I don't buy this, for the following reasons: - Any company would have done a business case analysis before proceeding with the MZ-D prototypes, and we know they got far along before cancelling. Obviously there was a pricepoint that worked.
- We're still buying non-autofocus A* lenses fer chrissake; we're a perfect audience for a DSLR that never changes! - We're still buying non AF teleconverters! - The imaging sensor options are off the shelf. - There's an even smaller market for astronomical CCD cameras, but yet there's a number of successful manufacturers. - It would mean people like me would start buying Pentax lenses again. - A 6MP DSLR would still be competitive today, two years after it was announced. R Rubenstein, Bruce M (Bruce) wrote: > It's because Pentax can't make any money selling a DSLR. The amount of > cost that would need to be amortized over the relatively short product > life of a DSLR, and the small number of units that Pentax can sell > would make the cost of the camera very high. There will be fewer > manufacturers of interchangeable lens DSLRs than there are SLRs. This > is exactly what happened in the past when major technologies like AE > and AF (which depended on enabling technologies like electronics and > advanced manufacturing techniques) became wide spread. Don't expect to > see DSLRs from Pentax or Minolta. > > BR > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* Dan Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > I can't see why Pentax wouldn't incorporate dSLR into their lineup > when they think, both, that they can make a profit on it AND still > make it a great value for their customers. > > > Dan Scott >
