William Robb wrote:
> On 6/28/07, Adam Maas
>
>> Note that you do get certain things for that extra 40% or so that the D200
>> costs.
>
> I had a closer look at the B&H website. They list the D200 body at
> $1499.95 (after instant rebate), the K10D body is listed at $744.95
> after a $50.00 mail
On 29/06/07, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We appear to have a few people on list who know more about camera
> manufacture and the economics thereof than the people who make them.
> It's surprising that there are not more camera manufacturers given the
> level of knowledge and expertis
You know, I know quite a bit about digital design and digital controls,
but hey what does that have to do with current camera design.
William Robb wrote:
> On 6/28/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> That sounds like perfect bullshit to me. It's a simple assembly easily
>> manufa
Nothing spécial to Adam but I had to respond somewhere.
It's me or this thread isheading the exact way as a JCO thread so much
people are complaining about??
Whatdid you expect, such compatibility with K mount on a K100D super?
If so, I'm sorry but this is silly. Othrwise, it has nothing to do
wi
On 6/28/07, Adam Maas
> Note that you do get certain things for that extra 40% or so that the D200
> costs.
I had a closer look at the B&H website. They list the D200 body at
$1499.95 (after instant rebate), the K10D body is listed at $744.95
after a $50.00 mail in rebate.
This is getting to cl
William Robb wrote:
>>> - Original Message -
>>> From: "Adam Maas"
>>> Subject: Re: K100D super (unofficial for now it seems)
>>
>> A D200 is $1599CDN and a K10D is $1099CDN, you must be looking at an
>> 18-200/D200 kit to get 2.5x
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Adam Maas"
> > Subject: Re: K100D super (unofficial for now it seems)
>
>
> A D200 is $1599CDN and a K10D is $1099CDN, you must be looking at an
> 18-200/D200 kit to get 2.5x the price. Not as big a difference
On 6/28/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That sounds like perfect bullshit to me. It's a simple assembly easily
> manufactured with similar assemblies in many other devices. However
> there's no reason to use old technology. There are alternate designs
> that would have totally digi
That sounds like perfect bullshit to me. It's a simple assembly easily
manufactured with similar assemblies in many other devices. However
there's no reason to use old technology. There are alternate designs
that would have totally digital output, and be even less expensive, and
more reliabl
William Robb wrote:
>From: "Digital Image Studio"
>> And for a relatively small cost per body they could make the
>>claim of effectively 100% backwards compatibility.
>
>The best info I have been able to glean is a manufacturing cost of
>about US$35.00 per body sold. What that would do to the ret
William Robb wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Adam Maas"
> Subject: Re: K100D super (unofficial for now it seems)
>
>
>> AI conversions cost about $30 these days and can be done at home with a
>> Dremel in a pinch. Nikon did factory convers
On 29/06/07, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The best info I have been able to glean is a manufacturing cost of about
> US$35.00 per body sold. What that would do to the retail price, and if the
> price increase would dissuade more people from buying than the increase in
> compatability
- Original Message -
From: "Digital Image Studio"
Subject: Re: K100D super (unofficial for now it seems)
>> I don't know about Leica, but none of the Japanese manufacturers are 100%
>> supporting their older lenses. Pentax is actually the best of the lo
- Original Message -
From: "Adam Maas"
Subject: Re: K100D super (unofficial for now it seems)
>
> AI conversions cost about $30 these days and can be done at home with a
> Dremel in a pinch. Nikon did factory conversions for 25 years, I think
> that's enou
On 29/06/07, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Pentax can't touch that anymore (since the MZ-S was the only body
with anything similar in capability) even if a Pentax body can mount
lenses from 1948. Pentax offers no more support than Canon does for
pre-K mount lenses (and K mount was introduce
On 29/06/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The SDM support required a minor mechanical change to the miirror box,
> changing the sensor would have required changing the entire imaging
> subsystem. The other enhancements are mostly software.
Minor to the point that it appears that they
Pentax used to and Nikon did for most, but woe betide you if you mounted
the wrong series lens on some cameras. It kind of depends how "legacy"
you want to get. m42 lenses give the exactly the same functionality,
(as do medium format lenses), on modern DSLR's that they had on the
first K moun
On 28.06.2007, at 16:13 , Adam Maas wrote:
> Pentax can't touch that anymore (since the MZ-S was the only body
> with anything similar in capability)
Even MZ-S won't give you P-TTL and wireless flash with plain K lenses.
