Thanks for saying that Mark, I wish that I could actuate that clearly
under pressure.

At 07:21 PM 6/7/03 -0400, you wrote:
Pĺl Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Peter wrote:
>
>> There is no reason for Pentax to also alienate old users at the
>> same time, they just have however.
>
>You mean alienating those who never buy anything new from them anyway :o)
>I suspect the compatibility issue is nonexistent for 99% of potential buyers.


I think you're wrong about that. Or right about it but missing an
important point.

Yes, the compatibility issue *is* nonexistent for 99% of potential
buyers. But I don't think those buyers themselves think that way. In
other words, buyers who don't own and will never own pre-A lenses will
be put off - perhaps irrationally, perhaps not - by compatibility
issues.

People *worry* about obsolescence. And *past* history of compatibility
is how they decide how much they need to worry about *future* issues.
(What else do they have to go on, in the end?) A person I know in the
industry who was at PMA told me that almost *everyone* who talked to him
about the *ist-D mentioned how they loved the full compatibility with
all K-mount lenses. I'd bet almost none of them actually own pre-A
lenses! Many of them weren't Pentax shooters at all (a lot were Nikon
users).

The rise of digital has made people more concerned than ever about
obsolescence issues. Perhaps it's mostly psychological; but if you lose
sales for irrational, psychological reasons it hits your bottom line
every bit as much as if they were lost for solid, rational reasons.
Making yesterday's products obsolete in your system causes customers to
worry about the lifespan of what they're buying *today* - especially if
the word "digital" is involved.

Perhaps Canon did the right thing in totally ditching their old lens
mount and starting from scratch rather than "nickel-and-dime-ing"
compatibility to death like Nikon (and now Pentax, it seems) has done.

The fact that 99% of its buyers won't ever own pre-A lenses is a good
reason why it *wouldn't* have hurt Pentax's bottom line to include full
compatibility! (Other than the trivial extra cost it would add to a
$1500.00 camera.) But those buyers would have felt a lot more confident
in the company that sold them the camera.


-- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com

Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx



Reply via email to