I'd assume that the step up will sell for not a lot more than the
current *ist-D. Maybe 200 to 400 (US Dollars Euros Pounds you name it
since from the pricing I'm aware of they are used interchangeably in
spite of conversion differences). Here's what I see as a workable plan
introduce the "Super"
On 31/1/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
>I was actually thinking this myself - they could still be planning to
>release something low end, AND high end with the *istD smack in the middle,
>although, the price drop has me wondering about the low end option to some
>degree... I mean, maybe they int
On 31 Jan 2004 at 17:54, Norm Baugher wrote:
> Serious question though, from a digital idiot - couldn't they just stick
> a, say 8MP sensor in the sunkist, and re-release it?
Sure with relevant circuit up-grades and assuming that the sensor size remains
the same or is smaller which effectively
Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 31/1/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
>
>>"Dear Ms Mayer,
>>
>>Thank you very much for your interest in the *ist D.
>>
>>There will be no *ist D replacement announced at PMA.
>
>Interesting but this does not preclude a Baby D.
>
>I think we might just see an an
Cotty noted: " Interesting but this does not preclude a Baby D."
or a "papa D" for that matter...
I was actually thinking this myself - they could still be planning to
release something low end, AND high end with the *istD smack in the middle,
although, the price drop has me wondering about the
I'm with you Norm. I will be very pleasantly suprised if they have
something to announce, let alone show. Even when they are moving
fast, they aren't very fast. The *istD is too new for them to be
ready with something else.
I would dearly love to see something, though.
--
Best regards,
Bruce
Nor does it preclude a Model above the *ist-D either.
At 05:46 PM 1/31/04, you wrote:
On 31/1/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
>"Dear Ms Mayer,
>
>Thank you very much for your interest in the *ist D.
>
>There will be no *ist D replacement announced at PMA.
Interesting but this does not preclude a
Does an announcement that announces that they have nothing to announce
qualify as a true announcement?
Norm
Cotty wrote:
I think we might just see an announcement of some kind
On 31/1/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged:
>"Dear Ms Mayer,
>
>Thank you very much for your interest in the *ist D.
>
>There will be no *ist D replacement announced at PMA.
Interesting but this does not preclude a Baby D.
I think we might just see an announcement of some kind
Cheers,
Cotty
Hi,
Translations interspersed
Tanya Mayer Photography wrote:
> "Dear Ms Mayer,
>
> Thank you very much for your interest in the *ist D.
We're glad someone is. Maybe if we are polite enough you'll buy one.
> There will be no *ist D replacement announced at PMA.
And if there was, we would
OMG HOT NEWS! I can't BELIEVE that I am the one to "reveal" this!!
Little 'ole me in my sleepy 'ole one horse town! lol...
I just got an email from CR Kennedy - they are the equivalent of Pentax USA
in Australia. It is a little cryptic, but check out the second sentence!!
I have included my
11 matches
Mail list logo
