> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Dear Mr Pentax : >)
>
> Are you saying that Nikon make two different 80-200 f2.8 lenses?
>
> YES
> AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8D IF-ED
> AF 80-200mm f/2.8D ED
>
> And before responding negatively read Pals e-mail below he summed up what I was
> trying to say. Instead the few e-mails that I sent in reference to a slight update 
>on the
> MZS all I got was negative vibes on how slrs are dead and the digital revolution is 
>here.

> I don't really care if digital is here or not what I was on about was a lack of 
>commitment

> from Pentax - period.

----
So you mean that if a company keeps the old lens for a period, while making a new lens 
- then this company shows commitment? Well, Pentax has done this for years. Just look 
at the F and FA serie. When they decided to skip true support for power zoom in the 
new bodies, they still had the FA 70-200
f/4-5.6, FA 28-105 f/4-5.6, FA 100-300 f/4-5.6 etc. while they were marketing new 
replacements without power zoom. Like the F/FA 80-200 f/4.7-5.6, FA 28-105 f/4-5.6 
(IF) and FA 28-105 f/3.2-4.5 AL (IF), F100-300 f/4-5.6 - FA 80-320 f/4-5.6. So I don't 
see your point here. With your logic, Pentax
must be showing more commitment than Nikon because they have three 28-105's 
available...  One very old, one quite old and one new. And the oldie FA 70-200 f/4-5.6 
can still be bought, despite the fact that the replacement - the 80-200 f/4.7-5.6 
already has been updated once. (shifted from F to FA
and got a new outer design).
   You say that Pentax does not show commitment just because they haven't updated the 
80-200 f/2.8. That's a bit loose grounds... If the Limited range wasn't showing 
commitment, then what is? It's quite fantastic that Pentax has three high-performance 
lenses that's very close in focal length to
other high-performance Pentax lenses. FA* 85 f/1.4 and the FA 77 Limited, the FA 35 
f/2.0 and 50 f/1.4 - and the FA 43 Limited, the FA 35 f/2.0 and FA 28 f/2.8 and the FA 
31 Limited. All are excellent performers. You don't have this choice with other 
makers. The Limited range is daring, brave and
fantastic. And shows commitment. Not only to new users, but also old users.
   If you don't like the FA 80-200 f/2.8, then don't buy it. You have the choice. You 
can buy an excellent Tokina instead, or a really good Sigma. No one is forcing you to 
buy the Pentax, so why are you so upset? Yes, the 80-200 is an expensive lens. We can 
write long mails about Nikon not showing
commitment because their 28-70 f/2.8 are more expensive than Pentax, and we can write 
the same about Canon or Minolta. We can write long mails about Canon not showing 
commitment because Canon 50 f/1.4 is more expensive than Pentax one, and we can write 
the same about Minolta or Nikon. Quite
meaningsless I say. As P�l once wrote - it evens out. Sometimes Pentax is more 
expensive, often Pentax is less expensive. It evens out.
   It's quite likely that the FA Star serie is going to be updated soon, now what 
Pentax has released new FA lenses (24-90, 28-105, 28-90) and one Limited - it's time 
to concentrate on the FA Star serie. Time will tell what Pentax is up to. When the MZ 
became a success, Pentax took the decision to
invest more money in R&D for new lenses. This is great news. But in order to support 
the success of the MZ-line, Pentax had to concentrate on the FA serie - simply because 
that the userbase of the MZ serie demanded more FA lenses. FA Star serie are an 
exclusive serie of lenses, reachable only to
the fortunate few. Few of the fortunate few has bought a MZ body. This changes with 
the MZ-S body. I'm sure that we will see new updates in the FA Star serie in the near 
future. At least for the zoom lenses. Quite silly having power zoom when no one of the 
current bodies supports it fully.

Best regards,
Roland
-
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 .

Reply via email to