> >When you can buy a 5MP camera > >for less that $2KUS, you aren't going to sell many 6MP cameras for $7KUS. > >If Phillips drops the price on the 6MP CCD, I wouldn't be surprised to > learn > >that the MZ-D (perhaps with a label) is on the schedule again. I'd pay > $2KUS > >for a nice 5MP Pentax digital body. I think there's a market for one. >
I wonder if the best solution for the moment is run with a smaller sensor and produce a "digital only" k-mount wide angle (or two) with reduced coverage. The best analogy I can think is of using an 8x10 camera with a 4x5 reducing back and a 4x5 lens. Neither the lens or the sensor (film) cares that the body is capable of greater coverage. So maybe your 50f1.4 becomes a 75f1.4 and your 77f1.8 becomes a 115f1.8 (using a 1.5x multiplier as an example) and you buy the appropriate "digital" lens(es) to cover the equivalent of 20, 24, 28 & 35, or a zoom that does the lot. I'm sure the lens or lenses would look funny with a big bayonet mount on a small lens body, but so long as it worked who cares? It would just be the opposite of a 645->K or 67->K converter. Th only problem is that Pentax would then have to stick with the same size sensor, or bring out yet more lenses. I wonder what size sensor is equivalent to the Auto 110 ? :-) Paul Ewins Melbourne, Australia - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
