On 6/18/2024 7:11 AM, mike wilson wrote:
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We are both talking about the camera that uses a way outdated and very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.
Apparently Pentax figures there are enough people out there who want to
shoot film who will also want new film cameras and the advantages that
new provides.
Now I don't sit on the Ricoh board of directors, but then nobody who
posts here does either, and to be blunt, the target market for this
camera are people who are half a century younger than the average age of
the soon to be crated and put into underground storage inhabitants of
the PDML.
bill
--
%(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.