And here I think is a key item in this discussion I'd like to bring to
peoples attention. I'm not picking on Jens here, I promise. He wrote:
I am in fact a very proud owner of a *istD and a MZ-S.
The thing is, I'm a proud owner of Pentax equipment as well. No one here is
attacking anyone's purchasing decision. Keep on enjoying your Pentax
equipment. If someone's self-esteem has been injured so that they must
defend Pentax no matter what, well I'm sorry.
The discussion seems to go:
Statement: "I'm worried about Pentax and their future viability in the
market place".
The response seems to be: "I like my Pentax camera, how dare you say
anything negative about Pentax".
We're not even talking about the same thing.
Tom C.
Whenever I have some money to spend - I go for some nice glass. F. 2.8 or
better, regardless of the focal length.
Right now I'm testing a Sigma 2.8/70-200mm AP0. I'm considering a used FA
2.8/80-200mm in stead.
At first the MZ-D was predicted to have a price tag of 10.000 USD. I would
probably never get it anyway.
The people who judge, buy or order my photographs never ask what camera
brand I use.
Only the photographs are of any interst.
Jens Bladt
Arkitekt MAA
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 1. oktober 2005 23:11
Til: [email protected]
Emne: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
That pretty well sums it up for me. Good post, John.
Paul
On Oct 1, 2005, at 4:05 PM, John Forbes wrote:
> Tom,
>
> The continual negativism on this forum doesn't make it a better place,
> and it certainly doesn't HELP Pentax. What is does is to distort
> people's assessment of Pentax's true position.
>
> You wouldn't think so from some of the posts, but Pentax is a
> profitable company. It clearly went through a hard time when it was
> forced to abandon the MZ-D, and I personally think it has bounced back
> from that rather well. A company with less financial muscle, and less
> commitment to photography, would have given up then. The fact that it
> didn't speaks volumes.
>
> As the more level-headed members of this site point out, the current
> DSLR range (the D, incidentally, is still available) meets the needs
> of most people, even most PDML members. Yes, it would be nice to have
> extra bells and whistles, but most of us don't actually need them, and
> many of us wouldn't pay very much for them. That's not to deny that
> there are some photographers whose needs are clearly not well served
> by the present line-up. However, they are a small minority, and with
> luck (and a little time), the D replacement will address their
> problems.
>
> It is noteworthy that there are now very few list members left who
> have not bought a Pentax DSLR. Clearly, there must be something good
> about them.
>
> In my view the Pentax DSLRs provide a much better picture-taking
> experience than any 35mm film camera, and I expect my two D bodies to
> be active for some time to come, whatever the future of Pentax. That
> means I will continue to buy lenses.
>
> John
>
> On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 20:20:45 +0100, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> In answer to your last question, yes I've perceived that to be the
>> case sometimes, but not with the Chongwagon comment. However, it's
>> not all whining and negativism. Some of it's an ongoing analysis
>> and, yes, speculation regarding the future of the brand, and
>> therefore the wisdom of future potential 'investments'.
>>
>> I single-handedly, and others who tend to share the same views, will
>> not make those views come true. Pentax, having marketed and produced
>> in the manner they have, are responsible for their image, ranking in
>> the marketplace.
>>
>> Tom C.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> Reply-To: [email protected]
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
>>> Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 19:38:16 +0100
>>>
>>> Which is a pretty big market if you think about it, in MF terms.
>>>
>>> Why don't you post a lot more negative messages about Pentax? That
>>> way you'll make your worst fears come true.
>>>
>>> It seems to me that in life we need a certain amount of optimism.
>>> People who get things done are optimists; people who whinge and
>>> bellyache are not nice to know and tend not to amount to much.
>>>
>>> Have you noticed that the most prolific posters of pictures on this
>>> site, and the best photographers, do not as a rule jump on the
>>> Chongwagon. They just get on with life and take pictures.
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 18:33:47 +0100, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yep. I can't see the market for a 645D being too much more than
>>>> owners of a film Pentax 645 system.
>>>>
>>>> Tom C.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> Reply-To: [email protected]
>>>>> To: [email protected]
>>>>> Subject: Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax...
>>>>> Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 10:45:48 +1000
>>>>>
>>>>> On 30 Sep 2005 at 15:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > Formats are only names now. A 645D would probably be no larger
>>>>> or heavier than
>>>>> > the current Canon D1s Mark II, and Pentax has already said it's
>>>>> sensor won't be
>>>>> > true 645 dimensions. Most prosumers cameras and some pro models
>>>>> will probably
>>>>> > remain APS-C. It's all just semantics. Paul
>>>>>
>>>>> The difference is that in reality by the time the 645D comes to
>>>>> market (if at
>>>>> all) there will likely be very little advantage between a top end
>>>>> Canon DSLR
>>>>> kit and the 645D technically. And if I had to buy a new set of
>>>>> lenses (which I
>>>>> would if I had to buy a 645D to get anything remotely top end out
>>>>> of Pentax)
>>>>> I'd definitely buy into the Canon system and I can't imagine other
>>>>> people in my
>>>>> position not doing the same.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Rob Studdert
>>>>> HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
>>>>> Tel +61-2-9554-4110
>>>>> UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
>>>>> Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
>
