On Wed, 23 May 2007 15:47:24 +0100, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > I was simply being kind and was at a loss for words. If I knew a >> camera >> > company was going out of business I certainly would not run out and >> buy >> > more >> > of the same because it will eventually stop working, likely not be >> > supported, and be worthless. >> > >> > Tom C. >> >> Let me explain it in short words. The scenario is that Hoya closes >> Pentax >> down. Like several people here, I have a lot of Pentax lenses, most of >> which will last my lifetime, unlike a camera body . The only thing that >> will prevent me from using the lenses is camera failure. >> >> If I try to sell the lenses, I won't get much for them, because nobody >> will want them. To change to a different system would cost thousands. >> >> So the sensible thing is to buy a couple more bodies, and by using them >> lightly hope to get at least 10 years use out of them, or even more. >> >> Digital camera technology is now quite mature. Improvements in picture >> quality are pretty small. Pictures I get from my *ist D are not hugely >> worse than my K10D. I do not expect that any camera produced in the >> next >> few years will be so advanced as to make either of these obsolete. >> >> So if Hoya DOES close Pentax, which I think is highly unlikely, I shall >> buy a couple more bodies. Probably a K110D and a K10D. I suspect some >> other people in my position will do the same. Whether body prices will >> actually rise, I don't know. But they won't fall as much as lenses. >> >> John >> > > I understand the logic behind it. The other view, in this theorhetical > situation, is that instead of continuing to drive down a one lane > dead-end > street in a car w/o a reverse gear, one could either go down a different > street or get a different vehicle.
If money were no object, one could choose any option. I am interested in finding the most cost-effective one. > I guess I think that it's more likely for a body to fail and become > worthless than it is for a lens to totally fail. Tom, you're nearly there. It's because bodies are more likely to fail that I would be keen to buy a couple and that way ensure that my lenses could still be used. I wouldn't buy more lenses because eventually there would be no body to use them on. That would be a waste. > Who knows what advancements could be made in digital picture technology > in 5 - 10 years? Not much, judging by how little progress there has been in the last two years. As I said, this is a technology that is now quite mature. The K10D is remarkable for its feature set and its price. It doesn't break any new ground technologically. John -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
