>>> That I agree with. For Pentax to go anywhere with this digital, it >>> must be SIGNIFCANTLY cheaper than the Canon 10D. > > PJ> But I don't agree with it! I don't think pentax will be cheaper than the > Canon unless Canon deliberately would want to rip their customers off. Canon > have far larger market share and higher > PJ> volume than the Pentax. It probably also have less features and use a > simpler AF system. I cannot imagine the *ist D is going to be cheaper. > Besides, being as keen on volume that Canon is, and > PJ> the fact that every manufacturer knows that the key to profit to DSLR is > to get volume up so that it becomes a mass commodity, I'm certain Canon will > be in the forefront of "cheap" DSLR. I'm sure > PJ> they won't sit still loosing market share because someone is undercutting > them. > > >>> That is the best >>> distinction that could be made. It also is in keeping with what >>> people think of Pentax. > > PJ> But that is whats "killing" them. Having cheap customers won't get them > anywhere. What worries me is what the cheapness anticipation indicates. What > lies behind it is the belief that Pentax > PJ> aren't "worth" much, therefore they must be "cheap". This is the > undercurrent of all those net discussion of the *ist D, and I'm surprised that > people doesn't notice this. After all, theres > PJ> nothing in the *ist D specification that indicatetes that it is cheaper > than the Canon, but still people think it is in spite of the fact that hardly > anyone can compete with Canon on price. > > >>> On count 1, they have succeeded. I haven't heard anyone saying that >>> it seemed to really suck. On count 2 the jury is out. If the price >>> is ballpark of a $1000 or so, they will have a hit. People will buy >>> it - not just Pentaxians. If it is close to the Canon D10 street >>> price (200 or less) then only Pentaxians will buy it. > > PJ> And thats what I have been saying all the time. Theres nothing in the *ist > that makes it more worth than a Canon or Nikon. However, I do not at all > believe that the *ist D will be particularly > PJ> cheap or sufficiently more competitively priced than comparable > Nikon/Canon. Why should Pentax be able to offer a DSLR cheaper than Nikon and > Canon when they both are making more DSLR's and are > PJ> constantly pushing the price envelope? I don't know what this assumption > in based on. Sure the jury is still out when it comes to price but I believe > the Pentax *ist D will be priced similarly to > PJ> the Canon 10D. At least, I can't find no reason to assume otherwise, but > still people do just that. Pål
I personally don't expect the *ist D to be less expensive than the 10D. As long as it's not too much more, it will be all right. I doubt anyone would bother about an extra hundred dollars when it comes to buying the camera that's right for them. --Mike
