Perhaps so. What I'm trying to say is; I'm not a pro. So I can't really afford pro photographic gear. I pay myself. The customers don't bring in enough business for me to make living from photography. I'm quite happy doing what I do - planning.
If I could afford to buy what I really wish for, I'd buy a heap (25.000 USD worth) of Canon L-lenses and a nice, fast 4.000-7000 USD EOS body tomorrow. It's not exactly rocket science to figure out, that an outfit like this would beat the sh.. out of anything Pentax ever made. Having said this, I still believe Pentax is doing a great job, providing what I need for what I am doing, at a price I can pay. Would I be a happier guy if there was an expensive model I couldn't afford? No, not really. I own photographic equipment worth 15000-20000 USD. That's about all I want to have invested in photographic equipment at the moment. I don't really care that Pentax doesn't offer a 5000-10000 USD FF body, 8 FPS, fast AF, large buffer, 14 MP, simultaneously JPEG/RAW, flash compensation etc. etc. Pentax would probably go belly up if they tryed to market a camera like this (MZ-D). I couldn't pay it anyway. I'd love to have all these things. And if I win the lottery,) I can get it nest week. No problem at all. Except it probably won't wear the Pentax logo. Believe me, I would! I know that some of you believe Pentax should have a 5000-10000 USD flag ship camera. In order to ensure a long term survival. And in order to sell more entry level cameras. Maybe so. And maybe not. Many high end camera companies are in trouble (Leica, Contax, Nikon??). Even Canon can break it's neck some day. Pentax makes (made) very good glass and ressourcefull, afforable bodies. That's all I need for now. I can't even afford to buy the 2.8/200mm, the 2.8 28-70mm or the 2.8/80-200mm or the 2.8/300mm. If I could Pentax wouldn't have to body to go with it. Pentax knows this. So, they are focusing on bringing out 3.5-5.6 lenses now. Pentax ahd a strange habit of making pro glass for prosumer bodies. A very strange strategy, is't it? But this seems to be changing now. I just hope they'll keep on going, so I can continue to use my old and new (perhaps some more Sigma, Tamron and Tokina) lenses - and some great used Pentaxes - for years to come. So, unless I win the lottery, I'll stick to Pentax as long as they offer nice, well designed products with a decent user interfase (no "picture modes" for me, thank you very much). Pentax still makes very high quality gear. I don't need a BMW or a Mercedes Benz. To me a high end Pentax is better than a plasticy Canon 300D. Toyota or a Nissan (worlds best selling car BTW) is just fine with me. Regards Jens Bladt -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Derek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 3. oktober 2005 17:58 Til: [email protected] Emne: RE: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... 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/ > > > > > > > > >
