Dario wrote:
> Where they're trying (not sure they'll succeed) to step from current 2% to
> 5%, when the big five (Sony, Olympus and three more manufacturers) are 15%
> to 20% each :-(
Something I believe is realistic as their digital P&S are competitive and Optio S is
going to be huge succes.
Pål wrote:
> Pentax have been bleeding edge in everything they have done except 35mm
slr's where they havent been bleeding edge for 20 years. This has sent their
marketshare for slr's from 30% to 4%.
> Digital is a totally different ballgame anyway.
Where they're trying (not sure they'll succeed
Whether your selling film cameras, digital cameras or toasters it's
still the same game of selling. It's always played the same way: you
pick your product, you pick your market, set up shop and then try to out
sell everyone else.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Digital is a totally different ball
William wrote:
> Pentax hasn't made anything "bleeding edge" for 4 decades.
> Thats a long time for a corporation to be a failure and still be in
> business.
Pentax have been bleeding edge in everything they have done except 35mm slr's where
they havent been bleeding edge for 20 years. This has
"Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I agree. Cutting edge stuff like the EOS 1Ds at $8k is for Canon (and
>maybe not Nikon). Pentax will do better 1 or 2 years behind the curve
>after these sensors have come down in price.
Yes. There's no sense in trying to compete at the bleeding
I agree. Cutting edge stuff like the EOS 1Ds at $8k is for Canon (and
maybe not Nikon). Pentax will do better 1 or 2 years behind the curve
after these sensors have come down in price. People for whom the EOS
1Ds is a serious option (in terms of price and timing) should really
switch to Canon be
> There are certainly a lot of us who'll be royally p*ist off if our huge
> investment in glass (including my 15mm f/3.5) is made obsolete or
> irrelevant; that is, if we have to have two different lenses to serve
> the same purpose on a DSLR and a film SLR. Not everyone is going to
> *abandon* fil
Mike wrote:
> I will be surprised and disappointed if Pentax doesn't follow through with
> at least a limited series of lenses specifically for the *ist D. This is
> exactly what is needed in digital photography, not the continued application
> of vestigial technology that's clearly on the way out
Mike Johnston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I really beg to differ. This would not be dumb at all, it would be SMART.
>Canon and Nikon have already started doing it (Canon's digital-only lenses
>are expected at this PMA or in Japan). One of the MAJOR advantages of
>digital is that you can get high q
> Throwing away compatibility to a really huge extent, like building
> small-image-circle lenses for the DSLR, would *really* go against Pentax
> history. I'm feeling more confident they won't do something that dumb.
Mark,
I really beg to differ. This would not be dumb at all, it would be SMART.
C
10 matches
Mail list logo
