Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-22-2012, 02:15 PM   #16
Veteran Member
jeztastic's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Canterbury
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 596
Pentax made a big deal out of K-Mount compatibility with the K-01. It would be pretty strange behaviour.

04-22-2012, 03:13 PM   #17
Loyal Site Supporter
pacerr's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Henry, TN
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,910
EVERY manufacturer absolutely HAD to modify their existing lens mount (at no small cost in R&D and tooling) to accommodate the electronic advantages of auto-exposure and auto-focus. AND they had to do it with the technology then at hand and with no practical experience with the potentialities of the current digital sensor or micro processor technology which were barely on the horizon.

(The different OEM mechanical solutions to auto-focus foretold the end of Tamron's fine line of Adaptall SP lenses as a single lens barrel design couldn't accommodate all of the AF methods via an economical adapter. Perhaps if they had ALL been electronic AF schemes . . . ? )

I can't imagine stuffing robust, reliable PK/A data pins and screw-drive AF mechanics into the M42 screw mount. The change in aperture control from linear, mechanical linkage, and from diameter to area aperture control to facilitate universal AE compatibility, was accomplished at the same time.

The on-going frustration over K-mount compatibility, now and for the future, is like condemning Ford for not including future provisions for 400 hp engines, air bags and automatic transmissions in the Model T. It also shows a failure to appreciate the limits of technology and foresight that existed nearly half a century ago. Consider the rotary dial phone vs. the 4G iPad in the same discussion. Heck, just try to explain to a teenager why we "dial" the phone.

The physical dimensions of the K-mount has been proven adequate for full frame lenses and has the potential for dealing with future innovations in the lens/body interface -- especially with modern data exchange technology -- a Blue-tooth lens/body data stream, tether enabled maybe? Or an optical link?

Do you still keep harnesses for a horse-drawn carriage, and horse manure!, in the garage? The PK/A mount is what it is. If it MUST change, it will; but not without due consideration for the economics and practical advantages of the situation.

Last edited by pacerr; 04-22-2012 at 03:30 PM.
04-22-2012, 04:45 PM   #18
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 43,273
QuoteOriginally posted by attilaworx Quote
Out of curiosity (and because I don't know much about camera mounts): would there be a technical advantage to creating a new mount?

Different connectors? Different flange distance? Different sensors or AF or whatever?
The only advantage would be elimination of the mechanical linkage, which would decrease the production cost of lenses and allow for larger apertures (like 85/1.2).
04-22-2012, 06:28 PM   #19
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,913
QuoteQuote:
...an amazing all singing al dancing full frame DSLR...
I would turn off the sound.

04-22-2012, 08:25 PM   #20
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
Pentax struggles to fill out their Lens Map now. How is adding another one going to help. Besides, Asahi Optical shifted to the K-mount because they had pushed it to the limit. You don't see Nikon dumping their bayonet mount. Canon shifted from a breech lock to the EOS. However, Pentax or Nikon didn't have to do that. Plus, it allows for the potential of more compact bodies and lenses.
04-22-2012, 08:27 PM   #21
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
The only advantage would be elimination of the mechanical linkage, which would decrease the production cost of lenses and allow for larger apertures (like 85/1.2).
Pentax still proved they could go to 85/1.4, 50/1.2 and 135/1.8 with this mount. They even had a prototype 35/1.4.
04-23-2012, 02:22 AM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Manila
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,190
QuoteOriginally posted by DaveHolmes Quote
Pentax brings out an amazing all singing al dancing full frame DSLR... With a mount that isn't K-shaped?
I'll buy a K-5 or two, and wait for angry Pentaxians to sell their K lenses at awesome low prices.
04-23-2012, 05:05 AM   #23
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by Alizarine Quote
I'll buy a K-5 or two, and wait for angry Pentaxians to sell their K lenses at awesome low prices.
Don't count on it. Most of us still shoot film as well.

04-23-2012, 06:56 AM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Manila
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,190
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
Don't count on it. Most of us still shoot film as well.
My dreams have just been shattered.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dslr, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:36 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top