and from what I could decipher from the >semi-translated text it sounded as if the camera could only use a K mount >lens set at its maximum aperture, such as f2 on my 50mm, for the Av >setting. Please correct me if I'm wrong. > >This gets back to my point: if I am "ill-informed" it's because the Pentax >system is a morass of tech details. (Nikon is also a morass when it comes >to compatibility of older lenses with certain bodies, another reason why >Canon EOS appeals to me, one system without the hassles of semi-backward >compatibility.) Could someone explain to me all the differences between >all Type A and Type B flash units in 25 words or less? > >Below I've pasted info from the Pentax Website on their lower-priced >bodies, that "handful" that you mentioned. I don't think I'm >"ill-informed" when I say that that Pentax has abandoned backwards >compatibility with K mounts with its affordable AF models. If I'm going >to spend more $ on a body, then a new EOS becomes attractive when you >figure in the prices of new EOS lenses as opposed to Pentax AF offerings >(see my previous post). > ><ZX-50: Usable Lenses: Pentax FA, F, A, M and K lenses. (When the aperture >ring is set at other than the A position, aperture-priority at >open-aperture or unmetered manual are available.) > >ZX-60: Usable Lenses: Pentax KAF2- and KAF-mount lenses. > >ZX-30: Usable Lenses: Pentax KAF2, KAF and KA-mount lenses. When the >aperture ring is set at other than the A position, shutter release is locked.> > > >Of course, I bought the ZX-M, the camera that was more or less a >replacement from the K1000. But unlike my old K1000, I have to worry if >my "Made In Japan" Vivitar 283 flash is going to fry the electronics in my >ZX-M. So much for backwards compatibility. > >I find it interesting that a couple of people on this list act touchy when >I mention that Pentax ain't perfect. As I said before, no platform is. I >think that the EOS one *might* be better for me than staying with >Pentax. Sorry if I called your baby ugly when I stated my "ill-informed" >opinion. > >Ray > >
