carstenw
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: The End of Pentax? | |
snegron7 wrote:
carstenw wrote:
snegron7 wrote:None of the camera manufacturers in Japan place any value whatsoever in the history of their brand.
This is just completely incorrect, not sure why you believe this. Nikon especially is deeply proud of the history of the company, and I presume other brands are too.
I completely disagree. Nikon is a 100% forward-thinking company. They are about "innovation", not preservation. Look at how they put almost no thought whatsoever regarding backward compatibility with their Z mount. I felt that pain firsthand when none of my AF-D lenses were able to AF via Nikon's F to Z mount adapter. That was the nail in the coffin that lead me to Canon. Canon's EF to RF mount allowed FULL compatibility with older EF lenses on new RF mount bodies. And don't think Canon created that adapter solely for the benefit of their loyal customers; Canon just didn't have enough RF lenses in their lineup to make their new RF cameras appealing to potential buyers.
As for Sony, they have no history dating back to the film days.
In the end, camera manufacturers exist 100% to make a profit. Some of us naive consumers attatch sentimental value to perceived "iconic" cameras. The moment we accept that cameras were created to be only tools, and detach our artistic emotional bonds with them, the easier it will be to move on and not waste outrageous amounts of money on them.
We will just have to agree to disagree then, none of your arguments make any sense to me. Nikon has famously long-lived compatibility, and they have always tried to maintain it, right up until it was hurting their business and they had to make a new mount. Even then they produce real adapters to make older lenses work on the new camera line, as much as possible. You have an incredibly jaded outlook, for no apparent reason. AF-D is a notoriously quirky specification, with a screw-mount for focusing, which would have been expensive and complicated to support, and possibly forced the new cameras to be larger. The "current" mount, a-la EF if you want to compare to Canon, is the AF-S line, which has since the 90s.
If you really want to point fingers, Canon is the company to look at. They have broken compatibility deliberately. The fact that you have chosen to buy ancient auto-focus lenses, which were then not supported in autofocus mode when the new bodies came out, is unfortunate, but you can still use them in manual mode, which is far better than what Canon did. You could have bought an entire FD Canon system, and the following day they were unsupported on new bodies. With Nikon you had to wait almost three decades to have a similar effect. There were a couple of lenses, like the defocus lenses, which were still AF-D until recently, but the vast majority of Nikon's huge catalogue has been AF-S for over twenty years, and they are all still supported.
Btw, Sony bought Minolta when they started with DSLRs. I think they kept that mount initially, but I have no idea what support they give to older Sony and Minolta lenses with their E-Mount.
|
