Here's an interesting question. Suppose that Pentax made a brand new
K1000, metal body and all What would they have to charge for such a
beast? Could it be made much cheaper than the Nikon FMA3?
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA 24450
(540)
Or take the features of the ZX-M and put it in the K1000 metal body, now
that would be a very attractive camera to me. The ZX-M has been compared as
the K1000 replacement.
Here's an interesting question. Suppose that Pentax made a brand new
K1000, metal body and all What would they have to
It would be better to use the FM2n, since that was in production for a
long time with a price history. I would not be surprised if the price
ratio difference between the K1000 and FM/FM2n was pretty constant over
time. When the FM2n stopped being sold last year it sold for $400-$500.
The K1000
Probably not any cheaper.
At 01:18 PM 3/10/2003 -0500, you wrote:
Here's an interesting question. Suppose that Pentax made a brand new
K1000, metal body and all What would they have to charge for such a
beast? Could it be made much cheaper than the Nikon FMA3?
Steven Desjardins
Department of
I am usually a lurker on the list, but reading all the posts from everyone here on Pentax digital, I find that most people have their facts misplaced.
First of all, the market isn't goingfull digital yet and it may not be for many years. The fact is, people still want good old fashioned "prints".
Rick wrote:
Some may argue that film sales has declined over the past few years and this may
signalled the end of analog photography. This is hardly from the truth as if you look
at the recent photo industry's sales survey, film is starting to make a come back
again.
REPLY:
Here in Norway
: Glen O'Neal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 1:49 AM
Subject: RE: Pentax future: advanced and classy or cheap and shoddy? [was:
RE: Hypothetical Question]
One point to remember. We heard quite a few months ago (before Photokina)
that along with the new
Oh, just an FYI for Canadians. I cannot remember, but one member I've
discussed with on previous occasions. I bitched loudly at Pentax Canada, and
probably just from luck, they got *new* brochures for 35mm lenses. It looks
like the same old one, until you look closer and see the additional new
- Original Message -
From: Pål Jensen
Subject: Re: Pentax future: advanced and classy or cheap and
shoddy? [was: RE: Hypothetical Question]
Dan wrote:
I just looked at Pentax's lenses on BH, are there more
lenses than
they list? They show 8 pages of lenses for Nikon, 6 pages
each
the
stuff in Canada
Brad
- Original Message -
From: Alan Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 9:09 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax future: advanced and classy or cheap and shoddy? [was:
RE: Hypothetical Question]
Pentax is currently offering about 60
, 2002 10:31 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax future: advanced and classy or cheap and shoddy? [was:
RE: Hypothetical Question]
- Original Message -
From: Pål Jensen
Subject: Re: Pentax future: advanced and classy or cheap and
shoddy? [was: RE: Hypothetical Question]
Dan wrote:
I just
- Original Message -
From: Brad Dobo
Subject: Re: Pentax future: advanced and classy or cheap and
shoddy? [was: RE: Hypothetical Question]
Hey Bill, when you looked at the Canadian site, did you notice
something
odd? Nice new site, but they don't list a single flash
unit!!! Some
Pål wrote: --
Sure, but I don't think LX with AF should be
interpreted litterally; more of an AF
camera that occupies the LX place in the line-up.
Yes, that is how I have meant it.
Both Nikon and Canon sell well of
their upper level bodies. When a company like
Kyocera
Alexander wrote:
I think in the 90s the product management was even
hostile against high quality 35mm gear as they also
ditched the successor to the PZ-1p without any
replacement. Instead they kept the PZ-1p in the
product line for a IMO give away price (but
nevertheless couldn't sell
my humble opinion
Glen
-Original Message-
From: Alexander Krohe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 2:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Pentax future: advanced and classy or cheap and shoddy? [was:
RE: Hypothetical Question]
Pål wrote
And, gathering from what I read here:
Flash will not fire if the LX thinks it can do
the exposure without flash.
Sticky mirror would not have been a complaint
when the LX was released, at least, I hope not.
-Lon
Pål Jensen wrote:
Mark wrote:
It's a pity the PDML didn't exist when the LX
If I had to guess, I'd say the average USA Pentax enthusiast got the
camera and lens as a gift and uses it 3 times a year. I don't think
that fits this group.
