My apologies. I retract my statement regarding the pricing as I missed the "and" from Pat's original email.
If this is the case - the cost of the Pentax should be adequately competitive. I'll await it's arrival and see how it fares against the Canons and Nikons. Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 9:55 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: *ist-D Canadian price > > > I know you are required, as a member of the Canon Believers, to > disparage all things Pentax, but you missed the point. You compared the > price of the Canon body to the Pentax body AND LENS, then complained > that the Pentax body cost more than the Canon body. I was merely > curious about the price of the Canon AND LENS. If you want to compare > prices, then compare prices on similar deals. > > Doug > > On Tuesday, July 29, 2003, at 08:49 PM, David Chang-Sang wrote: > > > A Canon L 16-35 lens is about $1300 USD. > > That's 2.8 throughout. > > Compare the quality to anything close to what Pentax offers. > > The closest item is a 17-28 3.5-4.5 zoom - which is $435 USD - and > > slower > > and not as wide a range. > > Or if you want to compare a similar "pro" Pentax lens, the closest > > they can > > get is 20-35 F4 which is $475 USD - still slower by a full stop and > > not as > > wide an angle of view. > > > > Banter back and forth as you will, but having seen the quality images > > that > > the L lenses can produce, you're not going to come close with the > > Pentax > > range until Pentax can release a "limited" zoom lens series. > > > > For everyday photos and if you don't need to pursue "available light" > > images, then I'm sure the Pentax lenses will be just fine. > > > > Cheers, > > Dave > > >
