The *ist mount - the sad truth :(

Sorry Roland was out, From what I know Both the *ist and *istd can both be set to fire with K/M lenses in open aperture or meterless manual ( tho this is not confirme ). This is based on the MZ-50 which will fire in meterless manual mode

Roland Karlsson said:

Roland Karlsson said:

But I did not find the mails that discussed the *ist D
mount topics.

Click to expand...

Found the thread also

Two good mails:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg124527.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg124686.html

Roland

Click to expand...

We'll just have to wait and see. When Phil reviews the full production version, he should test it against a standard M lens to see what the issues are. If they have abandoned us, then its up to each individual to decide what to do. Since probably half of my lenses are M or K type, then I might just give up on Pentax and sell everything to someone who would enjoy the lenses with a film camera, like the ME-super or a PZ series.

Part of the Pentax appeal has been backward compatibility with their older lenses, why abandon it now, on the dawn of a new generation of Pentax bodies?

Roland Karlsson said:

Look here:

http://digilander.libero.it/aohc/pshw2003/monte.htm

It shows that the *ist uses a KAF-crippled mount
(as the entry level cameras MZ-30, MZ-50 and MZ-60.

Pentax claims that it is a KAF2 mount. But this is not
correct. The actual mount lacks the "power zoom contacts"
and the "diaphragm simulator coupling".

So - if the *istD uses the same mount as *ist, this is
a real negative surprise indeed. My collection of M lenses
is not all that useful.

As a kind of "fix", the *ist camera (according to the manual)
even refuses to take any pictures if you don't set your
lens at A setting. This super ugly "fix" can be removed by
changing the special function setting 17. But, then the
camera turns off the exposure meter (at least in manual
mode).

Ouch - why - oh why Pentax?

Roland

Click to expand...

--
Gonzomatic

P e n t a x - the whole gamut

Robert Gonzalez said:

Part of the Pentax appeal has been backward compatibility with
their older lenses, why abandon it now, on the dawn of a new
generation of Pentax bodies?

Click to expand...

But Pentax hasn't abaondoned backwards compatibility. The *ist D is compatible with manual focus lenses from 1982 and newer lenses.

Multisegment metering, P-TTL, HyperProgram modes, aperture- and shutter priority - everything works.

So, the *ist D can use 21 year old lenses without problems. If this isn't backwards compatibility, then what is?

It's just that it can't use 27 year old lenses without restrictions...

I don't really understand the fashion with M lenses. My FA 28 f/2.8 AL is a much better lens than my M 28 f/2.8. And I do prefer my FA 135 f/2.8 to the M 135 f/3.5.

Best wishes
Roland

Roland Mabo said:

But Pentax hasn't abaondoned backwards compatibility. The *ist D is
compatible with manual focus lenses from 1982 and newer lenses.

Multisegment metering, P-TTL, HyperProgram modes, aperture- and
shutter priority - everything works.

So, the *ist D can use 21 year old lenses without problems. If this
isn't backwards compatibility, then what is?

It's just that it can't use 27 year old lenses without restrictions...

Click to expand...

I think the problem is that we M lens owners do understand
why our lenses do not work fully: that Pentax have not made
a full KAF mount - they have omitted the diaphragm coupling.

In Pentax cameras (before the ist) this coupling has been there,
except for some of the cheaper ones. I can buy a brand new
film based camera with this coupling.

But when going digital - Pentax choose to base it on ist, which
lacks this coupling. It all looks so very unneccessary. If that
damned ist (teh film variant) camera never was made we could
probabaly have used our M lenses fully now.

What Pentax could do is at least tell us whether there will come
some other models with a full KAF or KAF2 mount.

Roland

Roland Mabo said:

But Pentax hasn't abaondoned backwards compatibility. The *ist D is
compatible with manual focus lenses from 1982 and newer lenses.

Click to expand...

Roland Mabo said:

I don't really understand the fashion with M lenses. My FA 28 f/2.8
AL is a much better lens than my M 28 f/2.8. And I do prefer my FA
135 f/2.8 to the M 135 f/3.5.

Click to expand...

Ronald,

This is about Customer expectation. Pentax had a hugh hobbyist populance that used and are still using the old SMC & M series lens. They were good, and some even superb, why switch if they still perform. & quite a number of them not available in A , F, and FA version either. It would be very difficult to convice a Pentax ( Film ) user that his lowly MZ-50 or MZ-6 ( less than a year old ) had such coupling for the old lens to work, and yet the flashy and pricy *ist-D do not. I know of so many Pentax user who do want to upgrade to the *ist and later the *ist-D, but put off when they realized that their hugh investment of lens simply will not work properly. After all, if their old film body still work, they might just wait for a while until Pentax hear their voice and come out with one digital body that does support the K mount in full, or spend their money in a top notch scanner.

