On Jul 2, 2013, at 2:53 PM, Tom C <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 7/2/2013 11:52 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: >>> On Jul 2, 2013, at 11:42 AM, Zos Xavius <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> :( >>>> >>>> So ricoh absorbs pentax and reduces the name to a marque. >>> That's certain death. Look how Mercedes-Benz has failed as a marque of >>> Daimler, or Chevrolet as a marque of GM. >>> >>> Paul >> And then there was Pontiac, DeSoto, Oldsmobile, etc., etc. etc. >> >> Otis > > The announcement of the name change is double speak in my opinion. > Does removing PENTAX from the company name indicate a commitment to > the brand in your minds? > > Maybe a "commitment to the business" means Ricoh's business as a whole > - which would be a natural thing for any company. > > As you know I exited PENTAX a year ago. Yes it was pricey, especially > for what is considered pro-quality lenses vs. consumer quality. > However the angst is over. No more waiting, waiting, waiting. Lens > choices galore, not to mention AF speed and accuracy with N*. > > It doesn't mean you can't get excellent pictures with a Pentax body. You can. > > For me it got to the point that I didn't want to keep 'investing' in > an unsure future when other brands had what I want now as well as a > future that seems more secure. > > A lot has been mentioned in the past about bang for the buck. Granted > the K-5's offer that, However there's two parts there. > > 1, BANG > 2. BUCK > > If one's more concerned about the BUCK, then by all means get the most > BANG you can for it. > > If one's more concerned about the BANG, then get the most BANG and > realize it'll take more BUCK. >
The photo editors at The New York Times, Harris Publications and a number of other concerns I shoot for tell me I get at least as much BANG as any of their shooters. In fact one recently asked me how I achieve so much definition. i blamed it on the DA* 60-250. A few (not many) of the shooters I compete with have kits like…well, like yours. And they frequently complain that their profit margin is too small. But more and more I see the expensive gear mainly in the hands of the really big buck ad agency shooters and the doctors and lawyers, who like to have expensive stuff hanging around their neck. (Although Leicas are still the number one choice with the prestige set.) Serious photography doesn't require mega expensive equipment. It doesn't even require a 24 x 36 sensor. (All sensors are full frame. I get a full frame with every shot.) Paul > 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. -- 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.
