It's not exactly a key feature if the last 3 lines (KA, KAF, KAF2) of Pentax K mount lenses don't need it.
-Adam J. C. O'Connell wrote: > $5 in a $1000 camera which supports a KEY > feature of PENTAX BRAND LENSES is not > a simple miniscule cost reduction. Its just bad policy. > Secondly, its not the quanity sold that matters, > It's the amount of lost sales if they added it > And charged for it and I don't believe that > Would be a signifigant number. If you do, that > Fine with me but I don't. > jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Mark Roberts > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 8:03 AM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: K1D aperature simulator survey, part Deaux > > John Celio wrote: > > >>>You don't know the difference between shrewd and >>>Unscrupulous. Disabling older products without >>>Cost or technical reasons is just that. >> >>There -is- a cost reason for the loss of the simulator. > > > *Lowball* estimated cost of aperture smulator: $5.00/camera > Production plans for K10D: 13000/month > Additional cost to Pentax: $65,000.00/month or $780,000.00/year > > >>The cost reason is how much Pentax was losing from people not >>buying new lenses. It's as simple as that. > > > That too. > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
