Gonz wrote:
alex wetmore wrote:
Yes, but that assumes that film is going to be important in the future. It seems less and less important every day (at least 35mm). I would guess this is a move for a future body rather than a historical body.On Mon, 9 Aug 2004, Gonz wrote:
Bruce Dayton wrote:
I have to say that I consider it great news. Choosing to support full frame, aperture ring and on top of that, picking some primes speaks very positively. These represent to me that they are looking beyond the first time buyer and trying to provide for more serious photogs.
The aperture ring is puzzling. Does this mean that they are going to
make a digital body that supports the old aperture linkage again? I
tend to doubt if they did this to support old bodies, which are all
film. A DSLR with full backwards support would almost imply a super-D,
not a baby-D. Of course they may have also have gotten so much flak for
not making the *istD fully compatible with older lenses that they did an
about face. We've already seen them try to alleviate that with the
firmware fix that gives partial functionality back.
These aren't reduced image circle lenses, so they are also useable on Pentax film cameras. Since the MZ-S doesn't have body control of aperture it makes sense to put an aperture ring back onto the lens.
rg
So you are assuming that the sensors aren't getting larger than the current APS-sized ones?
/Henri
