no, you dont get it, the only reason why a M42 dslr will be produced is if there is sufficient demand for it and it alone and a profit to be made on it alone as it is. I do not believe lens sales are necessary for that situation to occur. I also dont beleive all DSLR cameras are now or/will always be "free razors" sold at cost just to sell blades (lenses). An M42 DSLR would be a speciality item specifically for people who only want to buy the new body, cost will be higher, yes, but not necessarily economically unfeasable forever which is what you are implying here. jco
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anthony Farr Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 12:41 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: 85mm f1.8 SMCT on ebay : $400+ Yes, we have no bananas. In your rush to disagree, you made my point. It matters not whether there is a viable market for an M42 DSLR, what matters is that no company wants to make it. The profit is selling DSLRs is in the OEM lenses. Companies will take a loss on cameras, knowing that they are making customers for profitable lenses. No OEM lens customers = no profit. No profit = no product. regards, Anthony Farr ----- Original Message ----- From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 4:07 PM Subject: RE: 85mm f1.8 SMCT on ebay : $400+ > What the heck are you talking about?, of course this camera will not > get produced unless its profitable to produce it, but there is a > already market need for one, its just a matter of when it will become > profitable to make one. there is no rush, these lenses are already > about 25-45 years old and still ticking, they are not going to > disappear anytime soon. > jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Anthony Farr > Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 9:14 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: 85mm f1.8 SMCT on ebay : $400+ > > > But "They" just don't want to make the camera you want, it's not in > "Their" interests. Sad for you and all the other M42 fans, but that > what big business does, looks after itself instead of the little guys. > > regards, > Anthony Farr > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 4:44 AM > Subject: RE: 85mm f1.8 SMCT on ebay : $400+ > > > > I think you are seriously overestimating the > > difficulty in producing/devloping a M42 DSLR, the only signifigant > > difference from a K100D would be a screw thread flange instead of a > > K flange and a M42 pin actuator instead of the k lens lever > > actuator. Nearly all of the remaining hardware would be the same and > > the software/firmware would be mostly deleting existing features M42 > > couldnt do. > > jco > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > > Of Cory Papenfuss > > Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 8:33 AM > > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > Subject: RE: 85mm f1.8 SMCT on ebay : $400+ > > > > > > On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > > > > > I wasnt discussing price, but if you already > > > have the lenses or want to buy high quality M42 > > > lenses, the higher cost of the body is offset > > > in the system context because the lenses are > > > much lower cost ( or no extra cost if you > > > already have them ) than brand new or recent pentax or canon or > > > nikon lenses in most cases. > > > > > > Yes, low production, high cost electronics items are "rare" but > > > still do exist. None of my audio gear for example, is mass > > > produced but I still got them. Look at full frame DSLRs or the new > > > Leica digital RF. I would not expect a M42 DSLR to be as cheap as > > > a K100D of course. > > > > > > jco > > > > > I really doubt adding another '0' to the price of a K100D would be > > able to make it a cost-effective design. Even if everybody who > > wanted one and was willing to pay for it (that'd be you and maybe 10 > > other people on > > the planet), it'd probably have to cost $20K to make back the > > engineering > > costs. > > > > It's a similar thing to aircraft avionics. What amounts to > > basically a well-built CB radio costs $2500 new. A similar model > > costs $1000 for a used one that's 25 years old. The few companies > > who > > > produce these low-volume devices charge a lot more than what they > > would if they were commodity. In some cases (like portable GPS's), > > for almost identical hardware to a consumer-grade on that costs > > 1/10th > > > the price. > > > > -Cory > > > > -- > > > > ******************************************************************** > > ** > > ** > > * > > * Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA > > * > > * Electrical Engineering > > * > > * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University > > * > > > ********************************************************************** > ** > > * > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > [email protected] > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
