I worked in the electronics design and mfgr industry for over 20 years but you don't need to be an expert to see that removal this simple cheap part is not going to save $50 to the price of the camera when you look at all the far more expensive complex parts internal and all the far more expensive product development costs of the other parts and the final retail price. Solely as a percentage of the cost it cant be anywhere near $50 price savings realized to the buyer by removing it. Pentax may have saved a few pennies by removing it but I seriously doubt that allowed them to issue $50 price drop.
Motivation? Motivating what?, all I am trying to point out that this is a major change in pentax policy for the worse and everyone should be aware of what the ramifications of it are not just for this particular issue but for all PENTAX customer support and long term product support issues from now on.... jco -----Original Message----- From: Mark Erickson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 11:14 PM To: 'pentax-discuss' Subject: RE: green button wars (again) Actually, Asahi Optical provided limited (not full) compatibility when they switched from their screw mount to the K mount (they abandoned diaphragm coupling and thus lost open aperture metering capability for screw mount lenses on K mount bodies). Regarding your desire for full aperture coupling in Pentax DSLRs, J.C., I basically agree with you. I wish Pentax provided full backward compatibility to M and K lenses, too. That said, I do not find the confrontational gloom-and-doom all-caps approach very motivating. Also, since I am not a camera engineer, I can't comment authoritatively regarding the marginal BOM cost of adding aperture-sensing mechanicals, sensor, electronics, and firmware to an already very small platform. But that's another debate.... --Mark "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Cant you guys read my posts before you make such comments about me? I > have explained repeatedly its not just the issue or K/M lenses on an > istD here that concerns me its Pentax turning point decision to no > longer support something without technical or financial CAUSE. Its > ridiculous that a camera as sophisticated as the istD doesn't properly > meter with K/M lenses because of a $5 part's removal for strategic not > photographic or compatability reasons. This situation is ONLY THE > START of something bad because they absolutely had a firm policy for deacdes > to NOT do that kind of thing and now they suddenly have done a 180 > apparently to sell more blades for their razors..
