"John Edwin Mason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pal wrote:
> >My guess is that the MZ-S will sell very well the
> >first year. Then I think it will settle as a steady
> >long term seller but in relatively small
> >volumes.
>
> Part of me hopes that you're right, Pal. A larger
> part of me hopes that you're wrong and that Pentax is
> forced to drop the price into my range. Don't get me
> wrong, I like most of what I've heard about the
> camera. Just don't want to part with that much
> money.
>
> I still worry about Pentax's marketing. Retailers
> I've spoken to about the MZ-S (in Charlottesville and
> and Abby and Penn in DC) think of Pentax as a maker of
> P&S and cheap SLRs (and high quality lenses that are
> too often difficult to find). To them the LX and MX
> are ancient history. They're going to steer anyone
> with nearly a grand to spend towards Nikon and Canon.
> How is Pentax going to overcome this prejudice?
If you asked those same dealers 20 years ago, they would have told
you that there was no way LX could survive against the likes of
Nikon, Canon, and Olympus. They would have told you that K2 and KX
are ancient history and all Pentax is good for is a basic AE camera
like ME and MV. They would have told you that Nikon F3 is o so much
better for only $300 more and any real "pro" would only use a camera
that weighs a ton.
> More on marketing... Wouldn't producing a silver
> version would be a mistake? (Yes, I know, matches the
> limited lenses.) But Nikon and Canon have trained
> consumers to see silver SLRs as low end. Pro cameras,
> the thinking goes, are black, unless they're high end
> rangefinders.
Regardless of impression, I prefer silver. Pentax would do the
right thing by offering us a choice.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
