> On 18/06/2024 14:03 BST Bill <anotherdrunken...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 6/18/2024 12:47 AM, mike wilson wrote: > >> On 18/06/2024 05:05 BST John Francis <jo...@panix.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 04:03:50PM -0700, Larry Colen wrote: > >>> > >>>> On Jun 17, 2024, at 3:57 PM, Bill <anotherdrunken...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> It looks a lot more complete than I was expecting. > >>> A lot more usable than I was expecting. > >>> > >>>> A little more expensive as well, but then, it is a Pentax.0. > >>> About the same as 120 gallons of gas, in early 1973 that would have been > >>> about $40, in 1974 that would have been about $60. > >> I can't remember exactly how much I paiid for my first Pentax (SP II + > >> 50mm/f1.4) in 1972, > >> but I'm pretty sure I paid significantly more than that. > > The place in the UK offering the new beastie also offers (when in stock) > > the K1000 for over £100 less. Although that in itself is daylight > > robbery, I know which I would choose. > > The problem with the camera from the POV of the PDML isn't the camera, > it's that we are all too fucking old. The target market isn't a bunch of > people in God's waiting room.
We are both talking about the camera that uses a way outdated and very expensive imaging technology, aren't we? In which case, anyone buying a superfluous and expensive unit when there are arguably better and certainly substantially cheaper options seems to be a few frames short of a roll. -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
