I was probably thinking of the Canon Eos 1n (1994). http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/eos-1n.shtml
Came only two years after the Pentax Z1 REGARDS Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 14. januar 2006 07:03 Til: [email protected] Emne: Re: new AF system soon (when D2 arrives)? Jens, The EOS 1v was introduced a few years ago, it's a development of the EOS 3, which was introduced in 1998. You might be thinking of the 1N in the early 1990's though, which was the camera that caused so many to jump to Canon. The *istD is quite competent when you put it up against the equivalent cameras in teh semi-pro market at the time of introduction, the D100, D60 and 10D. In fact it pretty much outperforms the D60, and is a match for the other two in most areas. The D70 is a later camera, and takes advantage of the cost reduction in memory, which permits bigger buffers for less money (which argues that the DS should have at least twice as much buffer). -Adam Jens Bladt wrote: >Your comparison is not very well chosen, Pål. >Ther's only 1 pro dog photographer for every 1000 sports photographers. And >he dosn't really need the speed. > >Defining the *ist D as an entry level camera (priced at two times the price >of a D70) certainly explains why I never saw a photographer using a Pentax >DSLR for documenting a football game. >Action photographers use Canons and Canons and Canons - and perhaps a >single, lonely Nikon here and there. That's the way it's been since the EOS >1v was introduced in the eighties. What made this camera special was - AF >SPEED and FPS. Faster than most cameras. > >But it doesn't explain why an entry level camera like the D70 has >significantly faster AF and larger buffer, than the D, does it? That's an >entry level camera too, right? I do hope Pentax will offer a semi pro level >DSLR some day. Perhaps even a pro camera in the 5000-10000 USD range. Pentax >may even do this before most amateurs and a few enthusiast, using Pentaxes, >have changed brand. The pro's changed about 25 years ago. > >I don't need a lot of speed often. But if I did - I certainly would. >If I did action photography - I certainly would too. > >Let's face it - Pentax wants a share of the entry level and amateur market. >That's the largest market, which requires relatively small investments in >product development and a relatively small risk. This probably makes a lot >of sense to the share holders. And it's fine with me, but doesn't work for a >pro. The semi pro 2000 USED camera is not aimed at the pros, but is clearly >meant for expanding the current market segment, competing with other entry >level or enthusiast cameras from Nikon, Canon, Konica-Minolta, Sigma, Fuji, >Sony, Panasonic etc. I really see no signs that indicate that Pentax wants a >share of the pro market. The LX perhaps was the last attempt. The >(abandoned) MZ-D project was perhaps the last. > >Pentax haven't made a pro camera since the AF 645. (pro meaning RESOLUTION >and AF). I wonder if they ever will agian. >Regards >Jens > > >Jens Bladt >http://www.jensbladt.dk > >-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- >Fra: Pål Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sendt: 13. januar 2006 21:32 >Til: [email protected] >Emne: Re: new AF system soon (when D2 arrives)? > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >>What I'm saying is, that sports photography IS professional photography. >> >> > > >The same can be said about dog photography or any other kind of photography >imaginable because somebody somewhere certainly do it for a living. >Anyway, judging Pentax suitability for any kind of pro photography from an >entry level camera clearly not targeted at any pro is rathjer futile and >doesn't prove anything about Pentax intentions. Sure, Pentax doesn't have a >pro or semi pro DSLR at present but that doesn't mean that they never will. >I'm certain that when the promised semi pro $2000 Pentax DSLR arrives it >will be suitable for pro use. > > >Pål > > > > >
