True enough. I prefer the aperture ring if it's an either/or situation, but who could argue with having both?
chris On Sun, 24 Nov 2002, Len Paris wrote: > But you can set the aperture from the aperture ring on the lens with the > PZ-1p. It's not a one OR the other proposition. > With the PZ-1p you get to do it either way, whichever you want, so it's > not a disadvantage to have an AV wheel. > > > Len > --- > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Chris Brogden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2002 9:44 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Why I won't be buying an MZ-S > > > > > > On Sun, 24 Nov 2002, Brad Dobo wrote: > > > > > > Its a dial or swithc on the body that controls the aperture when > > > > the > > > lense > > > > is set to the A position on an A series or newer lense. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Paul > > > > > > Oh, so they have made one? I wonder why it isn't on the other or > > > newer cameras, isn't it a feature on the top Nikons and Canons? > > > Anyone? > > > > Because with the MZ-S, you set the aperture via the aperture > > ring, not via the body. Some people prefer one, some prefer > > the other. I kinda like setting it via the lens myself. As > > long as Pentax is making cameras that require aperture rings, > > they keep having to put 'em on their lenses, which ensures > > backwards compatibility. Look at Nikon... because their > > newer low-end to mid-range cameras (F55, F65, F80, and some > > older ones) set the aperture via a dial on the body, they > > don't need to put aperture rings on their lenses. Now they > > have a whole series of lenses (G-series) with no rings, > > including some very nice ones, that you can't use on older > > Nikon bodies. And the new Nikon bodies with their pretty > > little Av dials can no longer read the apertures on the > > aperture rings of older lenses. > > > > chris > > > > > > >
