The compatability of the *ist-D with my numerous K lenses is more than adequate for most of my needs. They have pleased me.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >From: "Christian Skofteland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >My prediction for the future of Pentax DSLRs: No 24x36 sensors and no > >aperture rings. As a matter of fact, if Pentax releases more 35mm SLRs > >they won't need aperture rings either. And I'd put money on no new lenses > >having aperture rings as well. (they may still produce and sell older > >lenses with > >the rings, but no new designs will have them). Pentax is SHOWING us the > >future. We can bury our heads in the sand and ignore it or we can open > > Pentax needs to please SOMEBODY with its cameras and lenses, or nobody > will buy them. I'd suggest that loyal pentax users who still own lenses > without A settings and cameras without AV dials would be a likely group > for Pentax to sell future cameras and lenses to. If the stuff isn't > backward compatible, why not just buy a Canon like everybody else? > > If Pentax gets it wrong and does not please somebody, they HAVE no future. > The camera market is not so monopolistic yet that the companies can push > "the future" on us willy-nilly. > > >eyes, accept it and move on. I'm holding my breath for another DSLR with > >the same basic features but higher pixel count > > I myself wonder what has taken the 9MP cameras so long to come out. > Perhaps the camera companies are at last overstretched trying to maintain > the current rate of new developments and introductions. Perhaps the real > sales are not at the SLR level but the P&S level anyway, where there IS > some increase in pixel counts. > > > and (maybe) some kind of > >in-the-body-IS. I'm not deluding myself into believing that Pentax will > >develop a line like Canon or even Nikon are and I'm certainly not > >thinking, > > I don't see a Pentax version of the D1 or EOS1 series, no. The LX was the > only Pentax camera to ever try to compete at that level. That doesn't > mean than Pentax couldn't build something more like a digital PZ-1P than > a digital ME Super and sell it for $2000 or $2500. > > >hoping, wanting a DSLR (or film body) with complete backwards > >compatibility > >to M and K lenses. It would be futile. > > Not if people bought it it wouldn't. > > DJE
