I only hope sometime to even hold the MZ-S.
But with reference to the UI, I must agree with Pal.
The grip shape is tiring.
The LCD is confusing. Like a Nikon N60/N70.
Came out of the "techno" era where people seemed,
for a while, to want incomprehensible gibberish as
a symbol of some sort of geekishness.
Hence I've avoided used ones.
Now, why would a company like Pentax build a camera on which they are only going to
lose money?
It's called investing in the future.
Pentax needs to prove itself again to the community that uses this grade of camera.
They did it with the LX, but didn't have the foresight to build a "system" for the
pro. So the LX just sat there and became an orphan.
Now we see the MZ-S and, I hope, forthcoming MZ-L (a non-metalic MZ-S?) and a digital
of some sort. But not at all geared toward the consumer. They seem to have the
equipment end done right. A bit of a loss in anticipation of future gains. One-half
step back, two steps forward.
What would be the next step? Have direct sales efforts place these babies into the
hands of newspapers and magazines. Give free outfits them to a few publications. And
build a suitable support system. Provide a complete solution.
The problem with many manufacturers is the approach taken to marketing/sales. It is,
for may older, traditional companies, PRODUCT centered. What has changed in the last
3 decades is the migration toward SOLUTION. When Pentax gets this figured out,
they'll quickly climb out of the rut that they dug with the "M" series of
bodies/lenses -- nice products, but an inadequate solution for the pro.
My2drachmas,
Collin
--
.
-----------------------
"Edith Keiler must die."
Spock, Star Trek, "City on the Edge of Forever", c. 1930
--
-
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 .
