I think we are agreeing here. But I am saying that I rarely use Aperture Priority, no matter what kind of lens I use. That is why the current kludge is adequate for my needs. I am not saying it wouldn't be better to have the option, just that I would almost never use that option. I realize others may be different, but this could be one big reason why many good photographers are not as frustrated by Pentax's choice here.
It is sort of like saying that Pentax doesn't have the best AF system in the world, but since I don't really push the AF and don't use it much, that is not a big problem for me. For someone like Herb, this is a big issue. So some on the list may not see mediocre AF as an issue just like I see mediocre support for K/M as not a big issue for me. So to summarize - Pentax does not offer what it could/should with K/M support. That is, they only offer HyperManual when they could have offered both HyperManual and Aperture Priority. For those who want/use aperture priority, this is a big deal. For those, like myself, who do not use Aperture Priority, but do use HyperManual heavily, the support provided is generally adequate and not something to get worked up about. Can Pentax do better? Yes, they could bring back full support of K/M lenses. Hopefully they will on a higher priced body at least giving the option of using it. If they don't, then there are a certain number of photographers that will be left out in the cold and frustrated. I will not be one of them, however. Ironically, the place Pentax is hurting much more is not in K/M support, but in AF performance (tracking, low light) and image stabilization. These two areas cause a far greater loss of sales than the K/M issue. It remains to be seen if/how they will address this problem. And yes, the cost to address the K/M issue is almost nothing compared to the AF/IS problem. -- Best regards, Bruce Friday, September 23, 2005, 10:14:17 AM, you wrote: JCOC> No Bruce, don't get me wrong. I never stated that hyper manual is JCOC> invalid, of course its better to have it than nothing with K/M JCOC> but just like PROGRAM AE is better for some things than manual JCOC> (William Robbs "most important factor") there are cases where JCOC> Manual ( and hypermanual ) are really better than PROGRAM AE for JCOC> other things. I don't think anyone, myself included suggested JCOC> that there is NEVER a place for hyper manual ( what WR calls "Automatic" JCOC> with the GB) and I called SAE ( Semi-Automatic exposure mode). JCOC> Its always better to give a smart photographer a choice of JCOC> modes so one can use the best one for the situation. That's why JCOC> I want K/M AE mode until an new lens mount precluded it because JCOC> in a lot of cases it WOULD BE the best mode to use with K/M lenses. JCOC> jco JCOC> -----Original Message----- JCOC> From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] JCOC> Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 12:05 PM JCOC> To: J. C. O'Connell JCOC> Subject: Re: Camera engineering (was Re: Rename request) JCOC> I guess it's time for me to weigh in. These whole long threads have been JCOC> about removing backward compatibility. My general opinion is that Pentax JCOC> chose to remove full support of K/M lenses. The reasons are all speculation JCOC> on our part. Personally I would have preferred to have that support, much JCOC> like a PZ-1p. And yes, I would pay a little more to have that JCOC> compatibility. JCOC> Now for my current real situation - I own 2 pre-A lenses, a K 300/4 and a K JCOC> 200/2.5. Of the two, the 200/2.5 gets used regularly. The cost to pick up JCOC> a comparable new lens is quite high and I don't anticipate doing that JCOC> anytime soon. JCOC> My general usage of camera modes is thus: I use HyperManual predominantly JCOC> with Center Weighted metering and manual focus. This means that I have set JCOC> the *istD body so that when pressing the green button, it leaves my current JCOC> aperture and just matches the shutter speed. That means that whether I use a JCOC> new FA lens, or the old K lenses, my usage of the camera is identical. It JCOC> basically involves picking my aperture, picking where I want to meter JCOC> (usually not exactly where I compose the scene) and pressing the green JCOC> button. Then I move on to compose and lastly to focus based on the JCOC> composition. JCOC> So for most practical purposes, using a K/M or FA lens doesn't really bother JCOC> me much. If I am taking advantage of automation, then I am more in a mode JCOC> of wanting to use AF, matrix metering and full program with program line JCOC> bias (can be set on the *istD to MTF, high shutter and large DOF) and JCOC> letting the automation do it's thing. In this scenario, Aperture Priority JCOC> would not be my choice. So I would be using an FA type lens in this case. JCOC> Aperture priority support of K/M lenses would not be enough in this case, JCOC> because I couldn't auto focus, I would still have to deal with setting the JCOC> aperture and I couldn't use matrix metering which would cause the metering JCOC> to be less useful when I am relying directly on the composed scene to be JCOC> proper for center weighted (backlight type issues, etc). JCOC> So in summary, even though I think it would have been nicer to have full K/M JCOC> support, the green button kludge/hyper manual method of using K/M is good JCOC> enough for me because that is how I work anyway. I wouldn't be surprised if JCOC> quite a few others feel as I do.
