Re: Why not use the Auto110 line to make a digital system?

2002-10-04 Thread David A. Mann
Jim Apilado wrote: > The Auto 110 was a cutsey camera that didn't have to be made. I recall > Pentax producing a brown one and a transparent one that are both > collectors items now. The Minolta 110 zooms were better and easier to use > than the 110s. I played with an Auto 110 last week. Cu

Re: Why not use the Auto110 line to make a digital system?

2002-10-03 Thread Paul Stenquist
I have an auto 110. It's an interesting little camera that can be quite amusing. But in terms of build quality, it's a piece of crap -- at least in comparison to other Pentax cameras I own. Ditto, the lenses. You wouldn't want a digital version of this toy. Paul Stenquist MPozzi wrote: > > I cer

Re: Why not use the Auto110 line to make a digital system?

2002-10-03 Thread Brad Dobo
MAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 3:25 PM Subject: re: Why not use the Auto110 line to make a digital system? > They have none of the old tooling, because the camera has been out of production for years. Just to do an identical film camera would

RE: Why not use the Auto110 line to make a digital system?

2002-10-03 Thread Peifer, William [OCDUS]
Bruce Rubenstein wrote: > They have none of the old tooling, because the camera has been out > of production for years. Just to do an identical film camera would cost > just as much as to do a new camera - no cost savings. Hmmm, I smell some trolling here, but I'll bite, just 'cause I'm a fun guy

Re: Why not use the Auto110 line to make a digital system?

2002-10-03 Thread Peter Alling
It might make sense if it hadn't been out of production for so long. For the retooling costs Pentax would probably be better off with an entirely new design. Although it would be a nice touch to make the lens mount backward compatible. At 01:21 AM 10/3/2002 -0700, you wrote: >The news of Olympu

Re: Why not use the Auto110 line to make a digital system?

2002-10-03 Thread MPozzi
Ease of use...in line with this century perhaps? I assume the viewfinder to be small therefore hard to see through esp with glasses...AF may help... (I've never touched one...) even 'snap focus' could be a good compromise... Why should it be MF? ___

Re: Why not use the Auto110 line to make a digital system?

2002-10-03 Thread Bob Rapp
Why does it has to be AF?! Bob - Original Message - From: "MPozzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 6:21 PM Subject: Why not use the Auto110 line to make a digital system? > The news of Olympus and their new Digit

Why not use the Auto110 line to make a digital system?

2002-10-03 Thread MPozzi
The news of Olympus and their new Digital interchangeable lens reflex system got me thinking on why pentax could not use the old Auto 110 system (complete system with zoom lenses etc,) and upgrade it to include AF, and more importantly: Digital. Sensor size whould not be an issue, Batteries could