Peter Alling wrote: The problem is that most people aren't particularly rational, (and Pentax hasn't the wit to market and advertise it's advantages).
In ancient times Pentax made a "Pentax Calender" showing remarkably excellent photographs. Made from 6x7 negs, I suppose. Pentax really should consider doing these again. They worked for me, as well as a lot of people, buying Spotmatics. JEns Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Peter J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 1. juli 2004 17:44 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Selling Pentax 35mm gear (WAS RE: Beautiful SF1n kit, Voigtlander Canon only wins in image quality if you're looking for over sharpened Kodak Max 400 type output. Having played with both Canon and Pentax DSLRs in the same price range I can't objectively say that Canon has any obvious advantage over Pentax in focus speed, (Pentax is noisier though, that might affect peoples perceptions). Canon has the advantage of IS/USM where as Pentax has unmatched backward compatibility. If you don't have bottomless pockets the latter should mean more to the advanced amateur than IS/USM which most people buying in this segment probably can't afford. Unless you need IS/USM the logical choice should be Pentax. The problem is that most people aren't particularly rational, (and Pentax hasn't the wit to market and advertise it's advantages). Jens Bladt wrote: >Perhaps so. >But it seems to me Pentax can't really compete in the enthuisast segment >either. Canon 10D vs. Pentax *ist D. Same price range, same kind of buyers. >Canon winns this segment as well and has faster AF speed and better image >quality, doesn't it? >Regards > >Jens Bladt >mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt > > >-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- >Fra: Alan Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sendt: 1. juli 2004 08:01 >Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Emne: RE: Re:Selling Pentax 35mm gear (WAS RE: Beautiful SF1n kit, >Voigtlander > > >I think you misinterpreted my message. As technologies have evolved, even >cheap consumer products can be sophisticated, just built cheaply (cut >corners you can say). No doubt Pentax shows no sign of being able to compete >with the very top end sector like 1v/1D etc. However, Pentax still have the >chance to make a stand on the next sector down, EOS3/F100 level (digital >equivalence of course now). That does not mean they are not technological >sophisticated, just not the most high end products which most consumers do >not buy. > >Alan Chan >http://www.pbase.com/wlachan > > > >>I hear that what P�l and Alan Chan are saying is that Pentax is not likely >>to be able to compete/survive in making high-end camera bodies/pro-bodies. >>highThat is bodies above middle of the road performance. This could very >>well mean Pentax will not survive as a camera maker. >> >>Why? >>Because today good cameras are based on very sophisticated technology - >>AF-systems, Data Processing, Imaging-/Sensor Technology - as well as high >>quality lens design/lens making. Pentax may survive as a lens maker - if it >>can find corporate lens buyers. As a camera maker, Pentax may survive in >>P&S >>market - not in the high-end camera market. Mediocre does not do the trick >>anymore. Perhaps history has already proven this? >> >> > >_________________________________________________________________ >Add photos to your e-mail with MSN Premium. Get 2 months FREE* >http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=ht t >p://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines > > > > > >
