Pentax is good value for the money, while Nikon or Leica would make me a poor man.
Regards, Rod. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Blakely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 9:57 PM Subject: Re: The way things might have been - WAS: Rumour mill again... > I'd be shooting Pentax. It's about the glass. > > Regards, > Bob.... > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy!" > - Benjamin Franklin > > From: "Mark D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > It was stated: > > > > "Once upon a time in the 35mm professional world, the > > Pentax Spotmatic was THE camera to have." > > > > "If Asahi had offered the K bayonet mount at least 10 > > years earlier, Pentax would still be a brand of choice > > for the professional user. Staying with the M42 mount > > was the main cause of the decline of Pentax as a pro > > camera brand." > > > > If Pentax had abandoned the M42 mount and continued to > > the the cutting edge leader in 35mm camera > > production/technology, that implies that they would > > have applied advances in autofocus, image > > stabilization, hypersonic type af motors and who knows > > what else. If this was the case, how many of you would > > be still shooting with Pentax (a majority brand)? Or > > would you be shooting Canon FD and poking jealous fun > > at Pentax snobs <G>? >
