Yes, an MX with LX build quality. That's what is needed. And some new M lenses with Limited optical quality. Yes. I would have to get a job.
Ciao, Graywolf ---------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Pentax List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:03 AM Subject: New Manual, All Mechanical, Retro-Rangefinder > For those who don't follow these things, Cosina has just announced a > new, mechanical, all metal-bodied, rangefinder called the Bessa-R2. > What's also interesting about this is that there are some new lenses > available as well - nice, slow lenses based on old designs that go back > to decades past. One is a nice, slow 50/2.5. > > What is interesting about all this is how, over the last few years, CV > has added to the Voigtlander line a number of retro-designed bodies and > high-quality, inexpensive lenses, many in screw mount. > > There are now four or five bodies, a nice assortment of lenses, some > quite innovate, including a 12mm focal length. These lenses use nice > metal hoods, metal barrels, brass helicoids, and focus and feel very > nice. Some lenses are designed to be like the lenses from old Nikon, > Canon, and Contax rangefinders. Some lenses have the knurled and > serrated focusing collars like the old Super Takumar lenses. > > These cameras and lenses are making a big splash in rangefinder > circles. Leicaphiles are embracing the bodies and lenses to use with > their gear - sometimes Voigtlander lenses on Leica bodies, sometimes > Voigtlander bodies with Leica glass. > > Anyway, the point of this is not how swell CV is, but to wonder aloud > how it is that a company, who a few years ago had very little or no > brand recognition, has moved to become an innovator in this area, > creating and marketing reasonably priced products of good quality, while > companies like Pentax are busy spewing out mostly plastic, consumer junk > and mediocrity. Pentax used to be a leader, an innovator, and now, it > seems, is relegated to self-imposed second-class status. > > I would truly like to see pentax make a few bold moves - retro, advanced > engineering and design, unique optics that fill a niche - they can do > it, and I wish they would. There is no longer anything being produced > by the company that is of any interest to me, and I suppose I'm not > alone with those feelings. > > It's been said that it would cost $1000.00 if Pentax were to produce a > contemporary lens like the 50mm/1.4 Super Tak, or $1000.00 to produce a > Spotmatic quality camera. I think that's a gross, overinflated > estimate. If CV can make exceptional lenses for half that price, why > not Pentax? If CV can produce a camera to sell for half that amount, > why not Pentax? > > The sad thing is that, without more Pentax gear to move into, I'm > looking to move out of Pentax for my next purchase. It is sad, for the > years I've spent with Pentax have been many ... but now they seem to > only be producing gimmicky cameras with features that are of little or > no use to me, or many other people. I'd love it if Pentax could find a > way to make a high quality, simple, basic camera with a few good > lenses. I suspect there are enough old farts like myself who would > gladly buy 'em. > > So, what do you think? > -- > Shel Belinkoff > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ > You can't have everything. Where would you put it? > - > 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 . - 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 .
