I think the KM had dof preview, something the k1000 seriously lacked. ----------------- J.C.O'Connell hifis...@gate.net -----------------
-----Original Message----- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 3:57 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Best FF Pentax Rumour Story EVER!!!!!! The KM and the SPF were pretty much the same camera with different mounts, the meters are interchangeable. The K1000 was a KM without a self timer, once again the meter circuitry is interchangeable. With the large number of K1000s available donor cameras, the KM will be repairable to more complete functionalty long after it's more highly specified siblings the KX and K2 are rendered meterless. That's also good news for SPF owners, as the K1000 works as a meter circuit donor for them as well. On 9/16/2012 8:27 PM, George Sinos wrote: > That was in the transition days when they were moving from the screw > mount to the k-mount. They actually sold both models in both mounts > for about 2 years. It seems like that was around 1973 or 1974. gs > > George Sinos > -------------------- > gsi...@gmail.com > www.georgesphotos.net > plus.georgesinos.com > > > On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 7:11 PM, knarftheria...@gmail.com > <knarftheria...@gmail.com> wrote: >> The SP500 (which I have one of) actually does have a shutter speed of 1/1000. There is an unmarked space on the shutter speed dial where the 1/1000 speed would have been on the SP. Not only a space on the dial, but a detente if you move the dial to that blank space. And if you press the shutter release it will fire! >> >> The story I heard is that the marketing department wanted a "discount" Spotmatic, so came up with the idea for the SP500. Problem is that it would have cost way to much to design and build a new shutter mechanism with no 1/1000th speed. >> >> The solution was to use the same shutter mechanism as the Spotmatic but not paint 1/1000 on the dial. And not calibrate the 1/1000 speed. >> >> The result is that for most SP500s the "phantom 1/1000" speed is off by about 1/4 stop - hardly noticeable with most films, which tend to have a much wider exposure latitude than digital. >> >> Back when I used my SP500 I used that phantom 1/1000 all the time and it worked just fine! >> >> Since the SP500 lacked a few other features (self timer and hot shoe, which by that time was - I believe - on the Spotmatic) it was still cheaper to make. >> >> I have no idea what this has to do with the current discussion; just a bit of Pentax trivia is all... >> >> Cheers, >> frank >> >> "What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof." -- Christopher Hitchens >> >> --- Original Message --- >> >> From: Stan Halpin <s...@stans-photography.info> >> Sent: September 16, 2012 9/16/12 >> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <pdml@pdml.net> >> Subject: Re: Best FF Pentax Rumour Story EVER!!!!!! >> >> >> On Sep 16, 2012, at 5:07 PM, Toralf Lund wrote: >> >>>> What you're suggesting for Pentax would be a recipe for oblivion. It's >>>> a rare product that can sell and compete by boasting about what it >>>> DOESN'T have/do. >>> It would be dumb to market it that way, of course, but there is after all a certain appeal in being able to classify a product as simple and/or easy to use (as a result of not having many functions), and there are examples in the camera business on how a focus on different qualities than a long list of features or "cutting-edge" technology can be successful at least in a relative sense. Just look at the interest generated by the recent Fujifilm cameras. Or the Leica Ms for that manner. We're of course talking about a quite different market, there, but it seems to me that to a certain extent, they sell because of the features they don't have. Like auto-focus, for instance. The marketing doesn't actually boast about not offering it, though. >>> >>>> OK, I can do w/o just about all picture modes, in >>>> camera RAW processing and in-camera HDR. But some people just love >>>> that. >>> I'd love to see someone should trying to make a camera without that functionality, though. Maybe it wouldn't be sensible as the only option, but if you based such a model on a different one with all those features, the development cost should also be close to 0. As such, it might not be such a bad idea from a business perspective, even if the marked might be limited. >> IIRC, back in the Spotmatic days, Pentax had two camera models identical in virtually all specs. Except one had a max shutter speed of 1/1000, the other had a limit screw which restricted the shutter speed max to 1/500. Don't want fast shutter? Pay less. I think this would also work today. Don't want video on your DSLR? Pentax should give you a discount of $200 compared to a "full-featured" model, then charge you a $225 firmware upgrade fee if you change your mind later. >> >> stan >> -- >> 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. >> -- >> 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. -- Don't lose heart, they might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthly search. -- 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. -- 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.
