Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-14 Thread frank theriault
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:17:19 -0500, Luigi de Guzman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 12 January 2005 11:12, Graywolf wrote: VAT? Again, unless the Iron Chancellor has made Canon DSLRs VAT-exempt, this wouldn't make a difference. Something else is going on. -Luigi It's like Peter

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-14 Thread Luigi de Guzman
On Friday 14 January 2005 11:35, frank theriault wrote: On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:17:19 -0500, Luigi de Guzman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 12 January 2005 11:12, Graywolf wrote: VAT? Again, unless the Iron Chancellor has made Canon DSLRs VAT-exempt, this wouldn't make a

Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-14 Thread Bob Blakely
and the direction the light is going. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:56 PM Subject: Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...) I find telescope eyepieces work pretty much as intuition suggests; a stronger eyepiece

Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-14 Thread Daniel J. Matyola
Great analogy. Bob Blakely wrote: When you realize that if you create an image of a distant 60 foot tree on your film, develop that film, put it back in the camera (with the back open) and shine a light through it, you will project the 60 foot tree back on itself, then you will understand that

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-14 Thread William Robb
- Original Message - From: Luigi de Guzman Subject: Re: *istD EOL... But if it comes up from the US (or in from anywhere else, for that matter), it's subject to duty. Man. NAFTA was supposed to do away with that, wasn't it? Luigi, please treat NAFTA the same way you treat politics

Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-13 Thread Graywolf
opposite of what one (I) would expect? I know this is a basic optics question that I'm just not too embarrassed to ask. Tom C. From: Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 20

Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-13 Thread Bob Blakely
Ok, the analogy using light levers didn't work. Let's try again... Nothing is working opposite to expectations. One lens, the objective lens, is working in one direction with light coming in from the distant object at the *distant* focal point to the image on the other side of the lens at its

Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-13 Thread Nick Clark
Thanks for the replies. I'm still not sure I understand the focal length magnification thingy, so I guess I'll have to draw some ray diagrams. I'll try to shoot the moon when I next get a chance. It's a bit chilly and windy at night at the moment. Nick

Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-13 Thread Tom C
OK, that's what I started to conclude must be the answer. Thank you. Tom C. From: Bob Blakely [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...) Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:29:13 -0800 Ok, the analogy using light

Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-13 Thread johnf
I find telescope eyepieces work pretty much as intuition suggests; a stronger eyepiece increases the magnification of the image. A far more interesting question, to my mind, is why that isn't the case in photography. Bob Blakely mused: Ok, the analogy using light levers didn't work. Let's try

Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-13 Thread Doug Franklin
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 19:56:34 -0500 (EST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I find telescope eyepieces work pretty much as intuition suggests; a stronger eyepiece increases the magnification of the image. A far more interesting question, to my mind, is why that isn't the case in photography. We

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-12 Thread Leon Altoff
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 21:20:30 -0500, Peter J. Alling wrote: Pentax's English distributor strikes again. My local dedicated Camera shop says the *istDs isn't selling. They have it and the 300d and D70 (and the Minolta which is humungous) on display alongside each other. Even though the Pentax is

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-12 Thread Kostas Kavoussanakis
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005, Herb Chong wrote: given that the US list price for the *istDs and the 300D are almost the same and the street price is nearly so, what's up with the UK distributor? You hit it on the head Herb. Pentax is really overpriced in the UK. Kostas

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-12 Thread Luigi de Guzman
On Wednesday 12 January 2005 05:44, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Tue, 11 Jan 2005, Herb Chong wrote: given that the US list price for the *istDs and the 300D are almost the same and the street price is nearly so, what's up with the UK distributor? You hit it on the head Herb. Pentax is

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-12 Thread Peter J. Alling
Taxes and Greed. Luigi de Guzman wrote: On Wednesday 12 January 2005 05:44, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Tue, 11 Jan 2005, Herb Chong wrote: given that the US list price for the *istDs and the 300D are almost the same and the street price is nearly so, what's up with the UK distributor?