Cheers,
Sylwek
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdm
William Robb wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Sylwester Pietrzyk"
> Subject: Re: K100D super (unofficial for now it seems)
>
>
>
>> But it would be nice in K10D class body. Just like Nikon did in D200,
>> where compatibility with manual l
On 28/06/07, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't know about Leica, but none of the Japanese manufacturers are 100%
> supporting their older lenses. Pentax is actually the best of the lot.
And for a relatively small cost per body they could make the claim of
effectively 100% backward
The SDM support required a minor mechanical change to the miirror box,
changing the sensor would have required changing the entire imaging
subsystem. The other enhancements are mostly software.
Thibouille wrote:
> Very true, but AFAICT, they did exactly the same with previous bodies
> since ist
William Robb wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Sandy Harris"
> Subject: Re: K100D super (unofficial for now it seems)
>
>
>> Does anyone actually do this right -- provide full functionality with
>> legacy glass? I don't expect auto-focus f
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Roberts"
Subject: Re: K100D super (unofficial for now it seems)
>
>
> That after 4 years of selling DSLR's they've got a good idea of the
> importance of this information to 99.9% of their customers.
They are still cate
- Original Message -
From: "Sylwester Pietrzyk"
Subject: Re: K100D super (unofficial for now it seems)
> But it would be nice in K10D class body. Just like Nikon did in D200,
> where compatibility with manual lenses is better than in any Pentax
> AF body, eve
- Original Message -
From: "Sandy Harris"
Subject: Re: K100D super (unofficial for now it seems)
>
> Does anyone actually do this right -- provide full functionality with
> legacy glass? I don't expect auto-focus from old lenses, but being
> able to meter
P. J. Alling wrote:
>Mike Hamilton wrote:
>> On 27-Jun-07, at 9:04 PM, PJ Alling wrote:
>>
>>> They still trumpet K compatibility, but fail to mention any loss of
>>> functionality. If you read this you'd almost think that the aperture
>>> simulator was back. A marvel of marketing speak.
>>
>
On 6/28/07, Digital Image Studio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 28/06/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Rob, you were right...
>
> Generally yes, though I don't insist like some ;-)
HAR!
Cheers,
Dave
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo
Sandy Harris wrote:
> On 6/28/07, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
They still trumpet K compatibility, but fail to mention any loss of
functionality. If you read this you'd almost think that the aperture
simulator was back. A marvel of marketing speak.
>>> Yes, it's inter
On 28.06.2007, at 07:44 , Thibouille wrote:
> Then again, a D40 (if I rememeber well) is not even capable of any
> metering at all with old Nikon lenses.
And higher-end D80 also. D40 doesn't allow AF with non-USM
screwdriven AF lenses
> Anyway I really wouldn't wait for a True Kmount compat
On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 07:44:53AM +0200, Thibouille wrote..
> Very true, but AFAICT, they did exactly the same with previous bodies
> since ist-D.
> We shouldn't be surprised, really.
>
> Then again, a D40 (if I rememeber well) is not even capable of any
> metering at all with old Nikon lenses.
>
On 6/28/07, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> They still trumpet K compatibility, but fail to mention any loss of
> >> functionality. If you read this you'd almost think that the aperture
> >> simulator was back. A marvel of marketing speak.
> >
> > Yes, it's interesting how the marke
My dealer in Malta mentioned this to me... apparently the release is
quite imminent.
On 6/27/07, Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thibouille wrote:
> > http://forum.xitek.com/sorthread.php?threadid=453926&bcsi_scan_934C20D41D700C9A=YajnSdzdeM6pxFJl5YIX8wEAAACtx44A&bcsi_scan_filename=sorthrea
Very true, but AFAICT, they did exactly the same with previous bodies
since ist-D.
We shouldn't be surprised, really.
Then again, a D40 (if I rememeber well) is not even capable of any
metering at all with old Nikon lenses.
Anyway I really wouldn't wait for a True Kmount compatibility on such a b
- Original Message -
From: "P. J. Alling"
Subject: Re: K100D super (unofficial for now it seems)
> Disclaimer buried in paragraph 8. K mount compatibility proclaimed in
> paragraph 2. I draw my own conclusions from that.
yawn.
William Robb
--
PDML Pentax-Discus
On 28/06/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rob, you were right...
Generally yes, though I don't insist like some ;-)
--
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://picasaweb.google.com/distudio/PESO
http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~di
Rob, you were right...
