Nice summary Tom. Derek
> 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/ > > > > > > > > >
