I bought my first Pentax in 1961 or 62. Pentax has always seemed behind
the times. Yes they actually invented a lot of the neat stuff that made
SLR's better for general photography, but they often licensed those
inventions to competitors rather than using them themselves. Except for
that brief exciting period from the Spotmatic to the LX, they have
never been on the front line of the technology. Why should I expect it
to be different now. What they have always managed to do was to make a
competent affordable camera, and that does not seem to have changed a
bit with digital.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
-----------------------------------
Tom C wrote:
I never said the *ist D was functionally obsolete. I wasn't making a
case for comparing images generated from 6mp vs 8mp sensors. Actually
I was going down another line of thinking.
I was saying that many seem to express the attitude of "Oh well, this
is what we have come to expect from Pentax. They are a smaller
company. They don't make their own sensors. This makes them dependent
on other suppliers. Therefore they are slow to release new products.
Therefore they are behind the curve.". My question was, in view of
the above, "Is that not a factor to consider when making a purchasing
decision?". I think the answer to that can be nothing but 'Yes'.
It won't be the only factor to consider and it will be more heavily
weighted by some than by others.
Tom C.
From: graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 12:48:09 -0400
Not really, first the current camera is hardly functionally obsolete.
Second I doubt anyone is going to be able to tell the difference
between a 6mp and an 8mp image. Linear magnification is the important
spec and that has to double to be a really meaningful improvement
(that is 4x megapixels, for the math impaired).
I find it interesting how many people make a decision based upon
features they never have used, and probably would not use if they had
them. But they look sooooooo good on that spec sheet. Me, I don't
care how much sizzle that ad has, I want the steak to taste good; but
others seem to like the taste of paper.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
-----------------------------------
Tom C wrote:
There seems to be an ongoing defense of Pentax in regards to them
being a smaller firm, not being able to get the sensors, etc. Well
when comparing camera brands, models available, and deciding on
purchases, isn't this a relevant factor?
Tom C.
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 06:28:40 -0600
----- Original Message ----- From: "Rob Studdert"
Subject: Re: Sent My Brother to the Dark Side
I guess my question is how the heck do other manufacturers manage
to sell one
camera that's higher spec'd than a *ist D if that's all anyone
actually needs?
I don't think anyone would argue with you on that one Rob.
I guess my question is who is making APS-C or larger sensors in the
10-12 mp range that Pentax can buy from?
William Robb
