> > > > Peter Alling wrote: > > I have three things to say, if simpler is better 1.) Don't use > > auto-focus don't use digital neither is simple. 2.) If you insist in > > using a camera that sets exposures that are not guestimates then you > > have one choice, the LX. Everything else is just that even your best > > digital is still a guess from a wide open test. 3.) If you think that > > they didn't have to write special software routines to keep the *ist-D > > from working with K/M and test them then you're simply naive. > > > Actually I do think that. But I've been in the software business for 23 > years and believe me, its not that they wrote special code to do > anything. They just didn't write the code to support it. Its alot > easier to test when you have less things to test. Maybe your just too > jaded.
Actually they *did* have to write one piece of code - the piece that checks to see if a pre-"A" lens is mounted, and won't trip the shutter unless the appropriate Pentax function is set. But that's one small, simple piece of code. Code to support K/M lenses would reqire significantly more code to be written. As there is no mechanical aperture sensor the only functionality that could be provided would be stop-down metering. That's not code that is needed for anything else, so it would have to be specifically written.
