[Odinz]

+1 My old mechanical low-tech camera bodies can do this without a problem, Please.....De-Cripple the K-Mount!!

[Hornet]

count me in

[Old Man]

By all means, count me in on "de-cripple the K- mount"

I would also like for the flash to be used TTL and PTTL.

Thanks, Old Man

[pento57mm]

Count me in to, tired of overriding via body settings.

[insulinguy]

sign me up my pentax brethren.

[froeschle]

Update:

261 #-376 Odinz (My old mechanical low-tech camera bodies can do this without a problem, Please.....De-Cripple the K-Mount!! )
262 #-377 Hornet
263 #-378 Old Man
264 #-379 pento57mm (tired of overriding via body settings)
265 #-380 insulinguy
266 #like lectrolink

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

While the sentiment is worthy, we are barking up the wrong tree. The crippled mount has very little to do with quality image-making, and it has been strongly indicated that the electronic version is at least as accurate given the implementation of the two methods. Sure, I have many M lenses and use several of them routinely, but I can live with the stop-down problem.

However, the folks who are chiming in about the restoration of sensor-based TTL are on the right track. If you return to the sensor system in the top-of-the-line models (allowing for pTTL as well), you have a truly significant (pro level) differentiation within the Pentax system, and in comparison to other brands. Let's be honest here - Pentax has one of the worst pre-flash TTL designs and suffers repeatedly from failures. Every other pre-flash system is prone to occasional blinkies; TTL solves the problem (although Auto works fine too). The old TTL system was extremely reliable (well, not in the 1970s when the cameras routinely refused to fire if ambient light was within two stops of proper exposure - but that got much better within a few years).

The advantage here is that you can market the change with new flashes that are switchable, and indicate a modern advantage over the competitors. The disadvantage to uncrippling the K mount is it will be viewed as a backwards looking change in direction. While in some ways that is true with real TTL, the spin is a lot easier to claim that Pentax is moving forward.

[Slice Of Light]

Well, with the pics of the K-3 finally showing up, that's is not gonna happen with this release...... maybe on the future FF 'K-1' ??!!

[JimJohnson]

Well, with the pics of the K-3 finally showing up, that's is not gonna happen with this release...... maybe on the future FF 'K-1' ??!!

While I suspect you are correct, how exactly do you know this by looking at photos of a body with the lens mounted?

[nater]

I didn't know this thread existed and considered creating an online petition for this, did a google search, and then saw this thread. Maybe it would be good to open up the petition a bit more, maybe put it someplace like ipetitions? (It's what I was thinking of doing...)

iPetitions - Online petition - Free petitions

I just skimmed the thread a bit, and I'm surprised to see anyone claiming they don't want an un-crippled mount. Do these same people want to cripple the 645D mount? It's not crippled, and in no way does that hurt the 645D, and in fact I think it adds a lot of value to that body - it's one of the reasons I lust after it.

[Slice Of Light]

While I suspect you are correct, how exactly do you know this by looking at photos of a body with the lens mounted?

The leaked pictures of the K-3 without any lens mounted, don't show the mechanical stop-down coupler/indicator (at 2 o'clock)

[LSR]

Please sign me up too.

I also think bringing back TTL would be a great idea!

When people ask me why I choose Pentax over other brands, included in the answer I always say Pentax seems to care more about the mechanics of capturing an image, they don't forget the basics. The ideas mentioned in this thread, if realized, would prove my point.

[froeschle]

267 #like Kmounter (What do we want? Un-cripple the K-mount! When do we want it? NOW!)
268 #-385 nater (I [...] considered creating an online petition for this)
269 #-387 LSR (Please sign me up too.)

Well, with the pics of the K-3 finally showing up, that's is not gonna happen with this release

Yes, unfortunately .
I wonder how many cents a K-3 would have been more expensive with an aperture coupler.

I didn't know this thread existed and considered creating an online petition for this, did a google search, and then saw this thread. Maybe it would be good to open up the petition a bit more, maybe put it someplace like ipetitions? (It's what I was thinking of doing...)

I don't know whether ipetitions will be recognized more by Ricoh Japan than a dedicated international Pentax forum.

Maybe one should ask for a statement from Mr. Shigeru Wakashiro and Mr. Genichiro Takaoka.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/200075-pentax-rico...-petition.html
When will they take our feedback to heart?

[nater]

I don't know whether ipetitions will be recognized more by Ricoh Japan than a dedicated international Pentax forum.

I was more concerned with letting the most people in the world know about the petition. Pentaxforums is I'm sure just a fraction of the installed base. Gather more signatures, make a bigger statement to Pentax/Ricoh. And no reason why a broader petition couldn't include everyone here who wants to be counted.

[froeschle]

Unfortunately, the latest Pentax DSLR - the K-3 - also does not feature an aperture coupler.
So, Ricoh/Pentax executives will be asked about this issue at CP+ again.