----- Original Message ----- From: "Alin Flaider" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Doug Brewer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > I'm sorry Doug, but cheerleading makes indeed no service to Pentax. > On the contrary. They need real feedback, bad or good, but > substantiated. I've praised them in the past when I had good > reasons to do so, I might do the same in the future, too bad > nowadays their interests are so divergent with mines. > > Servus, Alin > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMO the negative views on new Pentax products are just so much Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt (FUD), and Alin is a major purveyor of that FUD, by repeatedly stating categorically that Pentax will do this or won't do that when there is no basis in fact to say so. e.g. Alin predicts that ALL lenses will be FAJ, even the next 'star' lenses, even though there is no statement from Pentax, or leaked product information, or published patent documents to support this claim. IOW Alin is just spreading his own FUD around the list. Before anyone asks what's wrong with fair criticism, the answer is nothing, if it's fair. But so much of it has been either premature or plain wrong, that it appears some people actually hope for the worst. If someone says that this or that camera is entry level, then the FUDsters say "crap" as if they and no-one else are empowered to make the judgement. If we are told that this new camera is made to a price (and stripped of some features to get there) to be attractive to new customers possibly more than longtime Pentax owners, the FUDsters say "bullsh*t", without even considering that Pentax's aim could be to enlarge the ownership base, whereas selling to old customers wouldn't achieve that aim. And if told that the follow-up models will be better specified, again the FUDsters proclaim "lies!", obviously because they have planted bugs in Pentax's boardroom and know every detail of Pentax's 5 Year Plan. But that's Not Bloody Likely, they're just flapping their gums, in a keyboard kind of way, to see what comes out. Obviously I exclude from this the working pros who needed a DSLR years ago, and saw the original promise downgraded. They want the top model first, and feel cheated that the 'prosumers' get first bite of the cherry. Those who own a shirtload of pre-A lenses also get my sympathy if they bought in when Pentax crowed about compatability. They share their circumstance with the pros, i.e. their preferred camera is down the list of priorities, because Pentax sees the next generation of customers as their future rather than the present generation. Reading this list, it's easy to agree with Pentax that their future is not with the present ownership base. FWIW, I have eleven Pentax lenses of which five are M-series lenses and one is the F85/2.8 Soft, which might be crippled despite it's relatively recent manufacture. I also have two Tamron SP lenses with plain K Adaptalls, although one is a reflex so that's not an issue but I'd need to find a KA Adaptall for the 17mm. So I am affected by the mount incompatability myself. Three things lessen my concerns. Pentax has previously introduced cameras with crippled mounts, but afterwards introduced better cameras with compatable mounts. I could use the camera without its meter, which I'm perfectly comfortable in doing. And, by the time I need to buy a new or a digital Pentax SLR the problem (or Pentax) will most likely be history. So why do I believe that optimism is the better approach? Because nobody else but Pentax afficianados care whether Pentax lives or dies, and nobody else will talk up the brand. If a potential purchaser searches the internet, and surfs into PDML to get a feel for the brand, what they'll get is a bickering rabble, the loudest of who predict the demise of the marque. In that way it could well become a self-fulfilling prophecy. regards, Anthony Farr
