Well, IMO it's ok if Pentax makes FAJ lenses and *ist-like bodies - because those are cheap, and most people will simply buy the cheapest SLR they can find in a store. This is not a problem, if we'll have our well-build cameras with K&M compatibility (even if they cost slightly more, like the MZ-5n), nice primes with the aperture ring etc. Even 2 similar lenses, a plastic, very cheap FAJ and a FA with enough metal and aperture ring will be OK for me.
Alex Sarbu ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joseph Tainter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "pdml" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 6:02 PM Subject: Re: On cheerleading > Jostein wrote: > > My point was simply that Pentax is unwise not to please established > users, even if it is designing a strategy for the future that is > different from its recent past. My reasoning is that established users > recommend Pentax to potential new users (I do), provided that they are > pleased with Pentax. It is a way of steering new customers to Pentax. In > other words, I think Pentax should keep k-mount compatibility and the > aperture ring, and not produce lenses that lack a distance scale - if > only for the continuing endorsement of established users. But as I've > said here before, I know little about marketing, and apparently Pentax > is reasoning differently. (I should mention that I own only two non-A > lenses, and they work just fine on my 1ps, so for me personally this is > not an issue.) > > Joe > >