Lon
frank theriault wrote:
Even if they do monitor us once in a while, or even all the time, I can't
believe that they put much
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:52:33 -0500, T Rittenhouse wrote:
[...] 3.2 beer [...]
We used to call that near beer. Apparently because it gets to sit
near beer on the loading dock.
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
That probably describes the average photographer in any developed country.
At 07:06 AM 12/19/2002 -0500, you wrote:
If I had to guess, I'd say the average USA Pentax enthusiast got the
camera and lens as a gift and uses it 3 times a year. I don't think
that fits this group.
Lon
frank
So is the CMOS gathering data in a similar fashion as
a CCD,but with out the CCD?One BIG digital problem with the
CCD is dust on the filter.Is this now eliminated or greatly reduced
with CMOS.
I know i will eventually have to or want to upo grade from
the 2.74 megapixel to a higher unit.Just not
See interspersed comments below
Pål wrote:--
I think at the end of it's life time the LX was 3x
as
expensive as it initially was.
Too expensive.
The desire for ultimate quality vanishes as prices
increase.
Yes, but also the fact that there are limits on how
long you can sell
So is the CMOS gathering data in a similar fashion as
a CCD,but with out the CCD?One BIG digital problem with the
CCD is dust on the filter.Is this now eliminated or greatly reduced
with CMOS.
I know i will eventually have to or want to upo grade from
the 2.74 megapixel to a higher unit.Just not
On Wednesday, December 18, 2002, at 05:05 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote:
I can assure you, that as each product is contemplated, careful
consideration is given to it's ability to make money. Consumer demand
comes from people who buy new things. So if we list all the stuff we
bought new,
Hi, Ronald,
Well, the lens changing thing is a matter of practise, maybe!
The Spotmatics are very sturdy cameras, as evidenced by the number of
people on this list who still use them! The meters tend to go on them (I
doubt that they were designed to last 30 or 40 years), but they can be
Bought new:
Pentax K2
Pentax ME (black)
Pentax ME winder
Pentax LX (three)
Pentax LX finders (most of them)
Pentax LX winder
Pentax Z-1p
Pentax MZ-S
Pentax 280T flash
Pentax 400T Flash
Pentax 500FTZ(?) flash
Pentax 18/3.5
Pentax A 24/2.8
Pentax FA Limited 31/1.8
Pentax A 35/2.8
If you can't mix and match, there is no reason to buy Pentax AF gear.
BR
From: Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
you couldn't mix and match and you couldn't use both--which would
it be?
To: Pentax List
Subject: Re: Cmos was: Hypothetical Question
So is the CMOS gathering data in a similar fashion as
a CCD,but with out the CCD?One BIG digital problem with the
CCD is dust on the filter.Is this now eliminated or greatly reduced
with CMOS.
I know i will eventually have to or want
Big surprise! The F100 just about nails all your specs. It misses the
viewfinder by 2% (96%), and I guess makes the weight (27.7 oz). The problem
with Pentax is that what Pentax users wish for, other manufacturers already
make and sell.
BR
From: Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
After all, Nikon
How about the FM10? That should fit the typical Pentax Pocketbook. Pentax
mostly sells cheap cameras, because most Pentax buyers are cheap. Pentax
figured this out years ago and then fired their market research department,
because they're cheap too.
BR
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I already use AF lenses with my MF bodies.
At 10:09 PM 12/17/2002 -0500, you wrote:
Older, metal, for sure, for their simplicity and larger viewfinders more
than anything else. To paraphrase a Harvard professor's remark about reading
new books, Whenever a new camera body comes out, I buy two old
Until they make a digi, eh Cotty?
-Original Message-
From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
I have no doubts. Metal bodied, LX and MX.
Cheers,
Cotty
Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at
http://www.macads.co.uk/
That about says it all, Paul!
keith whaley
Paul Stenquist wrote:
The older bodies, without a doubt. LX, MX, and Spotmatic F are my
favorites. Focus and exposure control are part of the fun. To leave that
up to the machine would be like taking the bus instead of driving a
sports car.
Paul
Since my usage went from an sp500 to an MV to ZX-7 to an MZ-S I'm not
really knowledgeable enough to compare. I didn't use many of the older
cameras folks here rave about. I do like the feel of the SP500 over the
ZX-7 but not the MZ-S.
