[mee]

While owners of M and K lenses can go screw themselves. Right ...

No. But M42 owners, on the other hand, can go screw in their lenses (with appropriate adapter).

[pacu]

"damned if you do damned if you don't"

Thanks God , I am not in the photography business. All lenses and cameras as precision tools are fragile, no matter the build quality.

What about detachable lenses ? Who would want such a thing... what if I forget one in the field somewhere on a bench. /sarcasm

[Kunzite]

Of course it's not the same. (Although they certainly didn't stop making non-A lenses until much later.) That doesn't mean there aren't people who would like support for these lenses.

I'm sure there are people who would like proper support for M42, aperture pin included. I'm sure there are people who would like support for M37 lenses (because M42 is new, unproven technology or something). Whatever flea market lens one could buy for 2 pennies, there are people who would like support for it.
Pentax allowing the usage of K and M lenses should be seen as adequate support.

[eyeswideshut]

I'm sure there are people who would like proper support for M42, aperture pin included. I'm sure there are people who would like support for M37 lenses (because M42 is new, unproven technology or something). Whatever flea market lens one could buy for 2 pennies, there are people who would like support for it.
Pentax allowing the usage of K and M lenses should be seen as adequate support.

Oh oh, the High Priest of PenRicoh Orthodoxy has spoken.

Will all heterodox (un)believers please cease discussion of such dangerous topics as uncrippled K mounts.

Thank you
-The Management

[Kunzite]

Cut it out. I'm simply trying to ascertain what we can reasonably expect, and why. I'm not an "enemy of the people".
Though the FF - due to being a higher margin product - is in the best position to offer this marginal and for many useless feature.

[NZ_Ross]

There is a new Pentax K mount full frame camera coming very soon. What we have seen in both New York and Paris in my opinion looks very encouraging.

There is also a lot of speculation on the features, which of course is a great deal of fun, but how much of the speculation will be factual remains to be seen.

Given the encouragement of the coming camera, and the fun of the speculation wouldn't it be good if we could keep our comments and remarks to each other with the same tone

There is so much good information to be talking about at the moment.....

[eyeswideshut]

Cut it out. I'm simply trying to ascertain what we can reasonably expect, and why. I'm not an "enemy of the people".
Though the FF - due to being a higher margin product - is in the best position to offer this marginal and for many useless feature.

All in good fun Kunzite.
I just think it is hillarious that you believe Pentax "allowing" (!!!) use of M and K lenses "should be seen as adequate". Last time I checked, it was still the customers who vote with their $$$ on what is adequate and what is not.

[D1N0]

K-mount isn't crippled. K and M lenses are.

[Kunzite]

But that's precisely my point: there is little money on fully (as opposed to partially) supporting product lines discontinued more than 3 decades ago.
People who are voting with their money are called buyers, which means they would have (also) a bunch of more modern lenses; I don't see them leaving for compatibility reasons. I fail to see how those with K and M lenses but little else worth considering are "voting with their $$$".

Please also keep in mind that I'm not a native English speaker, thus my ability to properly convey subtleties is severely limited - both because of the language barrier and cultural differences. That a level of backwards compatibility with full support for products up to 3 decades old, and partial support for products 3 to 4 decades old "should be seen as adequate" is my opinion about what would be reasonable.
It's not me saying that Ricoh could screw us in any way they wish. Actually part of the reason I consider the support "adequate" is Pentax implementing the metering workaround, which was done because people complained.

[rod_grant]

Well said NZ Ross.
I realise the duress that you are under, given the cricket over the past three days.

[eyeswideshut]

K-mount isn't crippled. K and M lenses are.

Good point, but 'Crippled' sounds politically uncool. 'Technologically challenged' is the preferred nomenclature...

[Rondec]

I don't think it really matters a huge amount. Certainly there are those who will be a 2500 dollars in a camera to mount 15 dollar flea market lenses on it, but I would guess that the majority of lenses used on this camera would be more recent vintage and have apertures that are adjustable on the camera and auto focus. Certainly you will be able to mount older lenses on this camera either way, it just may not be as easy as some would like if Pentax keeps their same method of metering through pre-A lenses.

[Sandy Hancock]

I realise the duress that you are under, given the cricket over the past three days.

(Don't mention the Rugby....)

[Zygonyx]

Definitely, not in this thread

[roberrl]

My local Pentax dealer has just told me that FF has been cancelled due to low sales forecasts.
He's been a reasonably reliable source in the past.
Please don't shoot the messenger, I'm simply reporting what I've been told.