There are some things important to consider before we start opinionating the digital SLR market..
> Their comment: "Despite the rumors, we fear that > Pentax, Contax and > others distanced from Canon and Nikon and lack the > means to > position themselves on the digital SLR market. > Even if an > exceptional camera arrives, there will still be > the problem of > lenses and accessories availability." > Consider this: Who is likely to buy a DSLR? Your average mom and dad with a K1000 or a MZ-60 or MZ-6? Hardly I think.. And what are the benefits to a common individual owning a DSLR that are not already being addressed by their 35mm film siblings? And what market is a DSLR trying to satisfy? So far, I have not seen or heard a convincing case that everyone should own a DSLR.. And if that's the case, what's the hurry to rush into a DSLR market with only a handful of potential buyers? > Among the other trends and rumors they comment, > two may impact on > Pentax decision to market at all a DSLR this year > - in my opinion. > First, it seems that Canon (and perhaps Nikon) > will launch a very > aggressively priced DSLR that Pentax may not be > able to match. There is no doubt that everyone wants to market a DSLR priced for a specific consumer price point stopping Pentax on their tracks? Hardly.. Canon and Nikon were OEMing some of their point and shoot cameras at aggressive prices, while Pentax made most of their own and still are able to compete gracefully. That's not bad... Second of all.. What terms as an aggressive pricing? To price a product worth less of its value is suicide. Remember, once you price a product, the price sticks forever. Price doesn't usually go up - they go down, but warranty expenses can go up. And they do because, when the model stops being produced, parts stop being mass produced. When a handful of parts are needed to be produced to address warranty issues, prices for these parts usually go up higher. > 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. Again.. It all comes down to warranty or future repairs.. People here seemed to think that DSLR will never break. They will never need servicing.. Hence, there is no need for Canon and Nikon or even Pentax to stock parts for the older models.. Right? Unfortunately, DSLR or any digitals fail just like the analog 35mm camera. Everybody love to boast they are making money on digitals, and yet few would admit to loosing money because of warranty repair expenses and stocking of obsolete parts for the required 7 years in some states and countries. The expense of stocking these parts that may never get used is again money. These parts don't earn interest in the bank. They only collect dust if they are not used. But, companies are required to stock serviceable parts regardless of the model's age. Do you upset your current customer by telling him or her that their Canon D60's CCD block is no longer available even after only 2 years out of warranty? Certainly not.. Otherwise, you'll get a very very upset and fuming customer! Therefore, an obsolete product is a product that does not have any factory serviceable parts.. As long as the product is serviceable, it is not obsolete. By the way, digital parts are very to extremely expensive. Most makers will just advise their clients to simply upgrade to the next best available model, if their cameras were not fixable. > Pentax will have to do even more in this regard, > by presenting an > upgrade path in a complete system. One may wonder > if they actually > have the resources... It is actually "cheaper" for Pentax and also for everyone else in the camera business to provide an upgrade path for an existing or older system technology. Rick.. __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
