I would appreciate having the simularotr, as I said. But I wouldn't want to pay extra for it. I don't use my K lenses in situations where the kludge is a problem, so I dont' see much benefit. It would be nice. That's all. My main use of K glass is in the studio, where metering is irrelevant. Paul -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Perry Pellechia wrote: > > > The real question is how much would you be willing to pay extra for a > > camera that had the feature. If it added less than $100 to the cost > > and did not effect other features that I want, i.e., SR and SS motor > > lenses, then I would want it. I am not sure I would pay much more > > than $100 for full K/M support. I am sure the threshold would be > > different for others that have either a lot of K/M lens or had none. > > > > Perry. > > I would save _much_ more than $100 in unbought lenses. (Which I'm not > going to buy anyway, Pentax, in case you are listening) So it's worth > much more than that to me. Count me in. > > > > > On 10/9/06, Lon Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>On the offhand chance that Pentax peeks at this list, > >>I propose the following question: > >> > >>How many people here would consider an aperature > >>simulator permitting (for K,M, and all other lenses with > >>aperature rings) CW metering, open aperature metering > >>in manual and AV modes a _highly_ desirable feature on > >>the K1D? > >> > >>Put my name as the first on the list. > >> > >> > >>-Lon > >> > >> > >>-- > >>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >>PDML@pdml.net > >>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
-- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
