Re: Old lenses and *ist D

[Robert Gonzalez]

Continuously variable shutter speed was the first big advancement.  With 
the A lenses, continously variable aperture adjustment became possible. 
      You can compensate for problems with non-constant aperture zooms 
this way, as well as get the perfect aperture for a given shutter speed. 
 With both ends open, as in "green" mode, the program line can pick a 
combination that is not possible to select by hand.  I find this 
desirable, don't you?  Why limit yourself to fixed f-stop buckets when 
you have a continuum between wide-open and min aperture??  Not wanting 
it is like a grade schooler saying "I like Whole numbers, I'm scared of 
Real numbers".

I initially felt betrayed by the lack of full support for KM lenses on 
the new digital body, but I've gotten good use out of them, and they 
could still be used on that body with a little extra work.  Adding the 
support for the older lenses is more expensive than people realize, with 
the extra development, manufacturing, and testing required, this 
incremental change propagates throughout the organization and affects 
the bottom line.  If they do add this to a future body, it will probably 
be more expensive and/or they will have amortized their R&D costs so 
that they can balance the benefits/costs better and come out ahead.

:)

Rob Studdert wrote:
On 7 Oct 2003 at 17:49, Robert Gonzalez wrote:


A continuously variable, microprocessor operated aperture 
control is a much more desirable form of adjustment.


Desirable to whom?

Everyone but a few whiners it seems.


A great retort indeed, indicating that the author has a deep understanding of 
the underlying concepts and dilemmas. :-(

Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT)  +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998