My question is this: Could Pentax actually use this list
Dear Sir:
To support the upcoming Pentax DSLR release, I enclose
$50___$100 $6000__
Please send me the free T-Shirt and my PDML membership for the next year.
best,
mishka
From: Brad Dobo
Subject: Hypothetical Question taken further...
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:51:11 -0800
In theory, I prefer my manual focus cameras, especially my Spotmatics, two of
which still work, and my Non-MLU 6x7, or my SuperProgram, when I need a camera
with a motor drive, to set up on the tripod and trigger with a long cable.
My eyesight has faded a bit with age, however, so when I'm on
To support the upcoming Pentax DSLR release, I enclose
$50___$100 $6000__
Please send me the free T-Shirt and my PDML membership for the next
year.
That had better be a 14 Mp T-shirt for $6K . . .
Steven Desjardins
Department of Chemistry
Washington and Lee University
Lexington, VA
when I wrote the original
Hypothetical Question. People here wonder whether Pentax monitors this
list (they do), and whether they listen to our advice when advising Japan
about product development...I don't know whether they do that or not, but I
have to wonder if it would be productive if they did
Thing I like about the Pentax system is not having to choose ... I wouldn't
want to lose either my LX or my ZX-5n. I think I use both about equally.
? We may be too eclectic a group to be a good
source of market research. We still argue over the PZ-1p vs the MZ-S.
Many here don't even want autofocus.
This is pretty much what I was wondering about when I wrote the original
Hypothetical Question. People here wonder whether Pentax monitors
I have to agree with Steve here. Companies only survive by selling
new things. A follow on used market doesn't really make them much
money. So, if most of us are happy with older gear, Pentax would have
nothing to sell and would have to fold. They could have followed
Olympus to the grave by
I would use the camera that suits my needs.
Kids: can't cope without autofocus MZ-5
Birds - hummingbirds e.g., give me an MZ-S
Travel photo into poorer areas: take my cheapest ME or whatever
Otherwise: LX
Blowups and high quality pictures: Medium Format
As written here before - what is good
Find an old Encyclopedia Britannica published around 1890, it contains
detailed instructions on the chemical basics to make your own nitrate based
film, you will have to adopt the nitrocellulose film stock from the
explosive's section however, (well nothing's perfect I guess).
At 11:02 PM
On Wednesday, December 18, 2002, at 09:05 AM, Steve Desjardins wrote:
To support the upcoming Pentax DSLR release, I enclose
$50___$100 $6000__
Please send me the free T-Shirt and my PDML membership for the next
year.
That had better be a 14 Mp T-shirt for $6K . . .
To
Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People here wonder whether Pentax monitors this
list (they do), and whether they listen to our advice when advising Japan
about product development...I don't know whether they do that or not, but I
have to wonder if it would be productive if they did.
Now
If there was a modern Af camera that was built
according to the same quality level as the LX and that
was accordingly priced (hint: where I live the
31mm/1.8 ltd. lens is almost 4x as expensive as was
the K-series 28mm/2), and if your only option was to
buy new, what would you choose: this
Mike,
Until you got to #9, I thought you were describing the 67II (other
than AF). Ok, ok, so it's not that quiet either. Seriously, if you
pick one up and play with it, you'd think why isn't there an
equivalent 35mm body just like this for sale?
Bruce
Wednesday, December 18, 2002,
Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The PDML might be viewed in aggregate to evaluate general
perceptions and trends.
One thing I'm saying is that we may _not_ be an accurate reflection of
general perceptions and trends. We're an enthusiast group with very
non-general attitudes and tastes.
Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No matter WHAT an AF LX would look like, there would still be people who
would find fault with it, be disappointed with it, or loudly complain that
it is missing the one essential feature they wanted. Designing cameras must
be a pretty thankless task.
