I agree with you (I think). I like the MZ-S precisely becuase it's well made but lighter and cheaper than the f100 or EOS3, and I don't care about the fatures they left out. What I always thought was odd was that the MZ-S does have this "retro"layout and ergonomics that is fairly obvious to anyone who actually uses it for a while. I've alway felt this was a perfectly natural extenion of Pentax's older camera feel to a robocam. The PZ-1p was a complete break that followed the N/C camp and was trying to comete with them at their own game. Oddly enough, the fact that it was much cheaper seemed to have little effect.
Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/31/03 01:30PM >>> On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, Steve Desjardins wrote: > This is the problem, however. Many complain about the MZ-S precisely > because it didn't have all of the "features". I don't think that any The people who cry about flagship this and flagship that.. There's never going to be a PZ-1pII to compete with the EOS-1v or F5. If there was, no one would buy it. Why bother? "Pros" shoot Canon. You can't take it away from them, so why even bother trying? Its not about loading the camera down with features, that's not what I was trying to say.. that's a fool's game, and one Pentax will lose. WEll, will continue to lose. That's why Pentax will never be top of the heap of the DSLR pile, and why even bother giving us the same stupid camera as everyone else just with a K mount on it? That's dumb. Take advantage of your unique market spot: Make clever, retro cameras that capitalize on that K1000 workhorse attitude, but make them with the features that people DO need. Quiet. Ergonomic. A middle ground autowinder. Retro layout. Etc. If I need a digital camera, I'm buying a Canon EOS-1d. Why wouldn't I? It would be downright STUPID not to, unless I have that sizable of a lens collection. And let's be honest, there's no market there.. not many people do. If I want a robocamera that does everything at 10 fps with 1000 focus points and whatever, I'm buying a Canon or a Nikon there, too. There's no need to pursue that market. Its lost, it won;'t be reclaimed. So, you can go ahead and try and reclaim market share, or accept your niche and give us something different and give the rest of the established photo world a reason to change TO Pentax rather than FROM Pentax. > camera company could make a profit from the folks on this list No one here buys anything new. We're about the worst possible focus group you could have. > precisely because of the diversity of tastes. Remember, Pentax may not > be a major SLR player, but they make a ton o' money off the P&S market. So, keep making your PnS cameras. And your digital PnS. No reason to change that, the current PnS line and the current SLR line have no commonalities, anyway. > And they are a business, after all. Exactly... so why offer the exact same SLR and DSLR camera as anyone else when no one is going to want to change TO your system.. there's better ones already made, and being generations behind those systems, you won't catch up. -- http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com <-> photography and portfolio.
