----- Original Message ----- From: Alan Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Re[2]: Next Pentax Flagship Camera?
> >Indeed. But I think that the majority of the MF cameras are being used in > >studios. IMHO this is where Pentax strategy is quite inconsistent. Most of > >the field photographers prefer to use 35mm or digital cameras because of > >their convenience: such cameras are lighter or at least their equipment is > >lighter (most of all - lenses), they usually have better parameters (say > >for > >example: flash sync speed), much more lenses of different kinds and focal > >lengths to choose from, easier and cheaper processing. Pentax is unique in > >terms of the compact size of its MF cameras but is also the only major MF > >producer that hasn't introduced interchangeable backs so far. You're right > >saying that the place that they do well is in field cameras, but heading > >for > >this segment only is in fact heading for the dead end. IMHO Pentax will be > >forced to introduce interchangeable backs to settle among studio > >photographers or else they will be floating around as a satellite. AFAIK > >(I'm not an MF shooter yet:)) Bronica produces digital backs. This will > >make > >the issue even more important for Pentax... > > I don't know your definition of field camera. But for landscape at least, MF > is much better than 35mm due to larger film format. And I sure prefer 120 > for landcape if I can afford to. Have you read my posting? Yes, I know very well that the larger format, the better image quality - you didn't surprised me. Mind, however, that the digital market is not the only one that developed fast in recent years. 35mm films became so good that it is no problem to get big enlargements of good quality, or at least quality that is good enough to use them in magazines, calendars, books etc. I repeat: most of the field photographers prefer to use 35mm or digital cameras because of their convenience: such cameras are lighter or at least their equipment is lighter (most of all - lenses), they usually have better parameters (say for example: flash sync speed), much more lenses of different kinds and focal lengths to choose from, easier and cheaper processing. That you prefer 120 for landscape doesn't mean that thousands of other photographers do - no, they use 35mm or digital. Just search the National Geographic for example... No, the main role for the MF is studio/fashion/commercials/nude (:)) photography, where polaroid or digital backs , as well as another film backs are important. The field photography is a dead end for MF if the producer focuses mostly on it... > Personally, I don't see how "classic style, elegance, convenience of > control, ergonomy, backward compatibility" could be serious weapons. These > factors are 2nd consideration at most. Besides, I don't think Z-1p can > compete with Minolta 7 or 9. If you don't see it, then perhaps you should turn to Minolta. You seem to appreciate Minolta very much. I'm not sure if you realize, that you've just questioned main reasons, for which many (if not most) people are Pentaxians. Add the SMC and IMHO you will actually have the ONLY reasons to stay with Pentax. Besides, good marketing can make advantages from everything, even from disadvantages (vide Canon) Z-1p beats easily Dynaxx 7 (I don't know Dynaxx 9 from my personal experience) in terms of ergonomy and convenience of use. It is one of the most ergonomic, well designed and user-friendly camera ever. Of course it lacks advanced flash metering, has outdated AF, DOF previev is mechanical. But equip it with P-TTL, HSS, SAFOX VII, electronic DOFp and magnesium housing and no Minolta will be a match for it also in terms of features. But you seem to dislike Z-1p... Meanwhile, Dynaxx 7 beats MZ-S because it offers more for the same or less money. > Any modular system is expensive, and I doubt it will ever happen. Besides, > if this is important to anyone, why wait for Pentax when Nikon has the F5 > now? Just doesn't make sense. This is the only statement I agree with. It doesn't make sense and is too expensive. So there is another way for Pentax: the Leica-like way. Pentax will be producing classic, durable, outdated and expensive cameras (one model every, say, 5 years) and equally expensive, rare limited lenses (of course, of high quality) for a limited group of people. Or maybe will focus on compact cameras only... Greetz Artur - 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 .
