[Uluru]

The aim of engineering is to reduce complexity, not add to it. Pentax DSLR like K3 is already fairly more complicated than Nikon's DSLR that do have a coupler. Adding more mechanical parts adds more possible engineering issues, which they want to reduce.
But speaking of that, maybe they have something else, a solution even easier and is a part/side-effect of another technology incorporated in the FF, but they will not talk about it now. However, even if they do not deliver it, green button works.

[blende8]

green button works.

It only works quite inaccurate, as has been discussed on this forum numerous times.

---------- Post added 02-13-15 at 10:23 PM ----------

Nikon never put electrical contacts on the F-mount until the AF era.

Ah, ok, thanks!

[rawr]

Yes -- and moreover, unlike the adapter scenario you described, the aperture would remain wide open until you take the picture.

Aha. Thanks for clearing that up. The NEX way seems more elegant.

It's a pity that even when shooting a Pentax DSLR using Liveview mode (not using the optical viewfinder), that stop down metering and the green-button are still required. In Liveview mode with a camera like the K-3, when you have access to focus peaking and a big bright LCD, requiring green button use and that the lens be kept wide open until you trip the shutter seems a bit redundant.

[fuent104]

1. We can't do the aperture coupler and small
2. But legacy-lens Pentax enthusiasts are important (especially in Japan)
3. How about Green Button stop-down metering? - it is a 'solution'

Frankly, I believe a generous solution. They could have just punted.

Generous? I think you could look at an empty glass and call it half-full.

Camera bodies from the 1970's, which were smaller than today's cameras, somehow had space to fit the coupling lever. Aside from a warp in the space-time continuum, it really doesn't make sense that there is now not enough space to fit the lever.

Maybe the SR system has something to do with it? Who knows. Either way, it's an insult to our intelligence to not explain it. My ZX-5n is also smaller than any DSLR, yet it has space for the lever.

---------- Post added 02-13-15 at 02:10 PM ----------

When I use my ME Super and ZX-5n, I often think about the fact that current dslrs are less functional, in this one particular regard. That seems like a giant step backward.

[Tanzer]

What Nikon does with their lenses has nothing to do with the Pentax situation. Pentax hasn't supported the aperture coupler for years -- there is no absolutely no incentive for them to suddenly introduce that capability today, as if it would attract new Pentax users? In fact, with a new FF body and new FF lenses on the market, they have even more reasons not to.

It seems to me that they buried this idea many years ago. There is space in any camera. They found simple excuse.

Yes, I agree. Like I said, if they really wanted to better support old lenses, they could easily sequence the green button and shutter release electronically, triggered by a single user operation, and that wouldn't require any additional hardware or space. The camera could sequentially "push" both buttons faster and more reliably than any human could. But because we asked specifically about the aperture coupler, (rather than a broader question about better support for old lenses,) they were able to come up with this as an excuse.

[THoog]

What Nikon does with their lenses has nothing to do with the Pentax situation. Pentax hasn't supported the aperture coupler for years -- there is no absolutely no incentive for them to suddenly introduce that capability today, as if it would attract new Pentax users? In fact, with a new FF body and new FF lenses on the market, they have even more reasons not to.

This. What financial incentive is there for Pentax to spend time and money developing (almost from scratch) the mechanical, electronic, and software mechanisms needed to support 30+ year old lenses? How many MORE people would buy an "uncrippled" high-end Pentax body than a "crippled" one? Apart from a marketing bullet point and good will from old glass collectors, it needs to be profitable for them to do so. Rather than asking again and again and not liking the answer, we need to provide them with a solid monetary justification for doing it.

[geomez]

Yes, I agree. Like I said, if they really wanted to better support old lenses, they could easily sequence the green button and shutter release electronically, triggered by a single user operation, and that wouldn't require any additional hardware or space. The camera could sequentially "push" both buttons faster and more reliably than any human could. But because we asked specifically about the aperture coupler, (rather than a broader question about better support for old lenses,) they were able to come up with this as an excuse.

I petition that next time we have a Q&A with Pentax, we propose a firmware solution to the problem instead of asking them the same thing time and again and expecting a different answer.

[jcdoss]

Hypothetically speaking, one could choose to purchase a Sony a7II instead of a Pentax, if all one wants is an image stabilized platform on which to use legacy manual focus lenses. Lost customers are hard to win back.

[THoog]

Hypothetically speaking, one could choose to purchase a Sony a7II instead of a Pentax, if all one wants is an image stabilized platform on which to use legacy manual focus lenses. Lost customers are hard to win back.

If that's all one wants, it's pretty hard to argue for staying with Pentax anyhow - the a7II will probably cost considerably less and be able to use other brands' legacy glass as well. I don't think the aperture coupler would make much of a difference, compared to the EVF/OVF or video arguments.

[mee]

They want you to buy new lenses... the general support for older lenses is just a carrot dangling you towards buying the camera body.

[OJGoreng]

What`s so wrong with the green button? I use it quite often on my K-5, and most of the time the camera is mounted on a tripod when I do. So it's a rather slow procedure anyway, where the green button is no burden. Or am I getting something wrong?

You have basically answered your own question; it's a slow procedure, which makes it useless in a situation where action is involved. If you compare that to the instant operation on, say, the lowly ME film body, it's an extreme hassle. I think that's part of the frustration... any 80s entry-level body had the mechanism, yet the current, hyperdengineered expensive models cannot perform this function, despite having the little lever required for closing the aperture on an old lens.

[Adam]

What surprises me is that the answer was: "I think it is important". Because there's never been a DSLR with an aperture coupler since the *ist D.

The 645D/Z both have the aperture coupler. But based on that interview answer, I don't think the FF will. Too bad, but not a deal breaker IMO.

[fuent104]

If that's all one wants, it's pretty hard to argue for staying with Pentax anyhow - the a7II will probably cost considerably less and be able to use other brands' legacy glass as well. I don't think the aperture coupler would make much of a difference, compared to the EVF/OVF or video arguments.

This is a pretty good argument for including the functionality, in my opinion. Does Ricoh want me to buy their camera or Sony's? We already know they are losing business to Sony. I can't imagine they like it.

Like most photographers, I want to keep purchasing new lenses and expanding my capabilities, but I don't want to have to stop using the equipment I've had for years. Being known as the company that best caters to its clients' wishes can't be bad for business. Making excuses about why technology that was perfected a few decades ago is no longer feasible due to lack of space in larger cameras can be bad for business.

How would people with DA Limited lenses feel if the FF had no crop capabilities? Probably not too happy.

[deus ursus]

Wouldn't OTF metering like on the LX be a work-around? With K and M lenses you could set the aperture with the aperture ring, and the camera would meter the light hitting the sensor and close the shutter when enough light has hit the sensor.

[boriscleto]

Wouldn't OTF metering like on the LX be a work-around? With K and M lenses you could set the aperture with the aperture ring, and the camera would meter the light hitting the sensor and close the shutter when enough light has hit the sensor.

Engineering for little return...