[Mattco26]

Why is it important to you that others buy Pentax cameras ?

Just wondering. I think some of the responses in this thread fall in to two categories.

a.) I would like my choice of Pentax to be justifiable to others, so it must have features comparable to, or better, than other camera choices. I am not secure in my own purchasing choices without the validation of others, be it via reviews or friends. I want to be able to say I have the best camera on the block, not the best photos.

b. ) I have old lenses and believe ( erroneously, largely ) that my ability to take great photos using them would be improved if only Pentax provided me with an aperture-feeler on their DSLR bodies. Although I am choosing to use 5-decade old manual focus lenses, I am unable or unwilling to compose and then move the aperture ring. Pentax are preventing me from being a better photographer by deliberately omitting a feature that is of marginal utility ( Pentax metering is pretty bad, even on current lenses... ) to a very minor subsection of Pentax users.

Really, I think Pentax would be better off spending time making good, competitive, popular cameras. The mount is fine.

Paul

( Takumar user in AP every day )

It may be fine for you, but I would like to use my K mount lenses the same way I use them on my ME Super. Av mode with open aperture metering.

[Tanzer]

Although I am choosing to use 5-decade old manual focus lenses, I am unable or unwilling to compose and then move the aperture ring ...

( Takumar user in AP every day )

This is not just about Takumar lenses -- those are easier because they do not require an electronic stop-down metering step.

If there is a way to rig K- and M-mount lenses with a manual setting like an older Takumar, then the old lenses would be completely manual. This would likely make the current interoperability situation easier to accept.

[bofh]

Why is it important to you that others buy Pentax cameras?

First of all: the more Pentax K mount users, the higher chance of continuing the Pentax K mount product line by Ricoh. So every purchase of a Pentax K mount camera rises this probability. More or less a self fulfilling prophecy.
Otoh: I'm convinced that Pentax cameras are very good cameras. That's the reason for me to buy these. To convince other people, there's not only the quality of the cameras, but the count and kind of features. The comfort when using old lenses is a strong argument, at least in my eyes.

The mount is fine.

Absolutely.
But: the better is the enemy of the good.

E.

[glasbak]

Yes, I want a decrippled mount, and No, I do not think it will happen, it will hurt Pentax lens sales.

But there is an alternative possible, where Pentax still can earn some money.
An mount upgrade, swap the K/M bayonet part with a chipped version.
This chip can inform the camera with the following information :
- lens ID
- Focal length
- Max/min aperture
- A setting (switch at smallest aperture in new bayonet part).
- The relation between aperture lever displacement and aperture (camera needs new firmware to take advantage of it)

Whats not (easy) possible :
- return lens distance info
- return focal lengt change for zooms

This would enable almost everything a FA mount does, except autofocus, and SR info for zooms.

[dlacouture]

This is not just about Takumar lenses -- those are easier because they do not require an electronic stop-down metering step.

If there is a way to rig K- and M-mount lenses with a manual setting like an older Takumar, then the old lenses would be completely manual. This would likely make the current interoperability situation easier to accept.

Well, you can always drill a second locking hole in the lens, so it will lock partway into the mount... Instead of doing a1/6 turn (approx.) between the red dot and the 12 o'clock position, the lens is then locked "sideway" at 1/12th of a turn, and its aperture lever is not engaged. It will then behave just like a good old m42 lens...

If you want to give it a try, just half-mount your lens and hold it (so as it won't fall out!).

[Tanzer]

You're right, I tried that and it works.

Now, I will complain that .... if no de-crippled mount, then perhaps Pentax should support a dual locking pin, so that we can mount K- and M-lenses in a "half-cocked" position! That would cost Pentax even less than a proper de-crippled mount!

[zokes83]

+1 Yes I want a De-crippled K-mount with a aperture ring coupler!

[froeschle]

1 4 5

142 #-208 bofh (i'd like to have a full featured kaf2 mount)
143 #-210 lguckert79 (i would love to be able to meter and have controle of my apture ring again)
144 #-214 glasbak (yes, i want a decrippled mount)
145 #-217 zokes83 (+1 yes i want a de-crippled k-mount with a aperture ring coupler!)

[dlacouture]

Another cheap workaround for K & M lenses would be to stop-down the lens on half-press... That would solve a lot of problems, without needing to add back the aperture coupler...

1- you focus your lens wide open;
2- you half-press the shutter button, the camera stops down the lens and takes a metering;
3- the lens is kept stopped down (and metering is active too) as long as you half-press the shutter...
4- upon full press, the P-TTL pre-flash is fired (with the lens still stopped-down), then the exposure is made.

This would enable fully working Av mode and P-TTL, with m42 and PK/PK-M lenses, with only some coding lines added to the firmware...

