Originally posted by mee And yes, it is shoehorning. Because if you're shoving in old tech you're squeezing out new tech as a result...
"Shoehorning" has a connotation of "forcing", as in "squeezing". Nothing of this sort is required to add an aperture coupler.
What you apparently mean is "misguided" or "adverse to growing the customer base".
While I don't believe that developing an aperturer coupler would imply a lot of sacrifices regarding other developments, I don't take issue with the idea that an aperture coupler should not be high on the priority list. In fact, as I already said multiple times I do agree that the priority should be low as the financial viability is doubtful.
But a case of "shoehorning" it wouldn't be, hence my objection.
Originally posted by mee And the Df took off like gangbusters.. right?
I reckon Nikon made money from it. And if not, I can image a number of reasons that have nothing to do with our discussion.
Be that as it may, just look at Fuji whose success appears to be mainly built on providing a retro experience. Why wouldn't Pentax be able to ride that train in a less brain damaged way as well?
Anyhow, I think I provided my point of view and saying more won't be constructive.