On 9/16/12 17:17, Tom C wrote:
From: Toralf Lund<[email protected]>
I don't know, personally I'm not convinced that chasing the "latest and
greatest" and focusing on higher numbers (in various specs) or a longer
list of features, is generally a good way to make products. As such, I
rather like what Pentax appears to be trying to do today, i.e. make
robust, simple and usable cameras built around the "right" technology or
technology that has perhaps matured a bit, as opposed to what's most
"advanced". If anything, I'd like to see them trimming down the feature
list even more and go further in the direction of keeping things simple...
- Toralf
Hi Toralf,
You'd admit it is good way to sell products though right? :) I don't
Quite.
It's not given that it's the best way for a company in the position
Pentax is in today, though. It's hard to beat big players at their own
game, so the best way forward when your number 4 or 5 in the market may
well be trying to be different. The focus on robustness, making the
equipment water proof etc. could be a good move in that respect.
really think Pentax is trying to build cameras around mature
technology as much as they're limited by what they can do from a
fiscal and manufacturing standpoint. Or as some have suggested,
Pentax may not be able to release a 24MP FF body until later because
sensor mfr's would rather put them in their own cameras as opposed to
sell to sensors to Pentax. It could be a procurement issue.
Possibly. Except, it has to be slightly more complex than just sensor
manufactures keeping products to themselves, of Nikon wouldn't have
them, either, right?
What you're suggesting for Pentax would be a recipe for oblivion. It's
a rare product that can sell and compete by boasting about what it
DOESN'T have/do.
It would be dumb to market it that way, of course, but there is after
all a certain appeal in being able to classify a product as simple
and/or easy to use (as a result of not having many functions), and there
are examples in the camera business on how a focus on different
qualities than a long list of features or "cutting-edge" technology can
be successful at least in a relative sense. Just look at the interest
generated by the recent Fujifilm cameras. Or the Leica Ms for that
manner. We're of course talking about a quite different market, there,
but it seems to me that to a certain extent, they sell because of the
features they don't have. Like auto-focus, for instance. The marketing
doesn't actually boast about not offering it, though.
OK, I can do w/o just about all picture modes, in
camera RAW processing and in-camera HDR. But some people just love
that.
I'd love to see someone should trying to make a camera without that
functionality, though. Maybe it wouldn't be sensible as the only option,
but if you based such a model on a different one with all those
features, the development cost should also be close to 0. As such, it
might not be such a bad idea from a business perspective, even if the
marked might be limited.
Generally, I think most of us that pursue photography as a hobby, a
passion, or professionally, enjoy having the best equipment we can
afford. That price point is different for each of us and is
constrained by any number of personal factors. There's no right/wrong.
Only what's best or attainable for us individually. For me, when the
D800 was announced it was right at that threshold that, while
expensive, it was less than half as much as it would have cost
yesterday with a D3X, and was still a huge leap forward. When I think
of it in these terms it's not that expensive.
I think I paid $1300 for the 6MP *ist D.
I'll pay $3300 for the 33MP D800E.
If using raw resolution as a single factor to compare upon, the *ist D
cost me $216/MB while the D800E is $100/MB.
Obviously there's more to it than MB, but one sees the point.
Well, I think the main point there is that the price of consumer
electronics is steadily dropping even if products are getting better. If
you wait a bit longer to buy something, you'll save a lot of money, but
you may end up waiting forever if you are really cheap, as this
development just doesn't seem to stop...
Also, I doubt I'll be buying another DSLR anytime soon. :)
I'll buy one when Pentax releases a FF camera that's otherwise the SLR
equivalent of the Fujifilm "X" cameras ;-)
- Toralf
Tom C.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
