Re: What make a camera a pro camera?

[Peter J. Alling]

There are all kinds of ways to look at a camera as a "Pro" model.  I 
think it's a Professional model if a Pro uses it.  Any good camera is 
therefor Professional.  That however invalidates a large part of 
advertising budgets so I doubt my view will be accepted any time soon, 
especially by Nikon and Canon.

Larry Cook wrote:
I was reading through some posts on one of the Pentax forums that I 
follow and ran across a remark about Pentax not making any "Pro" 
cameras. At the time I thought to myself, "OK, I'm not a pro, so what? 
I like what I have, a *istD, so what the hey?!?" Then I began thinking 
(always a problem when you aren't used to doing a thing...) about it 
and I found myself wondering, What makes a camera a "Pro" camera? Is 
it the construction? Particular features? The lenses? Accessories? The 
people that use them? The mythos associated with a camera? The price? 
The label the manufacturer applies? So, how does one distinguish a pro 
camera from a non-pro camera? The amount the camera charges for its 
services????

Just thought I would ask and it is a serious question, more or less. 
It is serious in that I am curious. It is not that serious in that 
nothing important hinges on the answer....

Larry Cook


--
I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. 
During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings 
and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime.
	--P.J. O'Rourke