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-12 Thread Luigi de Guzman
On Wednesday 12 January 2005 10:36, Peter J. Alling wrote: Taxes and Greed. I don't see taxes as a valid reason--unless there are some shady deals, Canon would have to pay the same taxes, unless for some reason there's an anti-Pentax tax (er, perhaps a PenTax?) in force. When I lived in

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-12 Thread Graywolf
If that is a Ritz I understand they give their salesfolk a bigger spiff on the D70 than any of the others. There is a lot more going on than which is the best camera. My understanding is that at least Pentax is making enough istDs's to push them. They weren't pushing the istD because they were

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-12 Thread Graywolf
VAT? graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Luigi de Guzman wrote: On Wednesday 12 January 2005 05:44, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Tue, 11 Jan 2005, Herb Chong wrote: given that the US list price for the *istDs and the 300D are

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-12 Thread Kostas Kavoussanakis
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005, Graywolf wrote: Luigi de Guzman wrote: On Wednesday 12 January 2005 05:44, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Tue, 11 Jan 2005, Herb Chong wrote: given that the US list price for the *istDs and the 300D are almost the same and the street price is nearly so, what's up

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-12 Thread Luigi de Guzman
On Wednesday 12 January 2005 11:12, Graywolf wrote: VAT? Again, unless the Iron Chancellor has made Canon DSLRs VAT-exempt, this wouldn't make a difference. Something else is going on. -Luigi

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-12 Thread Nick Clark
I think Canon are discounting quite heavily. The Pentax is GBP20 cheaper than the D70, but nowhere near the Canon. Nick -Original Message- From: Herb Chong[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12/01/05 00:12:25 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.netpentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: *istD EOL

Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-12 Thread Nick Clark
:05 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.netpentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: *istD EOL... Bruce, I'm curious why the shop people thought the Digital Rebel was junk. Was it based on look and feel ? What about image quality? I'm asking because right now the Rebel

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-12 Thread Nick Clark
or their price from Pentax Japan? Nick -Original Message- From: Peter J. Alling[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12/01/05 02:20:30 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.netpentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: *istD EOL... Pentax's English distributor strikes again. Nick Clark wrote

Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-12 Thread Bob Blakely
are tilted so as to be quite spectacular. Regards, Bob... - Original Message - From: Nick Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 10:28 AM Subject: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...) I got a telescope for Christmas with a camera adaptor. I've

Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-12 Thread Tom C
Bob wrote: Think of it like a lever. The objective is focusing the image in the air inside the telescope's tube. The longer the focal length, the larger this image (like a camera lens). The eyepiece is used like a magnifying glass to view this image in the ether. The shorter the focal length of

Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-12 Thread Bob Blakely
Think of the lenses as simple, one element lenses. Think of the center of the lenses as fulcrums (pivot points) of a light lever too. If the eyepiece has a short focal length, the distance from the image in the telescope to the lens fulcrum is short. The distance from the lens fulcrum to your

Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-12 Thread Doug Franklin
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:28:39 -, Nick Clark wrote: Strangely the moon is even larger when using the shorter focal length 4mm eyepiece, which I haven't quite worked out yet. If I understand it correctly, the magnification of the image you see will be the focal length of the scope divided by

Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-12 Thread Herb Chong
- From: Nick Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 1:28 PM Subject: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...) I got a telescope for Christmas with a camera adaptor. I've not had much chance to play with it yet but was quite impressed with its power

Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-12 Thread Tom C
know this is a basic optics question that I'm just not too embarrassed to ask. Tom C. From: Herb Chong [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 20:48:29 -0500 short focal length

Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-12 Thread Herb Chong
. the eyepiece then magnifies that fixed plane. Herb - Original Message - From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 9:09 PM Subject: Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...) OK, I understand the math and don't disagree, but why

Re: Astrophotography (was Re: *istD EOL...)

2005-01-12 Thread Steve Sharpe
At 6:28 PM + 1/12/05, Nick Clark wrote: I got a telescope for Christmas with a camera adaptor. I've not had much chance to play with it yet but was quite impressed with its power the first couple of times I used it. It's a Telstar 900 I assume that this is the focal length of the mirror?

RE: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread Pål Jensen
Alan wrote: I'm not so sure. It seems like AF isn't an issue anymore among consumers. Now they concentrate on megapixels instead. There never was much wrong with Pentax AF anyway. The spinning through the helicoid trick has never been a benchmanrk on true AF performace. Andy Rouse, the

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread Pål Jensen
John wrote: I hate to say it, but I agree. Pentax needs something to really set it apart from the other guys. Consistantly making smallest-in-their-class cameras isn't enough for serious photographers. REPLY: I think it will be more than enough. As high-end DSLR are larger than medium

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread Pål Jensen
Herb wrote: no surprise if they are really going to announce a signficantly higher end body at PMA with 10 megapixels at $3-4K street price. REPLY: They are...? Pål

RE: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread ernreed2
Quoting Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Alan wrote: There never was much wrong with Pentax AF anyway. (I'm not quite sure whose comment that was) I never found anything wrong with Pentax AF on the much-maligned PZ-1 and I thought the ZX-5n wasn't too bad either, though not good in

