The aperture sensing apparatus could be redesigned to be mechanically just as elegant.
Adam Maas wrote: > Actually, its much more complex mechanically than Pentax's SR system > (although it's less complex than Sony/Minolta's). The Pentax SR system is two > plates, one of which floats on magnets and is controlled by strategically > placed electromagnets. Essentially the moving parts are the plate (which > holds a circuit board) and the cable which connects the circuit board to the > rest of the camera. That's it. It's an exercise in elegant engineering. > > -Adam > > > > J. C. O'Connell wrote: > >> Yes, its technically an assembly, not a part. >> And its way way simpler than IS, which they >> are current only asking $100 more for (retail) than >> the body without IS. Thats why I stated I >> bet that it wouldnt add more than $50 to >> the retail cost of the body and thats being >> generous to Pentax... >> JCO >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >> Mark Roberts >> Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 7:33 AM >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Subject: Re: RE: Pentax 1.8 85mm >> >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >> >> >>> So the $5 part is now a $50 part? >>> >> For the record, it's several parts, not one. The people at Pentax I've >> heard from estimate that the parts and associated additional assembly >> complexity add about $25.00-35.00 to the cost of a camera. >> >> >> > > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
