Ralf wrote:
> > expecting it before christmas. Reports say that the MZ-S will be
> > very well specified and that Pentax apparently has gone for the most
>
> You mean, you hope...
I really don't hope. I worry that if the MZ-S moves upmarket, a possible flagship
might be in danger.
Hope is one thing but all my info says that Pentax has gone for a very comprehensive
specification list. Whats more, this is all over the place on all mailing list and
forums in Japan. Its treated as a fact. Also, people with inside info say the same
thing. This also explain the claim from Pentax engineers that this camera compete with
the EOS3 and F100 and is very feature laden, explicitly said at Photokina.
It turns out that the delay is probably only a question of a couple of months but
Pentax sales people in Japan are dissapointed because of this.
> You are saying here that there is the pure chaos at Pentax product
> management, or?
>Nevertheless, they are absolutely free to publish any
> kind of updated specs anytime. As long as they don't do, the existing
> press releases and hands on reports in magazinew are valid, at least
> much more valid than any kind of speculations. Of course, the KB-266
> prototype might be dead, it might even be that we see a MZ-3N sooner
> than any advanced Pentax, but where are the reliable infos? Actually,
> most of the time shedule you gave last year was wrong, and you are
> saying now that the Photokina specs published by Pentax are wrong
> too, so what's left then? Does the camera still exist at all?
Nope. I just think that they showed a prototype at Photokina. They said that all
published data (very few in fact - only max shutterpeed and number of AF points and
metering patterns) may change without notice and that the final specifications wasn't
finalized yet. I don't know if there has been any change to the published specs, but
as you yourself posted awhile ago, Pentax probably had several incarnations of the
MZ-S around. Now it seems they have gone for the best specified one. No wonder, since
some of the reaction was that the MZ-S was not well enough specified.
> This makes me see red. :-) Who do they think they are? The number of
> people willing to buy a $1500 Pentax should be infinitely small, with
> whatever features.
Well, considering that this cameras digital sibling is going to compete head on with
digital versions of the Contax N-1 and Canons EOS-1V Digital, and possible also a
Nikon D2, some features are definitely needed. Whats more, the digital version is
probably far more important than the MZ-S for Pentax; if its going to cost $7000 it
better have specifications to match the price. Then theres that Minolta Dynaxx
7....and as you have said yourself this camera may change whats feasible in the
$700-$1200 price brackett. It has surfaced in Japan that the Minolta Dynaxx 7 is seen
as the minimum benchmark for the MZ-S featurewise. Note that this info is pretty
speculative at this stage.
I do not think it will cost $1500 but so far every official statement regarding its
price brackett and also the rumor mill, says that this camera is expensive. I do
believe that the number of people willing to buy an expensive Pentax is just as large
as those willing to buy an upper medium class one. Pentax history is full of mid level
cameras that failed (eg. SuperA, Program A, P50, Z-1p - great cameras but they didn't
sell as expected), while the high-end products and legendary and have fan clubs (LX,
Star lenses, Limited lenses). Also, digital slr's will be high-end initially by
nature.
>Most people would have bought a $850.- MZ-S with
> the specs published so far. So where's the problem?
Is there a problem? Well, you are one of those with a problem with the specifications
published so far; eg. no real cross sensor, max shutterspedd of 1/6000, 1/180s flash
synch, no flash comp from the body, exposure comp in 1/2stops etc...
I do not know whether they have kept these features, just they they have apparently
upgraded the MZ-S significantly - this has cause a minor(?) delay. I'm all for it as
long as it makes a better camera.
>Are you sure they
> are not simply looking for excuses for slowness and backwardness? The
> price thing very likely has something to do with their sales volume,
> and that's their own fault. Somehow it seems as if they would try to
> let the customer pay the price for this now.
No. I think its like this (speculation): They showed a minimum speced MZ-S prototype
(which included a three year old AF system which Pentax people say ain't ideal) to
test the waters. The reaction wasn't totally favorable so decided to then upgrade the
thing. Or, alternatively, they put some mock-up features into the camera because the
real thing wasn't finished yet.
Still, both the shutter and the AF system might survive into the production model but
will see a camera with many features.
Pål
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
visit http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions.
