Reread the first dictionary listing he posted: Dictionary wrote: "A: NO LONGER IN USE"
the K/M lenses are not only NOT "no longer is use" they have NOT all been superceded by more capable lenses. Do you agree with both of these statements or not? JCO -----Original Message----- From: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 10:59 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Camera engineering (was Re: Rename request) See the definition that Tom Reese posted. The K/M lenses have been superceeded by more capable lenses, rendering them obsolete. Obsolete does not necessarily imply unusable or no longer in common use, it means that there are more capable products on the market. And as the K/M lenses have been (with a couple of exceptions, all rather exotic) removed from the market and replaced by newer, more capable products, they are certainly obsolete. Doesn't mean I can't use them, and I do. As I've posted repeatedly on this thread, I use mostly K/M lenses on my D (As well as on my Ricoh KR-5sv). -Adam J. C. O'Connell wrote: > I think you are misunderstanding the > defintion of obsolete. I don't think > it means for me or you or anyone else, > to be obsolete it has to be ***universally*** > unwanted or undesireable to use anymore. > > Just because YOU don't want to use > a product anymore for whatever reason > doesn't mean that its obsolete because > if your reason for not wanting to use > it DOESN'T EVEN APPLY to large number > of other users application for the product, > than it not obsolete, its just not > what you want. Big difference... > GET IT? > JCO > > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 10:12 AM > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Subject: Re: Camera engineering (was Re: Rename request) > > > I consider any lens that doesn't permit use of modern metering or > flash > technology to be obsolete. K/M lenses are thus obselete (Although you > can modify them to allow modern multi-segment metering). In addition, > they, like the A lenses, do not allow the lens-camera communication that > FA and FA2 lenses do. > > That doens't make them unusable. Just obsolete. > > To go along with the car analogy, I consider carburated engines to be > obsolete, as the superior electronic fuel injection has rendered them > obsolete. Same for pushrod engine designs, which are obsolete as well. > But both are still usable. > > > -Adam > > J. C. O'Connell wrote: > >>We went thru this before. The defintion >>of obsolete as I recall it when discussed >>is way too vague. Just because an item doesn't >>have some later feature doesn't make it >>obsolete IMHO because that's like saying >>if your current car isnt a hybrid its obsolete >>because it doesn't have hybrid feature that >>came out later. Or even worse, if the feature >>that came out later is of little use like >>saying Pentax POWER ZOOM bodies made all those >>before it obsolete. Yeah right! >>GET IT? >>jco >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 8:44 AM >>To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net >>Subject: Re: Camera engineering (was Re: Rename request) >> >> >>K/M Lenses do not communicate max/minimum aperture information, allow >>setting aperture in 1/3 stops, communicate focal distance, communicate >>MTF data or communicate focal length. FA2 lenses communicate all this >>information, FA lenses communicate all but MTF and focal distance, A >>lenses give only the max/min aperture and allow setting aperture in >>1/3 stops. This information is required for Matrix-metering, P-TTL >>flash metering and the A position is required for Program and Shutter >>Priority AE modes. >> >>K/M lenses are obsolete as they lack these capabilities. Doesn't make >>them unusable or inferior, just obsolete. >> >>-Adam >>
