Hi John, on 24 Aug 03 you wrote in pentax.list:
>> I'm not sure. The 300D is really a poor rebel. You can't>choose the >> metering modes as you want, you can't stay on a focus point frame >> after frame without (cumbersomely) rechoosing the point etc. >The *very* low price of the EOS 300D and the fact that you >get a similar number of pixels as the EOS 10D, Nikon D100 >and Fuji Finepix S2 for so much less money means that it >will be the consumer DSLR of choice this Christmas, just >when we thought that Pentax had claimed the lead in consumer >DSLRs with the *ist D. Yes, the 300D will obviously sell better than the 10D, D100, S2 or *istD. But I never saw the *istD as a cheap consumer DSLR that would sell in larger numbers than other comparable products. I'm quite sure that Pentax will sell as many *istD as they can produce - and that is the optimal situation for a manufacturer. The 300D is simply another class of DSLR - many people will buy without knowing its strengths and weaknesses. Some will buy it to get a cheap DSLR, others in order to have a status symbol. Many won't care about the cameras features. The *istD is another class - it is a tool for semi-pros. This class has its own customers and they will still buy these more expensive cameras because of their benefits: more (manual) features and better materials. If this class wouldn't exist, then Canon wouldn't sell a 300D and a 10D. >In an instant, the EOS 300D has redefined the digital SLR >and moved it firmly into the consumer arena, and nothing >will ever be the same. Yes, Canon has opened a new market segment - the consumer DSLR. >History will judge the announcement of the 300D to have been a turning >point in the world of imaging, and the *ist D will be just another >Pentax model -although a worthy one. Pentax has choosen to play in another arena - the semi-pro DSLRs. I'm quite sure that all surviving DSLR manufacturers will offer a range of DSLRs in the (near) future: consumer, semi-pro, pro. Simply transfer the analog product range to the digital arena. This is a inevitable development and I don't think that Canon did a really revoultionary thing - they were the first, simply and only. >Imaging? You know, that's the thing we used to call "photography". Photo-what? Ah, I remember... that were those cameras with that strange spool-Compact-Flash (SCF) in the back, weren't they? ;-) Cheers, Heiko
