hi, sorry but I disagree, you don't fix problems/bad parts by just removing them and the feature they enable and there OBVIOUSLY was no substantial problem with these POT sensors because pentax used them for over 30 years. They wouldn't have done that or taken 30 years to a do your "yank" fix if there was any signifigant problems associated with them... I know I have bought 25 year old like new Pentax cameras that the metering cam works like new, 25 years of aging. With regards to durability or the parts that's easily testable and can be specified on purchase...
What makes it really obvious is that this is/was a "common" part to all PK cameras and if there was any reliablity or durability problems with ANY "common" part in all cameras it would be taken very seriously indeed and would be immediately addressed and changed or redesigned not removed years ago if that was necessary... jco -----Original Message----- From: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 7:52 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: green button wars (again) You redesign if the costs are justifiable. You remove if the costs aren't. And the issue is inherent to Potentiometers. -Adam J. C. O'Connell wrote: >Is this a double post or what? >I previously posted that if a part performing a function >is is failing you find a better part >or redesign to make it work - you don't just >remove it. So your last sentence doesn't >make any sense within that context. They would have >had to removed it for some other reason, not >that is was trouble prone. Because if it >was in there to begin with then removal >with loss of the function is not a solution >to any reliability problem if there was one >in the first place. Based on the fact that >I already posted, which was they made these for over >30 years in virtually every camera body they sold, do you really think >it could have possibly still be unacceptably unreliable or trouble >prone in ALL those cameras and was never corrected or improved if >needed? If they built one today it would be better >than ever based on 30 years of experience >with them no doubt or it might even be the exact >same part as 30 years ago if they had good success >with it.... >JCO > >-----Original Message----- >From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 4:40 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: green button wars (again) > > >Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Mark Roberts wrote: >> >> >> >>>Between the mechanical linkage and the potentiometer, it also >>>introduces two more potential points of failure. >>> >>> >>How often have these failed in the past? >> >> > >I've seen several, and those are from the days when the aperture was >set from the lens, so the potentiometer contacts were moved often. If >the potentiometer is left in one position all the time, as it will be >when most or all of the lenses one owns are left on the "A" setting, >failure will be much *more* common: Potentiometers like to be swept >across their full range of motion occasionally to keep the contacts >clean. > >I hadn't thought about all this until my previous post on the subject >but I suspect this is a *major* reason why Pentax has eliminated this >part. > > > >