Mike Hamilton wrote:
> On 27-Jun-07, at 9:04 PM, PJ Alling wrote:
>
>
>> They still trumpet K compatibility, but fail to mention any loss of
>> functionality. If you read this you'd almost think that the aperture
>> simulator was back. A marvel of marketing speak.
>>
Disclaimer buried in paragraph 8. K mount compatibility proclaimed in
paragraph 2. I draw my own conclusions from that.
Mike Hamilton wrote:
> On 27-Jun-07, at 9:04 PM, PJ Alling wrote:
>
>
>> They still trumpet K compatibility, but fail to mention any loss of
>> functionality. If you read
On 27-Jun-07, at 9:04 PM, PJ Alling wrote:
> They still trumpet K compatibility, but fail to mention any loss of
> functionality. If you read this you'd almost think that the aperture
> simulator was back. A marvel of marketing speak.
Not so. "Available functions may be limited with certain l
- Original Message -
From: "Digital Image Studio"
Subject: Re: K100D super (unofficial for now it seems)
> On 28/06/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> They still trumpet K compatibility, but fail to mention any loss of
>> functionality. If y
On 28/06/07, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> They still trumpet K compatibility, but fail to mention any loss of
> functionality. If you read this you'd almost think that the aperture
> simulator was back. A marvel of marketing speak.
Yes, it's interesting how the marketing speak reads
They still trumpet K compatibility, but fail to mention any loss of
functionality. If you read this you'd almost think that the aperture
simulator was back. A marvel of marketing speak.
Peter Fairweather wrote:
> Read all about it!!!
>
> http://www.pentaximaging.com/footer/news_media_article?A
In a message dated 6/27/2007 3:29:14 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Read all about it!!!
http://www.pentaximaging.com/footer/news_media_article?ArticleId=9997175
6mp, dudst removal, support for SDM lenses
Peter
So I got my K100D just a little too soon, h
Read all about it!!!
http://www.pentaximaging.com/footer/news_media_article?ArticleId=9997175
6mp, dudst removal, support for SDM lenses
Peter
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Thanks for the link!
Looks like it will be formally announced next week with delivery
before the end of the summer.
Bertil
>
> http://forum.xitek.com/sorthread.php?
> threadid=453926&bcsi_scan_934C20D41D700C9A=YajnSdzdeM6pxFJl5YIX8wEAAAC
> tx44A&bcsi_scan_filename=sorthread.php
--
PDML Pe
But this was obviously the show stopper.
> ???K100D,??,???,??
Norm Baugher wrote:
> Regarding SDM, I found this quite interesting:
> " ?,??SDM"
> Norm
>
> Thibouille wrote:
>
>> http://forum.xitek.com/sorthread.php?threadid=453926&bc
Regarding SDM, I found this quite interesting:
" ?,??SDM"
Norm
Thibouille wrote:
> http://forum.xitek.com/sorthread.php?threadid=453926&bcsi_scan_934C20D41D700C9A=YajnSdzdeM6pxFJl5YIX8wEAAACtx44A&bcsi_scan_filename=sorthread.php
>
>
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@p
Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
> On Jun 27, 2007, at 7:54 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
>
>> I'm guessing that's the SSM-enabled K100D. Hopefully with a bigger
>> buffer as well.
> Just SDM and DR, don't count on other significant changes, you'll see
> tomorrow...
>
> Cheers,
> Sylwek
>
It'll be a mistak
On Jun 27, 2007, at 7:54 PM, Adam Maas wrote:
> I'm guessing that's the SSM-enabled K100D. Hopefully with a bigger
> buffer as well.
Just SDM and DR, don't count on other significant changes, you'll see
tomorrow...
Cheers,
Sylwek
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.ne
Thibouille wrote:
> http://forum.xitek.com/sorthread.php?threadid=453926&bcsi_scan_934C20D41D700C9A=YajnSdzdeM6pxFJl5YIX8wEAAACtx44A&bcsi_scan_filename=sorthread.php
>
I'm guessing that's the SSM-enabled K100D. Hopefully with a bigger buffer as
well.
-Adam
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PD
http://forum.xitek.com/sorthread.php?threadid=453926&bcsi_scan_934C20D41D700C9A=YajnSdzdeM6pxFJl5YIX8wEAAACtx44A&bcsi_scan_filename=sorthread.php
--
Thibault Massart aka Thibouille
--
K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ...
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
50 matches
Mail list logo
