Mike Johnston wrote: > > > First, it seems that Canon (and perhaps Nikon) will launch a very > > aggressively priced DSLR > > You can bet on that. > > > Second, the early demise of D60 places a question mark over general > > manufacturers support for DSLR. People will think twice before > > buying a relatively expensive product that gets obsolete so quickly.
I'm continually amazed at people's use ~ and perception ~ of the word "obsolete." It seems they think of anything called 'obsolete' as just next to worthless. Last week, before the introduction of the new super-thing, what they had or hankered for was top of the line, and WELL worth having! Now, in a week or less, it's relegated to the rubbish pile because some ad man called it obsolete. How absolutely absurd! If it was very good last week, it's just as good this week, and will probably be just as good next year, and maybe 10 years from now if you take care of it... Most of my collection of Pentax bodies, and lenses too for that matter, could be considered obsolete by someone, just for age alone! In fact, ONLY because of age. But I'd put the raw quality of my best negatives up against those produced by any one-hour-new Nikon, Canon or whatever, and unless you _knew_ what took it, you'd find it impossible to tell the body was 50 years old, and the lens 35 years old. That, my friends is not obsolescence. It's attitude and directed mindset... I love my 'obsolete' cameras! keith whaley > The D60 isn't exactly "obsolete." It's going to be replaced, probably at > PMA, by two separate cameras, and Canon simply underestimated demand for it > and sold out of the production run far sooner than they thought they would. > Since the production lines were already devoted to the new cameras, another > run of the D60 was not feasible. But the early "demise" of the D60 in no way > indicates a lack of support for it--rather, it indicates its overwhelming > popularity and far stronger than expected sales. > > --Mike
