Re: Poor FA* lens sales

[Doug Brewer]

Mark Erickson wrote:
Here are my reasons why FA* lenses might have been poor.  First off, the 
FA* lenses were intended to hit "professional grade" specs such as the 
F2.8 28-70 and 80-200 zooms, big fast telephotos, etc.  Pentax never 
shipped a body that matched them and met similar "professional grade" 
specs.  Their top body was the (P)Z-1p, which did not match the EOS-1 or 
F-4.  When the EOS-1 was replaced with the EOS-1n and later the EOS-1v 
and the F-4 was replaced with the F-5, Pentax had no answer.  Canon and 
Nikon also added IS/VR and USM/AFS features to their lenses to improve 
their performance.  In addition, Canon and Nikon provide professional 
level services at, for example, sporting events.  The result is that 
Canon and Nikon are viewed as having "professional grade systems" while 
Pentax does not.
Regarding total sales, I have to believe that most "professional grade" 
lenses  are sold to pros, "wanna-be" pros, and rich folk who want to 
look like pros.  Compared to their numbers, how many dedicated Pentax 
enthusiasts are there with enough money to buy FA* glass?  My guess is 
not many.
--Mark


Using a 1.5 multiplication factor for the digital sensor, a 50-135/2.8 
works out to be the 35mm equivalent of 75-202.5/2.8, and a 16-50/2.8 
works out to be equivalent to a 24-75/2.8, so rather than conclude that 
the "professional grade" fast zooms are being discontinued, it looks 
like they are being replaced in the line-up.