Rob Studdert wrote: > I guess the very bottom line for me is that it isn't just > inconvenient, it's getting difficult and becoming limiting > having to tote and juggle two systems, plus quality film and > processing is now a significant cost. My frustration is > compounded by the fact that I'm sure that it's possible to > replace my MF system with a suitably spec'd digital body that > utilizes 35mm lenses and by the fact that at least one other > manufacturer makes such a body. Unfortunately my lens kit > with which I'm very happy isn't compatible.
This is of course a very different matter. If you really have to carry two sets of equipment most times and you have loads invested, there really isn't a cheap answer. If the processing costs are becoming restrictive, a one off cost must look attractive. Until you come to pay for it of course. That isn't amusing at all. > This has been discussed more than a few times before, Pentax > had every opportunity to offer full backwards compatibility > but elected not to, they also cried wolf. I've been loyal to > Pentax for many years and I feel they are letting me down And they could have elected on no compatibility. I can live with it and you're not happy. Fair enough! > My shots are mainly for me and I'm hard to please, much more > so than most commercial clients I expect. Fully understood - which doesn't make the problem above easier to solve. > > It's a pain Rob, but like most things in life it's a > compromise. You > > have a vast amount of talent to make the very best of what > you use and that you can't buy. > > Point granted and I do accept the compromises and I don't > want to sound like I'm whining (no comments) but it's just > difficult having to watch other manufacturers delivering > products that consistently set the standards and Pentax users > being fed little but vague promises. And then, to top it off, > having to bear the tireless supportive claims of Pentax users > who accept the status quo that insist on reinforcing to the > rest of us that Pentax are going the right way about their > business. If they were I'd be happier I guess? It is a Pentax list after all! What they have on offer and I currently own and use is certainly up to my immediate and short term future needs and what they don't offer now, they probably did once and I can acquire it second-hand. I can also live with my current film processing costs. You on the other hand pretty much know exactly what you want and how it should be achieved and film isn't part of your future. If there is one manufacturer who can meet those needs, I'd really seriously consider the change. Long term it's a winner for you. Malcolm