RE: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread Jens Bladt
: Pål Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 11. januar 2005 14:23 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD EOL... John wrote: I hate to say it, but I agree. Pentax needs something to really set it apart from the other guys. Consistantly making smallest-in-their-class cameras isn't enough

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread Pål Jensen
Jens wrote: Good point. But not allways true. A camera is still a camera. IMO the *ist D/DS models make others look ridiculous. Yes, but who knows except Pentax insiders? Pål

RE: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread Rob Brigham
- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 11 January 2005 15:23 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: RE: *istD EOL... Quoting Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Alan wrote: There never was much wrong with Pentax AF anyway. (I'm not quite sure whose comment that was) I

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread William Robb
- Original Message - From: Pål Jensen Subject: Re: *istD EOL... Jens wrote: Good point. But not allways true. A camera is still a camera. IMO the *ist D/DS models make others look ridiculous. Yes, but who knows except Pentax insiders? My local camera store was telling me that before

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread Nick Clark
My local dedicated Camera shop says the *istDs isn't selling. They have it and the 300d and D70 (and the Minolta which is humungous) on display alongside each other. Even though the Pentax is smaller, they say the reasons people don't go for it are partly the SD card but mostly the difference

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread Bruce Dayton
I was in my local shop yesterday - mostly Nikon and Pentax, some Canon. They are selling about five D70's everyday. People just keep walking in a buying them. They think highly of the *istDS, but it doesn't sell anywhere like the D70. Pretty much the word is out in all media that photographers

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread Tom C
, but depending on results I get with the *ist D I wouldn't mind trying the Rebel. Tom C. From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: Nick Clark pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: *istD EOL... Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 15:33:08 -0800 I was in my local shop yesterday - mostly

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread Herb Chong
: Re: *istD EOL... no surprise if they are really going to announce a signficantly higher end body at PMA with 10 megapixels at $3-4K street price. REPLY: They are...?

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread Herb Chong
: Re: *istD EOL... My local dedicated Camera shop says the *istDs isn't selling. They have it and the 300d and D70 (and the Minolta which is humungous) on display alongside each other. Even though the Pentax is smaller, they say the reasons people don't go for it are partly the SD card but mostly

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread Bruce Dayton
with the *ist D I wouldn't mind TC trying the Rebel. TC Tom C. From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: Nick Clark pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: *istD EOL... Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 15:33:08 -0800 I was in my local shop yesterday - mostly Nikon and Pentax

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread Shel Belinkoff
I didn't realize that Nikon needed to be saved. Shel From: Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] But they are really making their money on the D70. It could well be the camera that saved Nikon's hide.

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread Luigi de Guzman
On Tuesday 11 January 2005 18:18, Nick Clark wrote: My local dedicated Camera shop says the *istDs isn't selling. They have it and the 300d and D70 (and the Minolta which is humungous) on display alongside each other. Even though the Pentax is smaller, they say the reasons people don't go for

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread Peter J. Alling
Pentax's English distributor strikes again. Nick Clark wrote: My local dedicated Camera shop says the *istDs isn't selling. They have it and the 300d and D70 (and the Minolta which is humungous) on display alongside each other. Even though the Pentax is smaller, they say the reasons people don't

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread William Robb
- Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: *istD EOL... I'm asking because right now the Rebel is the top selling DLSR for astrophotography. I haven't had a chance to try the *ist D yet with my telescope, but depending on results I get with the *ist D I wouldn't mind trying

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-11 Thread Cesar
Keith, I cannot be sure what they will work on, but you may want to check out Gulfstream Camera 1682 East Oakland Park Blvd. Oakland Park, FL 4 954-564-8586 They are in the Ft. Lauderdale area. I plan on being in their store on Friday. Hopefully I will remember to

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-10 Thread johnf
Luigi de Guzman mused: I spent, with tax, about a thousand dollars, US on the DS. I nearly threw up; it was the most money I'd ever spent in one go on a single piece of photographic equipment. I paid full release price for my *ist-D; $1695 US, I believe. Then I watched the price tumble

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-10 Thread Rob Studdert
On 9 Jan 2005 at 23:56, Luigi de Guzman wrote: I spent, with tax, about a thousand dollars, US on the DS. I nearly threw up; it was the most money I'd ever spent in one go on a single piece of photographic equipment, and probably equalled the value of all my gear in all formats (35mm

RE: *istD EOL...