What we old timers do look for is a system expansion based on our established equipments. Seeing the *ist-D as a quantum leap from chemistry based to digital mean. But Good lens remain good lens; and should be used. If Pentax choose to exclude these old lens users, they just choose to exclude themselves from potential buying deals. Forcing these users to switch to new Optics ( thus hugh investment ) is unfavourable action in Business sense.

That is why I say the Backward compatibility is not enough. Nikon did realize their wrongdoing and remediate themselves in the D2H

On the other hand, the lack of more choice in up to date Optics is hurting Pentax also. The *ist-D is but part of a system, and a system need many components, not just a single body and 2 or 3 DA lens.

--
Franka

The crux of the matter is that the vast majority of prime lenses on the used market are M lenses, not A or F or FA lenses. Soon after the A bodies came out, zoom lenses started to dominate the market, and relatively few prime lenses were sold. Of course, somebody who is willing to fork out $1600 or whatever for a *istD body (not me) may not be concerned about this, and will go out and buy a bunch of expensive FA primes, such as a $460 43mm FA instead of a $100 used 40mm M. Or so Pentax hopes. They are hoping that they will attract a new following, to whom they can sell their current line of lenses. They don't want them to be able to pick up a 28mm prime for $50 on eBay that they can use on this camera.

As others have pointed out, the cost of adding the aperture coupling to the camera is peanuts -- the cheap MZ-M has it. Pentax didn't leave it out to save money. They probably figured that people who are hanging on to their M lenses wouldn't be good customers for the *istD anyway.

The other problem is the ridiculous business of trying to fit lenses designed for 35mm film bodies onto a small sensor digital camera. My favorite lens for film was a 35mm f/2 M lens. The equivalent for the *istD would be a 24mm f/2, twice as heavy (405 grams), which sort of defeats the purpose of having a relatively light body. I used to think the 24mm f/2 was very expensive, but its $360 price tag seems quite modest in comparison to the *istD body.

I think prosumer EVF digital cameras such as the Minolta Dimage 7i for Sony F717 give much better value than DSLRs, with very little loss in flexibility or quality for most kinds of picture taking.

Franka T.L. said:

Roland Mabo said:

But Pentax hasn't abaondoned backwards compatibility. The *ist D is
compatible with manual focus lenses from 1982 and newer lenses.

Click to expand...

Franka T.L. said:

I don't really understand the fashion with M lenses. My FA 28 f/2.8
AL is a much better lens than my M 28 f/2.8. And I do prefer my FA
135 f/2.8 to the M 135 f/3.5.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The Sigma and tamron range of lenses have Pentax Mounts. Out of luck with Nikon or Canon though

arno said:

I'm not familiar to Pentax mounting issues but I'm wondering:
Is it possible to mount other lenses on this Pentax-body??
(perhaps Nikon? or SIGMA...I've no idea!!!!)

Regards, Arno

Roland Karlsson said:

Look here:

http://digilander.libero.it/aohc/pshw2003/monte.htm

It shows that the *ist uses a KAF-crippled mount
(as the entry level cameras MZ-30, MZ-50 and MZ-60.

Pentax claims that it is a KAF2 mount. But this is not
correct. The actual mount lacks the "power zoom contacts"
and the "diaphragm simulator coupling".

So - if the *istD uses the same mount as *ist, this is
a real negative surprise indeed. My collection of M lenses
is not all that useful.

As a kind of "fix", the *ist camera (according to the manual)
even refuses to take any pictures if you don't set your
lens at A setting. This super ugly "fix" can be removed by
changing the special function setting 17. But, then the
camera turns off the exposure meter (at least in manual
mode).

Ouch - why - oh why Pentax?

Roland

Click to expand...

--
Arno

Click to expand...

--

DCS-F707, Nikon CP 950, http://www.pbase.com/bmorris65 , http://www.usefilm.com/browse.php?mode=port&data=13628

I have been talking to Pentax Sweden.

The information I got was that Pentax see no profit
in supporting the very limited number of users that still have
working M lenses and that no new cameras will have the
diaphragm coupling.

Now - not all information you get is reliable - but the answer I
got was technically correct - so it is someone that knows
what it is all about - at least on the technical level.

On extra info was - "development will go forward and not
backward". I don't exectly know what this mean, so I leave
it to you to make your own conclusions.

Roland

If I were buying a Starist D today and did not have any prior Pentax lenses, would any of this be of consequence for me as someone new to Pentax?

Roland Karlsson said:

Look here:

http://digilander.libero.it/aohc/pshw2003/monte.htm

It shows that the *ist uses a KAF-crippled mount
(as the entry level cameras MZ-30, MZ-50 and MZ-60.

