I like that opinion. I also have a question of sorts, I thought a good 14MP full frame sensor would meet or defeat the finest grain 35mm films? If not, it's close. So if, as Glen says, 30MP+ come out (will they be like computer CPUs?) when and what will be enough? Unless you want something for a board in Times Square, isn't anything much more complete and utter overkill? How many of use just like slides, or 4x6, 5x7, 8x10, 11x14. I think we'll see a large gap, consumer and pro. They'll get the monsters in case, and we will never get them due to the price. And RAW format with these things? Computer companies are loving this, oh the profits!!
Perhaps the 35mm DSLRs will be consumer only and top out at not much more than 14MP. Consumer, amateur. All pros will go for new high tech and big sensors, of a medium format/large format type? Brad ----- Original Message ----- From: "Glen O'Neal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 1:49 AM Subject: RE: Pentax future: advanced and classy or cheap and shoddy? [was: RE: Hypothetical Question] > One point to remember. We heard quite a few months ago (before Photokina) > that along with the new digital SLR they were developing new wide angle > lenses for the new line. With the APS sized sensor cropping of the image > this makes sense as well as new technology to reduce chromatic aberrations > (also a problem with APS sized sensors). This would indicate to me that, > even if Pentax does actually get a DSLR to market next spring it will most > like not be a full frame sensor. I think the next step for the digital world > will be full frame sensors for medium format cameras as well as more > sophisticated technology for the 35mm full frame sensors and imaging engine. > Perhaps a 645 sensor first. By the time these 30MP+ monsters come out the > APS sensor that we are so anxiously waiting for in our DSLR will be no more > than a toy that is used mostly in point and shoot cameras and low end > DSLR's. > > Just my humble opinion .... > > Glen > > -----Original Message----- > From: Alexander Krohe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 2:43 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Pentax future: advanced and classy or cheap and shoddy? [was: > RE: Hypothetical Question] > > > 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 > >
