Right, you are, Alan! But why would that be? I earlier today proposed that maybe it's marketing and/or Pentax sales reps as opposed to those from N**** and C****.
Your post got me to thinking, however. Could it be that the lack of a "pro" 35mm camera is the reason? I don't want to get into what a "pro" camera is (please!), but let's face it, when we see a PJ in a media scrum on the news, or on the street, he/she invariably has an F5 or an EOS. I'm sure that the public sees that as well. I think that the fact that Pentax really hasn't catered to "pros" (PJ's at least) since the LX has hurt Pentax immeasurably. Or, maybe the converse is true: the fact (or at least the perception) that PJ's use C**** and N**** almost exclusively is a huge marketing coup for those two companies. As wonderful and capable a body as the MZ S is, PJ's aren't using it - not surprising, because I don't think they are necessarily who it is aimed at. But it's also not surprising that the public thinks, "Wanna look like a pro? I will if I buy C or N." regards, frank Alan Chan wrote: > I think it's the lack of image that Pentax has been suffering. It doesn't > matter what Pentax has made, people just won't notice. > > regards, > Alan Chan > > _________________________________________________________________ > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
