Over the years mechnical things have gotten more expensive, and electronic things have gotten less expensive. We are talking a moving target here not something set in concrete. You can not compare 1983 manufacturing economics and 2003 manufacturing economics directly.


J. C. O'Connell wrote:
see my last post, the cam could not
be adding 100 to selling price, a
K1000 could have never existed if that
were true.
JCO

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   J.C. O'Connell   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://jcoconnell.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 1:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Old lenses and *ist D


Also unfortunately a $10 increase in manufacturing cost tends to work out to a $100 increase in selling price.

Also, this camera was also probably well into the design stage when the
MZ-D was announced and was and is intended to be a cheaper, less
versatile camera. Unfortunately for whatever reason the MZ-D never made
it to the market so Pentax users are having to accept something less
than the top of the line camera.

Since it is common knowledge that Pentax was tweaking the design right
up to the time they started shipping any basic design changes would have
held the camera back much longer. All this is just simply a basic
engineering fact of life.

I still expect an all plastic camera similar to the *ist with even less
features than the *istD, and a camera similar to the MZ-D to appear in
the not too distant future. (And no, I am not going to make any bets for
folks to renege upon (GRIN)).


John Francis wrote:


Hogwash, they have been making bodies supporting
K/M/A/F/FA ALL FULLY, ALL in same body, and all
in cheap <$300 bodies. they didnt have to reinvent
that stuff for the istD. Pure marketing decision
IMHO. All they needed was a cheap aperture sensing
cam, about a $10 part at most and a few lines of
code to adjust the shutter speed slower as the
aperture ring gets stopped down....


This still comes down to demanding that everybody pay
the extra $10 or so, even if this is for functionality
they don't want and will never use.

Tell you what - why don't you send me $1 for every $100
you spend on photographic equipment?  It's only a small
increase, so you'll never miss it, and if you (and all
the other Pentax photographers) do this it will enable
me to have a greatly improved photographic experience.




--
graywolf
http://graywolfphoto.com

"You might as well accept people as they are,
you are not going to be able to change them anyway."




-- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com

"You might as well accept people as they are,
you are not going to be able to change them anyway."




Reply via email to