Pal; Pentax's current "flagship" - MZ-S - is, even by those on this list, considered a failure. Pentax's last decent model was the MZ-5n IMHO. What's left? MZ-L, MZ-6 etc. none of which are beyond advanced amateur. The same could be said for Minolta's offerings outside of their nicely spec'd Maxxum 5/7/9 series. Canon and Nikon, while still aiming at entry level users still seem to want to develop and have developed "pro grade" cameras and lenses. Maybe it's because they can afford to, maybe it's because people want them, or maybe it's because they basically "own" that market niche. I don't believe that Pentax wants to, nor sees an opportunity to, take a share of that market. It would cost far too much money to begin developing a lens line or camera line that would be on par with the EOS-1/F5's offered by the competitors. I really think that Pentax is happy with it's share of the 35mm market.
With respect to your reply regarding the lack of pro-grade equipment: 15 year old equipment doesn't cut it for everyone. Constant advances in lenses by other companies, including 3rd party makers, seems to be what the public (pro and amateur alike) seem to want. I'm not sure if I would consider a 15 year old lens, while it may have been top notch back in 1988, to be up to pro-grade standards today. The Limiteds were/are nice but even so, Pentax has made themselves an "oddball" by creating lenses that, when viewed by those outside the sphere of Pentaxian culture, as being strange. How many other companies are creating 77mm, 43mm and 31mm focal lengths? I'm merely saying that Pentax does not want to nor do they see a need to develop pro-level gear in 35mm format. For some people, this is perfectly fine, and acceptable, for others, it is not. I personally prefer the 15 year old stuff because I'm not going to sweat it when I toss it aside because I didn't spend a lot of cash on it. Just remember that if anyone holds onto their 15 year old equipment there will be a time, as I'm sure you're well aware, when they'll be turned away by Pentax themselves because they no longer "support" that equipment (i.e. LX for example) no matter how close to "pro grade" it used to be. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Pål Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 4:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax needs USM and IS Dave wrote: Pentax's target market in 35mm SLR has, I believe, always been amateur or entry level. REPLY: Canon target market have also always been entry level. They have in fact dominated this segment for 25 years. The wast majority of all Nikon and Canon gear sold is entry level. DAVE: This does not mean that they do not produce good cameras. It does, mean, however that they do not see a need to develop "advanced amateur" or "pro level" gear. REPLY: Pentax have always been present in the upper market segments. The majority of their lenses are far from entry level. In the 60's there wasn't any entry level as understood today and those old Pentax cameras and lenses are still enjoyed for their non-surpassed built quality. So your assesment isn't correct. Pentax have never actively marketed anything towards pros but thats a totally different issue. They haven't lacked pro grade equipment. It is just the fact that their current lenses are basically 15 years old technologically speaking. The 90's has been an era where Pentax have chosen preofitability over market share for 35mm slr's. Pål
