I think that's the industry standard for end of life. the Nikon D200 dropped a 
level at the end of its tenure as well.
Paul
 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Adam Maas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> That it did, but I can't help but think Pentax would have done better
> with it if it had remained near its initial pricepoint rather than
> descending into K100D territory. By the end of its run it was only
> about $50 off a K100D kit in price, which is a bit non-sensical.
> 
> -Adam
> 
> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 10:06 PM,  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I agree in regard to the K200D, but I wouldn't call the K10D a mistake. It 
> represented great value for the money, and that helped put Pentax on the 
> consideration list for many buyers.
> > Paul
> >  -------------- Original message ----------------------
> > From: "Adam Maas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> The utterly crippled buffer is the most telling fault, there's no
> >> justifiable reason why a modern camera should have a buffer limited to
> >> 4 RAWs or 4 JPEG's, especially not at the K200D's rather significant
> >> price (it's easily the most expensive base model on the market, and
> >> not the most capable). It's also overpriced considering the rest of
> >> its spec. The similar spec Sony A200 is significantly cheaper, has at
> >> least 50% more buffer in RAW (6 shot)with a slow card and as  much as
> >> 3x the RAW buffer with a UDMA card (Sony's write speeds on their
> >> current cameras are fastest in class and add significantly to RAW
> >> buffering, as much as doubling it on the A200 with a 300x card) and
> >> JPEG buffering is infinite at 3.0fps (to the K200D's 2.8fps) AND the
> >> Sony A200's AF is comparable in performance to the K20D. The Sony does
> >> lack the sealing,  but that's no excuse for the K200D to have a buffer
> >> spec that was obsolete on the Digital Rebel 4 years ago. Not to
> >> mention that currently the Nikon D80 sells for only slightly more than
> >> the K200D with kit lens, and it completely destroys the K200D in most
> >> regards (Faster AF, far better viewfinder, comparable IQ, much better
> >> flash system, better AF, much deeper buffer) as it's generally
> >> comparable to the K10D and exceeds the K10D in some regards (AF, Flash
> >> system, high ISO) while the K10D offered weather sealing and SR in
> >> response.
> >>
> >> Pentax made the opposite mistake with the K200D (too much money,
> >> uncompetitive spec) as they did with the K10D (too little money,
> >> over-specced).
> >>
> >> -Adam
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Brian Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
> >> > OK, well perhaps we could talk about technical things for a minute...
> >> >
> >> > I'm interested in your statement "....cheap ones aren't as bad in
> >> > comparison as the K200D is to the K20D."
> >> >
> >> > What do you think is wrong with the K200D given that it's about
> >> > $600-$700 (Au) cheaper than the 20D?
> >> >
> >> > I'm considering my options at present with the thought of getting either
> >> > a 200D or a 20D later in the year.  Much as I'd like a 20D, the 200D
> >> > seems to be able to do most of what I need (based on the reviews I've
> >> > read).  About the only thing I'd like that the 200D doesn't have is the
> >> > extra resolution.  I rarely need very high ISOs and I don't do a lot of
> >> > photography where a I need to fire off a lot of frames quickly - I'm
> >> > finding it hard to justify the extra money, particularly as there's a
> >> > lens or two I'd like as well.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Cheers
> >> >
> >> > Brian
> >> >
> >> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> > Brian Walters
> >> > Western Sydney Australia
> >> > http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, 28 May 2008 19:09:05 -0400, "Adam Maas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >> >> Some of it is also the lack of options. Pentax has never had more than
> >> >> three digital bodies in the line, and no more than two commonly
> >> >> available ones, while they had many more current film bodies for most
> >> >> of the post-spotmatic era. We're back to the days of the SP and SP500
> >> >> when it comes to body choice. Really its' 'get the cheap one or the
> >> >> good one, and the cheap one has a few too many comprimises'. Much the
> >> >> same goes for the restricted lens line, although the cheap ones aren't
> >> >> as bad in comparison as the K200D is to the K20D.
> >> >>
> >> >> -Adam
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 6:37 PM, Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > Jaume,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I agree with you that the list has changed with digital.
> >> >> > Some of the old focus on cameras and lenses is diminished.
> >> >> > We are not shooting film any more...digital is too easy.
> >> >> > So we aren't debating lens vs lens or camera vs camera.
> >> >> > And some are posting lots of pictures because they can.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I hope we are still friendly and welcoming to new people starting with
> >> Pentax.
> >> >> > In fact, I think there is a real need for help with the early
> >> >> > expertise for digital.
> >> >> > It is easy to snap pictures, but getting high quality results is 
> >> >> > harder.
> >> >> > The issues include jpeg vs raw, sharpening, computer storage, and 
> printing.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Regards,  Bob S.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> > --
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > http://www.fastmail.fm - One of many happy users:
> >> >  http://www.fastmail.fm/docs/quotes.html
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> >> > PDML@pdml.net
> >> > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> >> > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
> follow
> >> the directions.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> M. Adam Maas
> >> http://www.mawz.ca
> >> Explorations of the City Around Us.
> >>
> >> --
> >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> >> PDML@pdml.net
> >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
> >> follow
> >> the directions.
> >
> >
> > --
> > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > PDML@pdml.net
> > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
> > follow 
> the directions.
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> M. Adam Maas
> http://www.mawz.ca
> Explorations of the City Around Us.
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Reply via email to