It's
I hope they listen now. I would buy a 6MP CCD or CMOS DSLR and would
not mind if the chip is APS sized. If they could manage a CMOS chip like
the Foveon, with some enhancements over the one used in the Sigma SD-9,
I'd be very happy. I don't need anything a lot larger than that. Keep
the price
Message-
From: Len Paris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 2:45 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Hypothetical Question
I hope they listen now. I would buy a 6MP CCD or CMOS DSLR and would
not mind if the chip is APS sized. If they could manage a CMOS chip like
1. A 98% or 100% viewfinder with good snap for easy manual focusing
I really wanted #1 (or part of) for the MZ-S, but I was told that to get
100% it was expensive, like doubling the cost. I can see why Pentax didn't
bother with it given their market. Too bad. Not sure what you mean by snap
It's a pity the PDML didn't exist when the LX was introduced. It would
have
been interesting to read the inevitable complaints.
Now that is really interesting
, 18 Dec 2002 14:56:27 -0600
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Hypothetical Question
Personally although I love Pentax gear I am considering a move to
C. I
have done a lot of research on the EOS 1Ds and am really impressed
with the
images produced by the full frame CMOS sensor as well
: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 3:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: RE: Hypothetical Question
Two thinks i like about the D1 even with the 80-200 f2.8 on it,is its
well balanced even with the weight.The Pentax DSLR would have to ,for
me,be aswell.
Also the shutterlag is that of an slr,meaning
Not anymore. He sold it and it sounds like he'll sell his 67II and be
done with film for good.
Bruce
Wednesday, December 18, 2002, 1:34:37 PM, you wrote:
GON For a very impressive review including image comparisons of the EOS D1s and
GON 35mm and 645 (buy the way he uses the Pentax 645) see
Hi, Ronald,
I keep hearing that bayonet mount is so much faster to change lenses
than screwmount, but my experience doesn't agree. I just now walked
over to my cameras, and timed a lens exchange with both bayonet and
screwmount. Under 5 seconds for each. Even if I'm off by a second or
two,
: Hypothetical Question
The do not officially monitor this list. Therefore, what you are asking
is
silly. Some of us on the list know people who work for Pentax. We know
what
they say. However, I can almost guaranty they if you post a question to
Pentax on this list, it will not be answered
Sorry, Brad,
But, I think you've got the whole marketing thing backwards (I'm saying this
from the viewpoint of someone who knows ~nothing~ about marketing, btw).
I shouldn't have to buy the latest and greatest equipment, to support my
favourite company, so they can bring out something that I
Even if they do monitor us once in a while, or even all the time, I can't
believe that they put much stock in our opinions. We're what, a couple of hundred
enthusiasts? That's a pretty small sample, and hardly representative of the
market as a whole. We don't have much influence beyond our
On 18 Dec 2002 at 14:27, Brad Dobo wrote:
So it looks to me like most won't be happy unless they release a DSLR on the
traditional LX body, make it steel and heavy, and use as much mechanical parts
as possible. A mechanical analog digital...interesting :)
A rigid chassis is just as important
On 18 Dec 2002 at 14:45, Len Paris wrote:
I hope they listen now. I would buy a 6MP CCD or CMOS DSLR and would
not mind if the chip is APS sized. If they could manage a CMOS chip like
the Foveon, with some enhancements over the one used in the Sigma SD-9,
I'd be very happy. I don't need
On 18 Dec 2002 at 16:27, David Brooks wrote:
Just not sure how the CMOS works vs the CCD.I always associated CMOS
as start up computer programing.I have seen the Canon 1D and it looks
nice and its cheaper than the Dxx series from Nikon.
Any CMOS commentsCotty?
CMOS is a far better
The do not officially monitor this list. Therefore, what you are asking is
silly. Some of us on the list know people who work for Pentax. We know what
they say. However, I can almost guaranty they if you post a question to
Pentax on this list, it will not be answered.
All companies that have
Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
CMOS is a far better option than CCD however it has only recently been
developed to a point where it would be suitable for professional photographic
applications. CCD sensors will displaced completely in the not to distant
future.
See:
: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 6:07 PM
Subject: Re: Hypothetical Question
Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
CMOS is a far better option than CCD however it has only recently been
developed to a point where it would be suitable for professional
photographic
applications. CCD sensors
Hi, Tom,
My bet is that the vast majority of Rebel users have no idea that all those big
white lenses on the sidelines of NFL football games are C lenses. They
probably bought their Rebels because Andre Agassi's mug is on the tube, trying
to tell us that he uses one (yeah, right!). That's
Cotty wrote:
If God loves me there is a full-frame digital SLR with fast imaged stablized
lenses in my future. I am betting Pentax won't have one out by then. Anyone
want to wager a beer or two on that. I like free beer!
