The best thing would be to admit the correct and allow the shooter to turn it on or off with a custom function. Why change the iso anyway? why not just change the Tv?
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 11:30 AM, CheekyGeek <cheekyg...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Steven Desjardins <drd1...@gmail.com> wrote: >> The funny thing would be if they >> didn't correct there would no evidence of it in this data but rather >> in inconsistent exposure results between lenses. > > I guess I should have prefaced my comments as coming from one who > really likes to use old legacy glass on my K-x (and before that > K200D). Frankly, I'm not a DA buyer, so their current offerings are > irrelevant to me. I'm interested in m42 Takumars and SMC K-mounts, and > (to a far lesser degree) F and FA lenses designed for full-frame 35mm. > And if you hang around in those circles that is EXACTLY what you hear > about from some people. I've just never paid attention to the CAMERA > BODIES that the complainers were using before. > > I'd really love to hear the Pentax Position on these issues. I think > that most users would rather have the camera cheat the ISO in favor of > proper exposure with a given lens, rather than force the photographer > to keep track of the myriad exposure characteristics of each lens > (which would change depending on the aperture you were using them > with). > > Darren Addy > Kearney, Nebraska > > > > > -- > Nothing is sure, except Death and Pentaxes. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
