On Sep 16, 2012, at 9:51 AM, "Bob W" <p...@web-options.com> wrote:
>> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of >> Toralf Lund > >> I don't know, personally I'm not convinced that chasing the "latest and >> greatest" and focusing on higher numbers (in various specs) or a longer >> list of features, is generally a good way to make products. > > if you are Nikon or Canon and your market is professional journalists and > such-like then it is the only way to make products, because if they don't > make them someone else will and they will end up as also-rans. > > Pentax had a big slice of that market once. Of course the main reason professional journalists flock to Nikon and Canon is service and loaner programs. And of course there is the sheep thing. Some pros shoot Canon and Nikon because it's the pro thing to do.. Full frame is hardly a factor, until you get to the rarefied atmosphere of Vogue covers or Sports Illustrated spreads. And even there, I'm sure one could get by quite nicely with the 40 meg images a K-5 produces. I do covers for Harris Publications, which has a long list of titles and is highly dependent on newsstand sales. Their books are nothing special, but they devote a lot of time and effort to covers, because that is, in essence, what they're selling. And they do that well. Their art directors are always very pleased with my pics and like the way I'm able to capture good dynamic range. (Too many journalists shoot jpegs, even when they don't have to.) I just sent another set of pics to the NY Times that will probably dominate the cover page for next Sunday's auto section. The photo desk loves them but says it would make life easier for them if I downsized them a bit from the 40 meg spec. 20 megs will be just fine, thank you, even for a photo that spans the page. Paul > > B > >> As such, I >> rather like what Pentax appears to be trying to do today, i.e. make >> robust, simple and usable cameras built around the "right" technology >> or technology that has perhaps matured a bit, as opposed to what's most >> "advanced". If anything, I'd like to see them trimming down the feature >> list even more and go further in the direction of keeping things >> simple... > > > > -- > 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.
