The pent up demand, of people who would actually spend close to $1500
was probably far greater than Pentax has. Minolta was the leader in AF
and even had a pro support program (in the US). Their AF mount has been
out about 15 years when the camera came out, and they had sold way more
AF gear, in those years, than Pentax. I think in this country Minolta
may be the #2 35mm SLR seller after Canon. (Their cameras are carried
everywhere. The camera was treated like the Second Coming on the Minolta
mailing list. They still didn't have enough customers that were willing
to spend that kind of money on a body, and just about no one switched
brands to buy it.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's a very reasonable hypothesis. This seems, on the face of your
facts, to be a much better comparison. However did minolta have as much
pent up demand as Pentax? And did the Dynax 9 fulfil their demands
better than the competition? We really don't have all the stats to
actually support any guesswork here, but it is likely that the demand
for a pentax film flagship would likely depend on its appeal to LX and
MX users. IF Pentax make a camera which appeals to these people, then
they have something truly unique which cannot be obtained from any other
marque which also makes DSLRs to fit the same lenses.
