A bit embrassing?

[Adam Maas]

On 3/16/08, John Francis <johnf at panix.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 08:04:24PM -0400, Mark Roberts wrote:
>  > David Savage wrote:
>  > > At 08:44 AM 17/03/2008, pnstenquist at comcast.net wrote:
>  > >> Some interesting threads came up today: In-camera autofocus vs. lens
>  > >> dedicaed autofocus; improved continuous autofocus with the new
>  > >> Pentax cameras and lenses. No much discussion followed either of
>  > >> these. So what topic does the list fixate on: Whether Macs or PCs do
>  > >> a better job of burning DVDs. Such silliness.
>  > >
>  > > LOL Soooo true.
>  > >
>  > > And I think you mean image stabilisation ;-)
>  >
>  > Har!
>  >
>  > But there *was* one SLR that did in-camera autofocus. Can you name it?
>
>
> Would that be the Contax (the one that used the same sensor as the "MZ-D") ?
>

Right brand but not even the same mount. The Contax N series, which
included the Contax N Digital, used a very EOS-like setup. In-lens AF
motors, electronicly controlled apertures, with in-body AF sensor. The
Contax 645 used the same setup and thus C645 lenses worked fully on
Contax N 35mm bodies.

The older Contax/Yashica mount AX was the camera in question.
-- 
M. Adam Maas
http://www.mawz.ca
Explorations of the City Around Us.