Well, thanks for clarifying, but I'm still not sure I'm following the
logic. Are you saying that the presence of an actual upgrade path is
a bad thing? If so, then this can be applied to any of the Big Four.
It's generally more cost-efficient to upgrade one body than to switch
systems.
If I'm reading this wrong, I apologise.
Doug
At 9:38 PM +09001/3/01, Jeff Tsai caused thus to appear:
>Sorry about that... I was writing multiple mails in a single sitting and
>must have left a thought hanging somewhere!
>
>What I meant to say was that Pentax (the company) assumes that their
>installed user base (hopefully with a large collection of bodies and lenses)
>will not readily switch to another camera brand just because they are
>introducing a high-end and high-priced body. Rather, they would probably
>assume that the additional US$1,500 (or whatever the final cost is) will
>pale in comparison to what we've spent on equipment so far so upgrading will
>be a far less painful path than switching over completely...
>
>Hope that makes sense!
>
>Cheers,
>
>Jeff
--
Douglas Forrest Brewer
Ashwood Lake Photography
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.alphoto.com
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, visit www.pdml.net
and follow the directions.