Click to expand...

--

Ulysses

Ulysses said:

If I were buying a Starist D today and did not have any prior
Pentax lenses, would any of this be of consequence for me as
someone new to Pentax?

Click to expand...

Nope, not really.

If you don't want to buy a used M lens or Power Zoom lens.
(Now they are going to get real cheap though

Roland

And what do you get with a Power Zoom lens from Pentax? I know virtually NOTHING about the Pentax lenses or their system.

Again, we're talking about "used" Power Zoom lenses, right? Current ones would be just fine?

Also, how are Pentax lens prices in comparison to Canon? And how is the range?

Roland Karlsson said:

Ulysses said:

If I were buying a Starist D today and did not have any prior
Pentax lenses, would any of this be of consequence for me as
someone new to Pentax?

Click to expand...

Nope, not really.

If you don't want to buy a used M lens or Power Zoom lens.
(Now they are going to get real cheap though

Roland

Click to expand...

--

Ulysses

Ulysses said:

And what do you get with a Power Zoom lens from Pentax? I know
virtually NOTHING about the Pentax lenses or their system.

Click to expand...

Member said:

Again, we're talking about "used" Power Zoom lenses, right? Current
ones would be just fine?

Click to expand...

Forget the power zoom lenses.
The power zoom simply adds zoom buttons on your zoom lens,
something that is not an advantage. No such lenses are made
any more.

You will be alright with istD if you have no lenses.

Member said:

Also, how are Pentax lens prices in comparison to Canon? And how is
the range?

Click to expand...

Sorry - I am not up to date - my SLR cameras (except my latest
camera body) are quite old.

Roland

Ulysses said:

If I were buying a Starist D today and did not have any prior
Pentax lenses, would any of this be of consequence for me as
someone new to Pentax?

Click to expand...

It would eliminate a large selection of used lenses that are widely available, especially primes.

alex

Its a shrewdly calculated move by Pentax. They have to overcome any bitterness that established Pentax customers will have concerning the lack of support for older lenses. Second, if the street price is really $1699, and not the MSRP, then they have to overcome newer users hesitation over dropping this much cash when they can get a 10D for $300 less these days. If they succeed, then they will sell bodies and lenses for a whole generation of new Pentax customers, if they fail, they will have missed probably the only chance they had of entering this market segment.

So in effect, they have a single suite spot: established Pentax customers with newer lenses. Doesn't leave much room for "moving forward". They would have been better off starting more conservatively and offering a full KAF2 digital body and later wooing new customers with lower price, crippled bodies with cheap zooms.

Roland Karlsson said:

I have been talking to Pentax Sweden.

The information I got was that Pentax see no profit
in supporting the very limited number of users that still have
working M lenses and that no new cameras will have the
diaphragm coupling.

Now - not all information you get is reliable - but the answer I
got was technically correct - so it is someone that knows
what it is all about - at least on the technical level.

On extra info was - "development will go forward and not
backward". I don't exectly know what this mean, so I leave
it to you to make your own conclusions.

Roland

Click to expand...

--
Gonzomatic

P e n t a x - the whole gamut

Roland Karlsson said:

I have been talking to Pentax Sweden.

The information I got was that Pentax see no profit
in supporting the very limited number of users that still have
working M lenses and that no new cameras will have the
diaphragm coupling.

Now - not all information you get is reliable - but the answer I
got was technically correct - so it is someone that knows
what it is all about - at least on the technical level.

On extra info was - "development will go forward and not
backward". I don't exectly know what this mean, so I leave
it to you to make your own conclusions.

Roland

Click to expand...

Well if they really think this way, then they must have been burying their heads in sand for the last 24 months or so. Pentax user been voicing their concern over the design of a DSLR long since Pentax announced the now defunct MZ-S based DSLR body. And one of the most voiced opinion is an absolute neccessity to support all lens right up to the original K mount spec.

All I can say is this answer from them sound more like Markleting Woo than anything. Tell you what it is. Most of the local Pentax Advocates I know of here simply sneer at this. They had been waiting for months for the *ist-D, some even ready their money for one, but all of them told me that they will not buy one now just for this one single reason. Even the one who use exclusively AF lens. You guys can draw some clue as to the negative aspect of this action yourselves.