2005-01-10 Thread Rob Studdert
On 9 Jan 2005 at 8:57, Brian Dipert wrote: The representative DID however point out that they'd need to 'digitize' their medium format product line soon; that as-is it was getting 'long in the tooth' It's teeth have already fallen out and there aren't any gums to bother with. Let's just

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-09 Thread Graywolf
AFAIK Pentax is still servicing LXen. After all it was only discontinued in 2000 (although they were almost impossible to get outside Japan). Since they were made for almost 20 years official repairs should be available for at least a few years yet. It is not lack of parts it is lack of

RE: *istD EOL...

2005-01-09 Thread Brian Dipert
Thanks for the report. Makes sense, given the (almost?) identical imaging sensors in the two cameras and the faster processing in the Ds. Did they drop any hints regarding the release of a higher-end DSLR? --Mark I asked about a higher-end 35mm model and did not get an encouraging

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-09 Thread ernreed2
Quoting Graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED]: AFAIK Pentax is still servicing LXen. Certainly were doing so around April/May of 2004, when mine paid them a couple of visits. ERNR

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-09 Thread William Robb
- Original Message - From: Graywolf Subject: Re: *istD EOL... AFAIK Pentax is still servicing LXen. After all it was only discontinued in 2000 (although they were almost impossible to get outside Japan). It won't be the machanics that are the problem, it will be the electronic

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-09 Thread Keith Whaley
Graywolf wrote: AFAIK Pentax is still servicing LXen. After all it was only discontinued in 2000 (although they were almost impossible to get outside Japan). Since they were made for almost 20 years official repairs should be available for at least a few years yet. It is not lack of parts it

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-09 Thread mike wilson
Hi, Graywolf wrote: AFAIK Pentax is still servicing LXen. After all it was only discontinued in 2000 (although they were almost impossible to get outside Japan). Since they were made for almost 20 years official repairs should be available for at least a few years yet. It is not lack of parts

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-09 Thread Graywolf
: *istD EOL... AFAIK Pentax is still servicing LXen. After all it was only discontinued in 2000 (although they were almost impossible to get outside Japan). It won't be the machanics that are the problem, it will be the electronic components. As an example, when my fleet went in for service

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-09 Thread Graywolf
Unfortunately, no. I did a few years back but the guy retired or died or something. Micro-Tools has some Retina parts in their catalog. There is a guy in Australlia that comes up with a 'kodak retina repairs' search but it looks like he only works on RF models. If you are handy copies of the

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-09 Thread Luigi de Guzman
On Saturday 08 January 2005 23:32, John Celio wrote: Without USM and IS like technology, I am afraid nothing Pentax could do to impress high end 135 users. I hate to say it, but I agree. Pentax needs something to really set it apart from the other guys. Consistantly making

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-09 Thread johnf
Luigi de Guzman mused: verdict: If I wasn't already so heavily invested in Canon glass, I'd get this. (heavily invested, here means that the total value of his lenses is easily in excess of the value of his car. Admittedly, he drives a very well-used car, but for someone who isn't

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-09 Thread Shel Belinkoff
John can attest to the fact that I can exceed the value of my Toyota with just a lens cap ;-)) Shel [Original Message] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] There's many of us here in that category. In fact I can easily exceed the value of my car (a 1986 Mustang GT ragtop) with just one lens.

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-09 Thread Luigi de Guzman
On Sunday 09 January 2005 23:28, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Luigi de Guzman mused: verdict: If I wasn't already so heavily invested in Canon glass, I'd get this. (heavily invested, here means that the total value of his lenses is easily in excess of the value of his car. Admittedly, he

RE: *istD EOL...

2005-01-08 Thread Jens Bladt
PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Brian Dipert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 8. januar 2005 04:44 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: *istD EOL... I had a chat with the folks at the Pentax booth today at CES. What I was told is that there are less than

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-08 Thread Mark Roberts
Brian Dipert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I had a chat with the folks at the Pentax booth today at CES. What I was told is that there are less than 1000 bodies left in factory inventory, and when they're gone there'll be no more made; the *istDS will carry the torch going forward (at least until

RE: *istD EOL...

2005-01-08 Thread Alan Chan
--- Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Interesting. It seems Pentax can't really impress a substantial percentage of high-end 35mm camera buyers. I wonder what Pentax will be doing to try to replace the lost sales of professional the MF cameras (6x45, 6x7) - in other words to get (back) in to

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-08 Thread Herb Chong
- Original Message - From: Alan Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 7:34 AM Subject: RE: *istD EOL... Without USM and IS like technology, I am afraid nothing Pentax could do to impress high end 135 users.

