No no no it's going to be powered by a gas turbine! At 04:06 PM 9/27/2002 -0700, you wrote: >RE: the proverbial Epson alliance... > >Wouldn't that be a treat! Maybe its a Daimler-Chrysler-Pentax alliance, >introducing the first diesel-powered V10 digital off-road monstercamera >weighing 150 lbs., and a whole set of FA* lenses will fit on it >simultaneously, on a giant, rotating K-mount. I'll start holding my breath >now... > >I'm thinking of putting the list of FA* lenses together for sale to list >members first... Pentax delays in digital are costing me a lot of money. And >I can't believe it is taking this long. This is now ridiculous. > >Again, I would love to go out shooting experimentally and for my own >personal photographic edification, but I just hate spending $20.00 for a >roll of Provia everytime I do, not to mention two trips to the lab (etc., >etc., see previous rants). A digital would allow me to become much more >creative, and to use my gear much more often than I do now. Hard drive space >is cheap and efficient, and all it would cost me is some juice to recharge >my batteries. I could print what I need at home on my Epson 1270. > >My next camera will definitely be a digital. I just hope I don't have to >sell all my lenses, bodies, and flashes and jump ship to do it. > >Come on, Pentax, for ####'s sake, get a grip, this is getting so stupid now. >Even the Minox is looking pretty good to me. > >As for a flagship film camera, how about the sensors and autofocus mechanism >from an Z-S stuck in a PZ1-P body, like we first mentioned five years ago. >How hard could that be? There's probably list members that could do it. > >If they have really been working on a film flagship since before the first >limited lens came out (circa 1997), this is probably the longest running R&D >in the history of photography. Maybe it is the crystal focussing camera the >caveman mentioned a few years ago (I still can't believe I fell for that >one). > >Nice to hear from the Cave again, BTW. > >Really getting fed up now, > >Cameron Hood > > >on 09/27/02 1:35 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 20:14:37 +0200 > > From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E5l_Jensen?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: So?.. > > Message-ID: <009f01c26653$b3f39900$5f257a94@oemcomputer> > > Content-Type: text/plain; > > charset="iso-8859-1" > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > > > Anthony wrote: > > > >> I personally think they were set back years by the abortive alliance with > >> Hewlett-Packard. Just think about all the development time they spent > >> getting the EI cameras into the shops to have them be such a letdown. So > >> they found themselves well into the digital era with no joint-venture > >> partner to provide the IT side of a digicam development, and had to > restart > >> from scratch. It's a miracle that the Optio cameras got to market so soon > >> after the demise of the EI cameras. And the need to staff an IT R&D > >> division could explain a little of the increase of employee numbers. > > > > > > I believe the are in-cahoots with Epson. All kinds of disclaimers apply > as I > > can't remember where I got that from :-) > > > > P�l