--
Franka

Most "A" lenses and up, F, FA were made in the middle 80's and up. Pentax has and still makes some great lenses. Most people here, that you hear about have some of these great lenses made before the "A" lenses. You might see "M" or just "SMC". Pentax had to pick a spot to stop supporting older lenses. So they picked the "A" which are somewhere around twenty years old now. These "A" and up have the contacts that provide lens information to the body. "M" and older will work but no info will get sent to the body and the picture file. I myself only have a few of these older lenses. I have mostly "A" and "FAs". I think most people (new to Pentax) will be getting the newer lenses. I hope that Pentax will come up with its own version of "IS" or "VR" and most of the people will upgrade their older lenses to these and we will hear less about this in the future.

alex wetmore said:

Ulysses said:

If I were buying a Starist D today and did not have any prior
Pentax lenses, would any of this be of consequence for me as
someone new to Pentax?

Click to expand...

It would eliminate a large selection of used lenses that are widely
available, especially primes.

alex

Click to expand...

Ulysses said:

If I were buying a Starist D today and did not have any prior
Pentax lenses, would any of this be of consequence for me as
someone new to Pentax?

Click to expand...

As I understand it, the M lenses that the *ist D does not [fully] support are ones from 20 years or more ago that lack automatic aperture setting and so do not work with typical AE operation (and they certainly lack auto-focus). If I get a Penatax DSLR, my one M lens will have to be semi-retired to black and white film usage I suppose; I am not going to complain.

For comparison, all my other Pentax lenses from the 80's will still work fine; how easy is it to use a 20 year old Canon lens on a 10D?

Brenton LeMesurier said:

As I understand it, the M lenses that the *ist D does not [fully]
support are ones from 20 years or more ago that lack automatic
aperture setting and so do not work with typical AE operation (and
they certainly lack auto-focus).

Click to expand...

Yepp, that is true.

But, my lenses are mostly M, I use them without any
problems with a modern Pentax SLR. I actually like
aperture priority and even manual exposure. I find
aperture priority that you choose on the lens superior.
I also like manual focus. Manual focus and manual exposure
makes it easier to prefocus and preset exposure. In
many situations that is faster. Matrix metering and multi
pont focus does not always do the correct thing.

BJL said:

For comparison, all my other Pentax lenses from the 80's will still
work fine; how easy is it to use a 20 year old Canon lens on a 10D?

Click to expand...

I don't care. Don't have any Canon glass.

Roland

Waterman723 said:

Most "A" lenses and up, F, FA were made in the middle 80's and up.
Pentax has and still makes some great lenses. Most people here,
that you hear about have some of these great lenses made before the
"A" lenses. You might see "M" or just "SMC". Pentax had to pick a
spot to stop supporting older lenses. So they picked the "A" which
are somewhere around twenty years old now. These "A" and up have
the contacts that provide lens information to the body. "M" and
older will work but no info will get sent to the body and the
picture file. I myself only have a few of these older lenses. I
have mostly "A" and "FAs". I think most people (new to Pentax) will
be getting the newer lenses. I hope that Pentax will come up with
its own version of "IS" or "VR" and most of the people will upgrade
their older lenses to these and we will hear less about this in the
future.

Click to expand...

Hmmm ..... The *ist-D lacks the KAF2 Power Lead contact; I doubt at current state any IS or VR will be possible or even buld in AF motor ( aka EOS Ultrasonic ) , all of which will need powered elements in such new optics.

While I would want to agree with you on the MF lens issue. I simply cannot, Pentax not been updating their lens line to keep a reasonable full compliment ever since the lens turn "A" .... a lot of us are using the older SMC & M lens out of choice, but also out of neccessity. There's just no comparable "A" lens or any AF variant ( in term of focal length / aperture and quality of optics ). Until Pentax remediate themselves from this rather tight spot, it would be hard pressed for the quite large populance of Pentax MF user to be convinced. After all, its quite clear to all that simply adding that one mechnical / electronic bit to support the Aperture indexing is far easier ( and much cheaper ) than developing a Whole new lens line. Even the cheapest film SLR from Pentax had that, so there really do not exist a reason not to include it in the *ist-D.

Come to think about it, if all these Old MF lens user will need to rebuild a whole new collection of lens to go digital, then there's really little incentive to stay with Pentax. Both Nikon and Canon off that much more as a "system" goes ..... and then the not so cheap Street price of the *ist-D certainly do not help either. One of the prime objective for the *ist-D is to retain user populance and I cannot see why Pentax choose to alienize their most loyal customers ( those who had indeed wait long and hard ).

However I'm still cautiously optimistic about a further up-market/amateur body that would include one or both of these ( the power lead for future optics and the Aperture indexing link ) ..... Might be they can bring the old MZ-S based digital body back to life with the new breed of upgraded sensor.

--
Franka

About half my lenses are M so I'm a little bummed that they didn't include the option to use these lenses in the new istD. I guess I will now have to wait and see what happens with the reviews. If they don't look good, I'm seriously considering looking at other brands who have a much better selection of modern lenses (IS) and other accessories. Still waiting...and waiting... and waitng....