Granted, the viewfinder could be getting quite dark while you do the half-press, but for a majority of cases it would work quite well... And it would be a firmware-only implementation, meaning that it could be made available right now on existing models...

Edit:
Regarding point 3, there is also a further possibility that would work like this:
- upon half-press, the lens is stopped down, and the camera takes a metering,
- the lens is released to its wide open position, and another metering is done (the camera can then deduce the relative aperture used)
- While half-press is maintained, wide-open metering is done, and a proper value is deduced using the relative aperture obtained above
- Upon full-press, the P-TTL pre-flash is done wide open then adjusted with the relative aperture deduced above.

I'd be grateful for either modes, myself...
Let's be wild and ask for a simple Custom Option :
"Metering mode for legacy lenses:"
"1- Disabled"
"2- Stopped-down metering on half-press"
"3- Wide-open metering on half-press"

[geedee]

A De-crippled K-Mount with a aperture ring coupler would be great! Let's hope Pentax reacts as they have announced.

[Blue]

Why is it important to you that others buy Pentax cameras ?

Just wondering. I think some of the responses in this thread fall in to two categories.

a.) I would like my choice of Pentax to be justifiable to others, so it must have features comparable to, or better, than other camera choices. I am not secure in my own purchasing choices without the validation of others, be it via reviews or friends. I want to be able to say I have the best camera on the block, not the best photos.

b. ) I have old lenses and believe ( erroneously, largely ) that my ability to take great photos using them would be improved if only Pentax provided me with an aperture-feeler on their DSLR bodies. Although I am choosing to use 5-decade old manual focus lenses, I am unable or unwilling to compose and then move the aperture ring. Pentax are preventing me from being a better photographer by deliberately omitting a feature that is of marginal utility ( Pentax metering is pretty bad, even on current lenses... ) to a very minor subsection of Pentax users.

Really, I think Pentax would be better off spending time making good, competitive, popular cameras. The mount is fine.

Paul

( Takumar user in AP every day )

5 decade old K-mount lens?

[TaoMaas]

2- you half-press the shutter button, the camera stops down the lens and takes a metering;

The problem with that is...at least for me...the meter reading is often wildly inaccurate in stop-down mode. Most times, I'd be closer if I had no meter in the camera and just used the "sunny 16" rule.

[Sankon]

5 decade old K-mount lens?

My point being that any current mount that lets you use superb half-century old lenses can hardly be called "crippled". That's a very emotional word to use for something as unimportant in the grand scheme of things as a lens mount That Pentax also give you in-body stabilisation and AP for those lenses is great. They all work just fine, thanks to Pentax. From reading this thread one might be forgiven for thinking this was not possible, and that Pentax ( of all manufacturers ! ) is very troublesome about using older lenses.

It's a camera forum, not a photography forum, so not unexpected to see a focus on the ( largely pointless ) specs of the gear. Like those computing forums where no one talks about what they *create* with their multi thousand dollar investment, but just how fast it is on benchmarks compared to their previous one, or their friends', or another manufacturer's. They forget the purpose of the tool. The tool itself becomes the object of fascination. Comparison to other tools and different designs follows, deficiencies are perceived, maybe provoked by forum posting, and resentment settles in. None of this affects the original capabilities of the product. It distracts the purchaser from the uncomfortable thought that they are not using the expensive tool to it's potential. An endless cycle of purchasing, discontent, and upgrading follows. Nothing is ever created by such a person.

I understand it, but it makes me a little sad really. Pentax won't win much, if any, business by trumpeting "hey, now you can use those dirty old eBay lenses you really wanted !*". Anyone struggling to create good pictures today, with any current camera, will struggle with any future camera if they start to feel the camera is the issue. Such a person may prefer to believe a product feature is standing in their way. But like the computer forum geek, he or she might be better served by less critiquing of their equipment in use, and more examination of their usage of the equipment.

The mount is fine. Pentax make great photographic tools.

Paul

*Disclaimer at the foot of the ad: You could anyway, we just made it easier to use our generally rather poor metering, for those unable or unwilling to adjust it by themselves, despite choosing manual lenses that kind of assumes the user has a clue. Now you can fit that lens and benefit from wrong exposure, automatically ! But at least you'll be able to look your neighbour with that old D90 in the eye now, eh ! Thats worth something ! No need to be embarrassed at the camera club !

[Blue]

My point being that any current mount that lets you use superb half-century old lenses can hardly be called "crippled". That's a very emotional word to use for something as unimportant in the grand scheme of things as a lens mount That Pentax also give you in-body stabilisation and AP for those lenses is great. They all work just fine, thanks to Pentax. From reading this thread one might be forgiven for thinking this was not possible, and that Pentax ( of all manufacturers ! ) is very troublesome about using older lenses.

