Originally posted by Lowell Goudge The simple fact is that backwards compatibility, such as it is, saved pentax.
+1
I agree that they should do a bit more to keep the customer base happy that saved them.
Originally posted by Lowell Goudge As a result, what they need to add, the "stuff" as you put it, has to be something that simply is not possible AT ALL without a new lens. It should not take away any further from what you can do with an older lens, in that respect, pentax, in many people's opinion have gone too far already.
I agree. It is fine to support and MTF-optimised P mode for FA and new lensers only because only these lenses provide the data. Or to only support lens correction functionality for new lenses. But they shouldn't cripple older lenses. New lenses need to be attractive on their own merit (sharpness, contrast, quickshift, SDM) but not because older lenses are disadvantaged.
Originally posted by Lowell Goudge To support older hardware any less would put them in the same boat as canon and nikon. That is not a boat I want to be in,
Same here.
Originally posted by Nass But if I were Pentax I'd make that only work with Pentax lenses, not Sigma. Better value for money for Pentax lens buyers and more reason to buy Pentax.
I don't like that strategy. Again, Pentax lenses should be preferable on their own merit, not by disadvantaging other lenses. I would not want to buy a body of any company to be basically forced to buy lenses from that company alone. That's too limiting; in the case of Pentax much more so than with Canikon.
Originally posted by Nass As in the body is only part of the consumer purchase, lenses are the rest.
Yes, and the lenses are where the money is made. But once you go for a body for whatever reason (say because you are attracted by the K-mount backward compatibility) you then gradually buy more lenses for that body which locks you into the mount. I would never had bought my Pentax lenses, if I didn't have the body for them.
Originally posted by tr13 Opening source for firmware after one or two years is a good option and I see no risks here as all of them use different sensors, processors, etc.
Good to see you post but I'm sad to hear you stopped your work on the Pentax firmware work.
I think even after two years there is still a problem for Pentax publishing firmware since they wouldn't appreciate public opinions about how certain things were done. Some parts will have to remain secret forever, I think, to protect IP.
It would be great to have a plugin architecture but I don't see that coming from Pentax.