I'll bet you a bottle of Wychwood's Hobgoblin against a tin of that
Hi,
Wednesday, December 18, 2002, 11:05:39 PM, you wrote:
I think one of Brad's points is that *many* on this list don't buy new
stuff no matter what Pentax makes. Even if they made the kind of
stuff you want, at the prices it would cost to make it, would you buy
new? Probably not. [...]
Just not sure how the CMOS works vs the CCD.I always associated CMOS
as start up computer programing.I have seen the Canon 1D and it looks
nice and its cheaper than the Dxx series from Nikon.
Any CMOS commentsCotty?
From what I gather, the CMOS uses vastly less power than a comparable
CCD.
Hi,
Wednesday, December 18, 2002, 11:02:59 PM, you wrote:
[...]
I wouldn't place too high a priority on this as a hotline to the top
Pentax brass though :-)
it's not brass anymore, it's plastic...
---
Bob
Our heads are round so that our thoughts can fly in any direction
Francis
Hey, I am the one who was trying to find a sucker to bet me.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 6:14 PM
Subject: Re: Hypothetical Question
If God
On Wednesday, December 18, 2002, at 04:40 PM, frank theriault wrote:
Even if they do monitor us once in a while, or even all the time, I
can't
believe that they put much stock in our opinions. We're what, a
couple of hundred
enthusiasts? That's a pretty small sample, and hardly
Also, I resent the implication, I drink that stuff they make over here.
Grolsh, Pilsner Urquel, and occassionally some of your english ale are my
usual choices. Though I have heard that that stuff is only for export
because you guys only drink Bud Coors nowadays.
A related anecdote:
I was
Nah, I think he bought it because some camera freak buddy said Canon's are
the best camera made. Of course, all those TV ads meant that he had already
heard of Canon. All I am saying is that the people in Pentaxes marketing
department seem to be pretty good engineers g.
Ciao,
Graywolf
Hee-hee!
It's because of these sorts of posts that we're all so glad you're back, Tom!
vbg
cheers,
frank
T Rittenhouse wrote:
snip)
All I am saying is that the people in Pentaxes marketing
department seem to be pretty good engineers g.
Ciao,
Graywolf
You must be thinking about the big manufacturers, Bud, Coors, Miller, stuff
not fit
to swill for pigs. There's lots of good Beer made in America, just not these.
At 03:26 PM 12/18/2002 -0800, you wrote:
Cotty wrote:
If God loves me there is a full-frame digital SLR with fast imaged
Glen wrote:
For a very impressive review including image comparisons of the EOS D1s and
35mm and 645 (buy the way he uses the Pentax 645) see this page below.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/1ds/1ds-field.shtml
He isn't. He is comparing his digital camera with another
Alexander wrote:
Interestingly, a majority here confesses how they
prefer manual focus and even all-manual bodies over
the new AF-bodies. In the real world however, exactly
the contrary has happened: Obviously because of a lack
of demand, most manual focus and all all-manual 35mm
SLRs
Mark wrote:
It's a pity the PDML didn't exist when the LX was introduced. It would have
been interesting to read the inevitable complaints.
I remember the compaints: it was too big and bulky, used batteries, and had useless
features like automatic mode. It was essentially a tool for family
Struthwater in the beer! That would cause a general strike and riots
where I live. You don't mess with a blokes wife, cars, sheds, dogs or
beer, although the first one is optional. G
Cheers
Shaun
T Rittenhouse wrote:
Also, I resent the implication, I drink that stuff they make over here.
Amercan beer is like making love in a canoe
It also helps that around here at least, you can't find Pentax SLR's in any of
the large discount retailers. Local Wal-Mart's for example carry a couple of
Canon Models a Nikon model and a Minolta Model, Pentax is represented by
IQZooms.
Pentax probably won't put up with Wal-Mart's extortion
A wire canoe at that!
Pål Jensen wrote:
Amercan beer is like making love in a canoe
.
--
Shaun Canning
Cultural Heritage Services
High Street, Broadford,
Victoria, 3658.