It's a camera forum, not a photography forum, so not unexpected to see a focus on the ( largely pointless ) specs of the gear. Like those computing forums where no one talks about what they *create* with their multi thousand dollar investment, but just how fast it is on benchmarks compared to their previous one, or their friends', or another manufacturer's. They forget the purpose of the tool. The tool itself becomes the object of fascination. Comparison to other tools and different designs follows, deficiencies are perceived, maybe provoked by forum posting, and resentment settles in. None of this affects the original capabilities of the product. It distracts the purchaser from the uncomfortable thought that they are not using the expensive tool to it's potential. An endless cycle of purchasing, discontent, and upgrading follows. Nothing is ever created by such a person.

I understand it, but it makes me a little sad really. Pentax won't win much, if any, business by trumpeting "hey, now you can use those dirty old eBay lenses you really wanted !*". Anyone struggling to create good pictures today, with any current camera, will struggle with any future camera if they start to feel the camera is the issue. Such a person may prefer to believe a product feature is standing in their way. But like the computer forum geek, he or she might be better served by less critiquing of their equipment in use, and more examination of their usage of the equipment.

The mount is fine. Pentax make great photographic tools.

Paul

*Disclaimer at the foot of the ad: You could anyway, we just made it easier to use our generally rather poor metering, for those unable or unwilling to adjust it by themselves, despite choosing manual lenses that kind of assumes the user has a clue. Now you can fit that lens and benefit from wrong exposure, automatically ! But at least you'll be able to look your neighbour with that old D90 in the eye now, eh ! Thats worth something ! No need to be embarrassed at the camera club !

I agree the k-mount is a very good mount. The Nikon F mount is a good mount and is 53 years old.

The PF is not only a camera forum but a photography forum.

[Mattco26]

My point being that any current mount that lets you use superb half-century old lenses can hardly be called "crippled". That's a very emotional word to use for something as unimportant in the grand scheme of things as a lens mount That Pentax also give you in-body stabilisation and AP for those lenses is great. They all work just fine, thanks to Pentax. From reading this thread one might be forgiven for thinking this was not possible, and that Pentax ( of all manufacturers ! ) is very troublesome about using older lenses.

It's a camera forum, not a photography forum, so not unexpected to see a focus on the ( largely pointless ) specs of the gear. Like those computing forums where no one talks about what they *create* with their multi thousand dollar investment, but just how fast it is on benchmarks compared to their previous one, or their friends', or another manufacturer's. They forget the purpose of the tool. The tool itself becomes the object of fascination. Comparison to other tools and different designs follows, deficiencies are perceived, maybe provoked by forum posting, and resentment settles in. None of this affects the original capabilities of the product. It distracts the purchaser from the uncomfortable thought that they are not using the expensive tool to it's potential. An endless cycle of purchasing, discontent, and upgrading follows. Nothing is ever created by such a person.

I understand it, but it makes me a little sad really. Pentax won't win much, if any, business by trumpeting "hey, now you can use those dirty old eBay lenses you really wanted !*". Anyone struggling to create good pictures today, with any current camera, will struggle with any future camera if they start to feel the camera is the issue. Such a person may prefer to believe a product feature is standing in their way. But like the computer forum geek, he or she might be better served by less critiquing of their equipment in use, and more examination of their usage of the equipment.

The mount is fine. Pentax make great photographic tools.

Paul

*Disclaimer at the foot of the ad: You could anyway, we just made it easier to use our generally rather poor metering, for those unable or unwilling to adjust it by themselves, despite choosing manual lenses that kind of assumes the user has a clue. Now you can fit that lens and benefit from wrong exposure, automatically ! But at least you'll be able to look your neighbour with that old D90 in the eye now, eh ! Thats worth something ! No need to be embarrassed at the camera club !

This is a rude and condescending post.

Pentax themselves use the fact that there are millions of used K mount lenses on the market in their advertising. So they are already trumpeting the fact that you are trying to denigrate us with.

As to your other point, many of us, myself included, HAVE examined the usage of our equipment. That's what were talking about here, Not some new-fangled techno gizmo that promises better pictures. This is a simple mechanism that used to be standard and has now been removed. Not having to fuss with EV compensation for every different aperture would make taking photos with these lenses easier and let the user focus on the photo, not on the gear and the workarounds needed to use it.

Like I've said before, Nikon has this on their better DSLRs and I don't hear anyone bitching about being able to use old Nikkor glass on their D200.

Comparing easier use of old lenses to computer geeks boasting about technical specs is disingenuous at best.