Ok, so after reading some of your responses and after chatting with Rob Studdert today, I now "get" this. The one MAJOR point to me, is one that Rob pointed out. The MZ-S doesn't have aperture priority from the body. I had NO IDEA of this, and to me, this alone is a huge mistake that Pentax is making. If they are releasing new lenses that can't be used on their self proclaimed "flagship" camera in Aperture Priority mode, then that is just downright crazy. Being unable to use old lenses on newer bodies and vice versa isn't SUCH a big thing for me, as we all know that there will come a time where technology just doesn't allow for them to all "gel", but to release a "flagship" model camera and then lenses that can't be used on it in that mode, that is just ridiculous (well, to me anyways).
William, of course I do understand that the aperture ring controls the aperture and that its absence can prevent this. What I was thinking was that this would only affect the older bodies that are completely manual, and as such wouldn't facilitate any control over exposure settings if it can't be set on the body. I thought that this was, at least, "acceptable" as the concept of being unable to use a new lens on a body that is 20 plus years old, really doesn't phase me. BUT, I hadn't looked at it from the opposite perspective whereby, even Pentax's newer cameras wouldn't be able to support their newer lenses. That is just crazy.... I "get" now, your statement about "the dictates of the camera intruding", as before this, I was just thinking to myself, "well, why don't they just set the aperture on the body of the camera", of course, I now realise that this isn't always possible. I wasn't assuming that everyone shoots in "program" mode though. If that were the case, then this discussion wouldn't even be happening as many of the older cameras that this applies to don't even support any form of "program" mode. I shoot almost exclusively on AV or M, mode, and usually with manual focus too, believe it or not. I don't know so little that I "spend my entire life shooting on programmed exposure mode". In fact, I don't think I ever have, except if I set the camera up for my hubby to take a pic of me with our kids etc. Aperture priority would be much to complex for him to understand... ;-) tan. > > > I have to ask, maybe naively, BUT, what is the big deal about the aperture > > ring? Exactly what does it "add" to in regards to camera function, or > more > > to the point, what does it take away when it isn't availalble? Is it only > > really a problem for those trying to use newer lenses with older bodies? > Or > > is there something else in the way that they function that I don't yet > know > > about? > > Well Tanya, an aperture ring lets you control the aperture. > That can be a pretty big deal if you want to explore the world of > photography without the dictates of the camera intruding. > If you spend your entire life on programmed exposure mode, then its no big > deal at all. > > William Robb >
