Bruce wrote: > My personal opinion is that DSLR sales will be just as BRAND driven as > film SLR sales. It is the system and marketing which makes the > difference. On both counts Canon and Nikon have Pentax beat. They > are going to have to come up with a nice alternative to make any > inroads. I think that price is one of those areas. $2000 for a > camera body is still pretty steep for most of us.
I believe you're right but not entirely convinced for the following reasons: 1. Digital sales and image will probably be sensor quality driven. Theres no guarantee that those with the strongest image from film photography will be the same who wins out in digital. Interestingly, the image for 35mm slr has been driven by the photo journalist usage. However, as photo journalist most likely will never be the main users of high resolution digital, as thir priorities are elsewhere, their benchmark status may be reduced as I again suspect that pure image quality will be the image driving force for digital. 2. The design and coolness factor. Digital is very much a novel gizmo at present and as such sales may be driven somewhat by cool design and style. Style should not be underestimated as image builder as digital cameras is very much a "lifestyle" product at present. 3. The current lenspool will have less impact than most think, except initially. Most camera manufacturers are of the opinion that the usage of older lenses is basically just a marketing trap and that newer, dedicated lenses are needed anyway sooner or later in order to take full advantage of digital. We cannot even be sure at this stage what standards emerge. Also, many DSLR buyers will be first time slr buyers and hence don't own lenses the camera needs to fit. Lets not forget that most slr owners owns only a couple of zoom lenses anyway, so buying another brand of DSLR isn't such a big deal. Nothing of the above need materialize but the playing field is changing and how things settles is anybodies guess. P�l