1. A 98% or 100% viewfinder with good snap for easy manual focusing
I really wanted #1 (or part of) for the MZ-S, but I was told that to get
100% it was expensive, like doubling the cost. I can see why Pentax didn't
bother with it given their market. Too bad. Not sure what you mean by
I remember those...
At 08:20 PM 12/18/2002 -0500, you wrote:
Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark wrote:
It's a pity the PDML didn't exist when the LX was introduced. It would
have
been interesting to read the inevitable complaints.
I remember the compaints: it was too big and bulky,
But the important thing to remember is that we wouldn't like the brand if they
didn't meed our needs, at least as some time weather today or in the past.
At 07:20 PM 12/18/2002 -0600, you wrote:
But the people on this is are not a couple hundred users, they are a couple
of hundred flag wavers.
when I wrote the original
Hypothetical Question. People here wonder whether Pentax monitors this
list (they do), and whether they listen to our advice when advising Japan
about product development...I don't know whether they do that or not, but I
have to wonder if it would be productive if they did
Hi Peter,
I saw and held one in Sydney at a camera store near Martin Place on
George street.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Peter Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 4:17 AM
Subject: Re: Hypothetical Question
The fact that the LX was only
and held one in Sydney at a camera store near Martin Place on
George street.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Peter Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 4:17 AM
Subject: Re: Hypothetical Question
The fact that the LX was only available in Japan made
has to be Canon
So let me ask a hypothetical question here. Asked of everyone. IF you have
to choose between EITHER the older, metal bodied, manual focus Pentax family
(Spotmatics, M series, A series, up to LX) ***OR*** the
polycarbonate-bodied, AF Pentax family (P series, ZX series, up to
MZ-S
good at being Canon, nobody else has to be Canon
So let me ask a hypothetical question here. Asked of everyone. IF you have
to choose between EITHER the older, metal bodied, manual focus Pentax family
(Spotmatics, M series, A series, up to LX) ***OR*** the
polycarbonate-bodied, AF Pentax family (P
- Original Message -
From: Mike Johnston
Subject: Hypothetical Question
So let me ask a hypothetical question here. Asked of everyone.
IF you have
to choose between EITHER the older, metal bodied, manual focus
Pentax family
(Spotmatics, M series, A series, up to LX
Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So let me ask a hypothetical question here. Asked of everyone. IF you have
to choose between EITHER the older, metal bodied, manual focus Pentax family
(Spotmatics, M series, A series, up to LX) ***OR*** the
polycarbonate-bodied, AF Pentax family
On 17 Dec 2002 at 15:30, Mike Johnston wrote:
So let me ask a hypothetical question here. Asked of everyone. IF you have
to choose between EITHER the older, metal bodied, manual focus Pentax family
(Spotmatics, M series, A series, up to LX) ***OR*** the polycarbonate-bodied, AF
Pentax family
Autofocus? We don't need no stinkin' autofocus!
Give me an LX any day
Christian Skofteland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 4:30 PM
Subject: Hypothetical Question
If Pentax
is so good at being Canon, nobody else has to be Canon
So let me ask a hypothetical question here. Asked of everyone. IF you have
to choose between EITHER the older, metal bodied, manual focus Pentax family
(Spotmatics, M series, A series, up to LX) ***OR*** the
polycarbonate-bodied, AF Pentax
, Australia
- Original Message -
From: Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 7:30 AM
Subject: Hypothetical Question
So let me ask a hypothetical question here. Asked of everyone. IF you have
to choose between EITHER the older, metal
not a
coincidence that it has won camera of the year awards after it's
introduction some 6-7 years ago.
DG
At 04:11 PM 12/17/02 -0600, you wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Mike Johnston
Subject: Hypothetical Question
So let me ask a hypothetical question here. Asked of everyone.
IF you have
- Original Message -
From: Mike Johnston So let me ask a hypothetical question here. Asked of
everyone. IF you have
to choose between EITHER the older, metal bodied, manual focus Pentax
family
(Spotmatics, M series, A series, up to LX) ***OR*** the
polycarbonate-bodied, AF Pentax family (P
Many Spotmatics have died, that's true. But, considering that they are between
27 and 38 years old, a surprising number of them are still around. And, in my
experience, the overwhelming reason that they die is that the meter goes.
Mechanical failures are not that prevalent.
Even if the
1 - 100 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
