Herb,
According to your prognostications, Pentax is going to go out of
business. If that happens, your lenses will be worth very little, and the
sooner you sell them the better.
According to a more rational analysis, Pentax will remain in business and
try to appeal to a niche market of enthusiasts and people who don't always
follow the herd. They will develop, over time, a range of perhaps three
SLRs, the most expensive of which will be a big improvement over the *ist
D but is most unlikely to beat whatever Canon model is at the bleeding
edge at the time.
Those who have convinced themselves that they need the highest technology
should therefore switch to Canon. There is no point in waiting for Pentax
to outdo Canon because it just won't happen.
Pentax will continue to introduce more sharp zoom lenses and perhaps the
odd prime in APS format. The remaining diehards will switch to digital,
and the market for older full-frame lenses will decline.
So whatever happens, your lenses will decline in value, and Pentax won't
produce the body you want. You should switch, and soon. By the sound of
it, you have invested far more money than you actually needed to in
various different sorts of Pentax glass. I can't believe you really need
Limited lenses for bird photography, so all those lenses are really dead
money anyway. You surely only need to buy two or three Canon lenses to be
competitive in the distant wildlife category.
For less fast-moving subjects, you can always keep the Pentax kit if you
want to.
But please stop bugging us all with your worthless financial analyses.
John
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 18:51:17 +0100, Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
because i have a lot of money stacked away in Pentax lenses that i would
have to sell at a large loss, and, in a brief moment of lucidity, Pentax
announced what they were going to do and it made sense, for that brief
moment. i was under the illusion that it might happen again. that ended
the day they announced the 645D.
if i don't sell at a loss and wait until the lenses are worth something
reasonably close to what i paid for them, that's going to be a couple of
years after Pentax stops making high end lenses. if they intend to stay
in the 35mm-ish DSLR business, they have to announce a reasonable
upgrade for the *istD.
Pentax lenses, if you get the higher end ones, are still at least as
good as their competition and sometimes much better. most of my lenses
are FA* and A*, with the set of macros and Limiteds thrown in. i just
want a body that uses them well enough to accomplish what i see every
day from ordinary Nikon and Canon shooters using their 20Ds and D70s.
every digital camera vendor is trying to move up in the cost and feature
chain because those are the only cameras that make money. why is Pentax
moving the opposite direction?
Herb....
----- Original Message ----- From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <pentax-discuss@pdml.net>
Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2005 8:57 AM
Subject: Re: How Pentax Could Survive
Herb needs IS, better AF, and a big buffer. He knows this, and we know
this. Although Pentax may come out with a camera that includes all
three, it may not be for a while, and it is unlikely to be
significantly better than the best Canon. I don't know why Herb
doesn't just make his mind up and switch, instead of poking through the
entrails of analysts and becoming ever more bitter and resentful.
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.6/111 - Release Date: 23/09/2005
