Pål wrote: ------------------ > Sure, but I don't think LX with AF should be interpreted litterally; more of an AF > camera that occupies the LX place in the line-up.
Yes, that is how I have meant it. >Both Nikon and Canon sell well of > their upper level bodies. When a company like Kyocera could manage to keep four (or > was it more) upper end bodies in the market simultaneously, neither of them selling in > volumes, it is nothing but a total disgrace that Pentax didn't manage a single one > during the 90's. Pentax' entire product line seems to be centered around P&S cameras. I was told by a pentax rep that in the early 90s (before they introduced the FA-series), Pentax had almost dicontinued the 35mm SLR system. At that time Pentax dramatically lost market share (35mm SLR), but on the other side, their P&S zoom cameras became extremely succesful. They continued their 35mm system because they thought - that making a 35mm system will boost the sales of P&S cameras (as it shows their expertise as a camera maker) and - they will get new customers from those who want to upgrade from a P&S camara to a SLR system. I think this strategy was quite successful.They survived and regained lost market share. It also explains the product philosophy behind the MZ-cameras: They are all either entry level cameras or for students. Similar to the espio/iqz P&S cameras, they make a large variation of MZ cameras that are all based on one single platform. So they can appeal a variation of different customers while keeping costs low. However, in this line up is no room for an expensive model. You need another camera platform (expensive), and such a model is much more difficult to sell with a different marketing stategy and a higher risk. > True, the LX was still around but it was beyond its selling date. So > Pentax deserve the reputation they now have; entry level cameras there are no point in > buying because if you buy a Nikon or a Canon, or even a Minolta, you have something to > upgrade to. I think in the 90s the product management was even hostile against high quality 35mm gear as they also ditched the successor to the PZ-1p without any replacement. Instead they kept the PZ-1p in the product line for a IMO give away price (but nevertheless couldn't sell much of them). As a result everybody expects Pentax to be cheap. There was (is?) no long-term marketing strategy for high end 35mm gear. They did not even market the 35mm SLrs as a system, they rather marketed single products. Even up to now Pentax USA and Pentax Europe do not bother with black limited lenses. Still no ultra-wide Af lens. > There are, however, signs that Pentax have gotten the message. I take the introduction of the MZ-S as an indication that you are right. But things are slowly moving. After the introduction of the MZ-S two years ago there has been silence again. The photokina no-show must have sent a desastrous message as they decided to "semi-announce" the upcomming APS D-SLR through internet groups (normally they remain tight-lipped about news releases). To be honest I think the product management has still a long way to go. They don't communicate to the customer in which direction they will go and what the selling points of their products are. E.g. you have to go to the Japanese web page to find out what the complete product line is. And when the MZ-S was introduced, they left it to the customer to find out if it is made of die-cast parts or just of metal-coated/plated plastic (due to an error in translation). > Also, I believe that > digital will force higher end cameras from Pentax. With some luck, we wil see film > versions of the as well. If for nothing else, then as a means for Pentax to cover > developing costs. Full-frame higher-end 35mm digital slr's will start competing with > Pentax MF cameras. Also, MF need an upgrade path to digital uless they want their > whole MF line to be a dead end. According to a rumor spread on the luminous landscape forum, Pentax is still committed to a full frame D-SLR (with FOVEON sensor). No idea if that is true, did you hear anything about that? (for my part, I will be glad if that APS sized D-SLR materializes in foreseeable future). > Codeveloping 35mm and MF digital slr's makes sense as > they can be made similar except for sensor size and physical size. Although for > digital the sensor will be a strong selling point, Pentax need to update their > features as well in order to be seen as competitive. They also will have to expect > quite a few years with lossleaders in order to build up their eroded image. I hope you are right but it will be expensive and there is no guarantee that this will pay off in the future. I fear that this is exactly not what they are prepared to do. So far, I do not see a long therm product strategy. The MZ-S looks to me as a temporary solution rather than as the base to a series of new high end digital and film cameras. It took Canon more than 20 years of a consequent product policy to get into their present dominant position on the market. Enjoy, Alexander __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
