Peter J. Alling wrote: > The camera buying public has to have a reason to consider Pentax and > most won't unless Pentax comes up with > a marketing strategy based on their strengths. >
I think Pentax has no hope competing with Nikon and Canon in trying to build cameras for professional photographers. What they should do is focus on Pentax's strengths. Given that the *istD, the 35mm *ist (and the MZ series before them), are very compact cameras well suited to travel and hiking they should market them as "adventure travel cameras". Most travellers are very keen on photography and, adventure travellers in particular, prefer lightweight, compact gear. Apart from being smaller than all other interchangable lens DSLRs the *istD has a further advantage in this regard in that it uses AA batteries which readily available even on the trekking circuits of Nepal. Pentax should advertise this fact - otherwise use of AAs may be seen as a disadvantage. > Pentax has to make a point of > actually advertising their un-paralleled forward > and backward compatibility. They have to offer incentives to get sales > people to actually "SELL" their cameras. When the "Baby D" is released Pentax should advertise the fact that all previous lenses are compatible and that telephotos in particular benefit from the 1.5 multiplication factor. After all, many people (or their parents) still have ME Supers and the lenses for them. If they knew that their old lenses would fit they might choose Pentax when shopping for a new camera instead of one of the "more popular" brands to "save" money. Of course, once they have bought into Pentax they will soon realise that their old wide angle lenses are not so wide anymore due to the 1.5 crop factor and will have to buy new ones. In this regard, Pentax should develop more DA lenses to better cover the wide angle end and not worry about lenses above 24mm for a while. There are plenty of existing K-mount lenses available both new and second-hand that cover 28-300mm. I think that if Pentax DSLRs were marketed as compact, rugged, quality, take anywhere cameras then they would sell well despite not having the "gee whiz bangery" of Canon and Nikon (who build huge, heavy and impractical DSLRs for the most part). Most (normal) people don't want to draw attention to themselves with bazooka-like lenses and industrial-sized cameras when taking a photo. This is part of the reason why a lot of people who used to use SLRs now use pocket-sized digital cameras. In fact, when I go anywhere with my *istD (which is a modest looking camera by SLR standards) people often ask me if I am professional photographer - something that never used to happen a decade ago when I had a Super A (Super Program). Sorry about the long ramble - as the wife's away I stayed up later than I should have so I'm not sure if I'm making any sense :-) Good night from Perth, Western Australia (where it is now 12.37am).