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-08 Thread William Robb
- Original Message - From: Jens Bladt Subject: RE: *istD EOL... Interesting. It seems Pentax can't really impress a substantial percentage of high-end 35mm camera buyers. I wonder what Pentax will be doing to try to replace the lost sales of professional the MF cameras (6x45, 6x7

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-08 Thread Joseph Tainter
What I was told is that there are less than 1000 bodies left in factory inventory, and when they're gone there'll be no more made Hmmm. I wonder how long there will be parts for repairs? I suppose that the DS uses some of the same parts. Joe

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-08 Thread Mark Erickson
I thought that Pentax' Pro market was addressed by their 645 and 67 series cameras. Remember that the 645n was the first production autofocus medium format camera in the world. What I can't understand is why Pentax hasn't released a digital system that uses 645 and/or 67 lenses. If nothing

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-08 Thread William Robb
- Original Message - From: Joseph Tainter Subject: Re: *istD EOL... What I was told is that there are less than 1000 bodies left in factory inventory, and when they're gone there'll be no more made Hmmm. I wonder how long there will be parts for repairs? I suppose that the DS

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-08 Thread William Robb
- Original Message - From: Mark Erickson Subject: Re: *istD EOL... I thought that Pentax' Pro market was addressed by their 645 and 67 series cameras. Was is the key operative. Pro's aren't using so much medium format now. More and more, they are using Canon and Nikon DSLRs. William

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-08 Thread Peter J. Alling
The law is 7 years but I'm not sure that matters much in electronics... William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Joseph Tainter Subject: Re: *istD EOL... What I was told is that there are less than 1000 bodies left in factory inventory, and when they're gone there'll be no more

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-08 Thread Graywolf
the cameras. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Joseph Tainter Subject: Re: *istD EOL... What I was told is that there are less than 1000 bodies left in factory inventory

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-08 Thread mike wilson
Hi, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Joseph Tainter Subject: Re: *istD EOL... What I was told is that there are less than 1000 bodies left in factory inventory, and when they're gone there'll be no more made Hmmm. I wonder how long there will be parts for repairs? I

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-08 Thread pnstenquist
will do my best to get it work ad infinitum. Right now it's sitting in a dust free glass case. That might be the best strategy. Paul Hi, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Joseph Tainter Subject: Re: *istD EOL... What I was told is that there are less than 1000

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-08 Thread mike wilson
Hi, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would be surprised if you'd be able to get either the *istD or the LX serviced in 10 years. In fact, it's difficult to get the LX serviced now. Independents won't touch it. It's too specialized. And I think Pentax is on the verge of abondoning it. Don't get me wront.

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-08 Thread pnstenquist
I agree in principle. But repair services have already quit servicing the LX. Make a few calls to verify if you wish. I shoot with mine once in a while, but it's becoming a museum piece. The *istD will undoubtedly follow, but not for at least five years. Paul Hi, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-08 Thread John Celio
Without USM and IS like technology, I am afraid nothing Pentax could do to impress high end 135 users. I hate to say it, but I agree. Pentax needs something to really set it apart from the other guys. Consistantly making smallest-in-their-class cameras isn't enough for serious photographers.

*istD EOL...

2005-01-07 Thread Brian Dipert
I had a chat with the folks at the Pentax booth today at CES. What I was told is that there are less than 1000 bodies left in factory inventory, and when they're gone there'll be no more made; the *istDS will carry the torch going forward (at least until next-generation products are out). The guy

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-07 Thread Herb Chong
no surprise if they are really going to announce a signficantly higher end body at PMA with 10 megapixels at $3-4K street price. Herb... - Original Message - From: Brian Dipert [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 10:43 PM Subject: *istD EOL

Re: *istD EOL...

2005-01-07 Thread Luigi de Guzman
On Friday 07 January 2005 22:43, Brian Dipert wrote: I had a chat with the folks at the Pentax booth today at CES. What I was told is that there are less than 1000 bodies left in factory inventory, and when they're gone there'll be no more made; the *istDS will carry the torch going forward

RE: *istD EOL...

2005-01-07 Thread Mark Erickson
Thanks for the report. Makes sense, given the (almost?) identical imaging sensors in the two cameras and the faster processing in the Ds. Did they drop any hints regarding the release of a higher-end DSLR? --Mark Brian Dipert wrote: I had a chat with the folks at the Pentax booth today at