What the hell are you talking about? I am not suggesting They frankenstein a current model, I am suggesting they Design a NEW model or series of models WITH IT. And it Would be very easy to NOT supply it on basic designs That had it in there too if cost was an issue of the part But I cant see that. I could design it myself. Both Hardware and software. All it is is "add exposure compensation" Per degree(s) of rotation of the aperture ring away >From wide open. This is really simple stuff here. Cam sensing could be done a number of ways, analog or digital. jco
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 10:58 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: The JCO survey It sure as hell doesn't show. It's easy to design in. Especially on a mechanical camera. It's not easy to add later if it was left out of the initial design. Simple as that. -Adam J. C. O'Connell wrote: > Regarding your comment about electronics engineering, > I WORKED in an enginnering lab for over 20 years so > I do know what I am talking about. This is nothing > More than a simple positional sensor that is a hell > Of a lot easier than you make it out to be. $100 > Cameras had it for Christ's sake. Its really easy > With the K mount because the lens is consistantly > Aligned to the body so the sensor can be fixed to the > Body also. Its far less complex than the one in > The spotmatic F from 30 years ago and they provided > That didn't they? > JCO > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Adam Maas > Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 10:18 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: The JCO survey > > The current cameras were not designed with an Aperture simulator in > mind. The addition of new hardware, modification of the existing mirror > box and integration of the extra electronics and software costs money. > > And SR did not come 'Free' on the K100D as you claim. It costs $100 (the > > price difference between the K100D and K110D. The only difference is > SR). > > Systems integration is NOT cheap. What allows you to make cheap cameras > is that the cost is spread among many cameras, as long as production > costs are low. Note that extra mechanical features add complexity and > are less reliable (more stuff to break). > > You obviously know nothing about mechanical or electronic engineering. > Even minor changes can have major costs as you need to test the > integration. It's not just throwing a couple extra parts into the box. > > The only Pentax DSLR which could have had the aperture simulator added > easily is the *istD, which used a MZ mirror box (which was obviously > designed with an aperture simulator in mind) and reportedly had one at > some point in the design cycle. The others were not designed with this > in mind and thus would be far more costly to add the feature (That said, > > if the feature had been designed in initially, the added cost would be > much less to add it afterwords) > > > -Adam > > > > J. C. O'Connell wrote: >> OK, explain to me how it was in the K1000, a $100 >> Complete camera? >> >> Explain to me how you think it needs signifigant "R&D"? >> They did this already in film camerras, duh. >> >> What do you think it cost to develop anti-shake >> And they have thrown it in FOR FREE on the latest K100. >> >> Gimme a break, your acting like this is some incredibly >> New complex thing when its friggin childs play its so >> Simple and cheap. >> >> jco >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of >> William Robb >> Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 8:00 PM >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Subject: Re: The JCO survey >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "J. C. O'Connell" >> Subject: RE: The JCO survey >> >> >>> The aperture cam sensor would not add $100 to the final price >>> IMHO. Look at anti-shake for example, its in a $500 camera >>> And its way more complex/expensive to implement than the >>> Super simple and dirt cheap cam sensor. >> What would it cost per camera? >> Please, cost per unit and what that wold trickle down to the consumer >> as? >> Include R&D and manufacturing costs as well. >> Then tell us how many projected sales would be gained for their doing > it >> vs. the number of sales lost on price point. >> >> You seem to know things that the people who I talk to don't know. >> What are the numbers, John? >> >> William Robb >> >> >> > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
