Simply logic would dictate that the more K/M lenses you own The more damage is done by not having full support of them. A single $5 part missing in the body could cause lose of functions To THOUSANDS of $$$ worth of lenses. That's the really stupid Economics of it all. jco
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shel Belinkoff Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 9:46 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: RE: K1D aperature simulator survey, part Deaux Why three? Why not one, or two? Define good? Are you now being elitist? Which K/M lenses that, if owned, should preclude someone from commenting here. Shel > [Original Message] > From: J. C. O'Connell > IMHO, anyone who doesn't have at least more than a few ( say 3? ) > K/M lenses, especially good ones, shouldn't even be commenting > On the matter. Of course you wouldn't care if you don't have > A signifigant number of lenses losing key functions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
