don't use it when the sun is in the picture: you may get a lot of flare.
mishka
On 7/26/05, Christian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I traded my SMC crystal ball for an L. The future seems less cloudy now...
> :-)
>
> Christian
>
>
>
On 7/26/05 10:11 PM, "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i never noticed before
> today, but Pentax has only 1700 employees. encouraging early retirement for
> 300 is close to 20%.
I thought Pentax was a holding company and the actual consolidated number of
employees is over 5,000 (still no
- Original Message -
From: "K.Takeshita" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> But I just finished polishing up my cloudy crystal ball and now I can see
> @#!?*&%.
I traded my SMC crystal ball for an L. The future seems less cloudy now...
:-)
Christian
On 7/26/05 9:49 PM, "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> After all, a higher end SLR typically sell 1/10 or less the quantity of entry
> level models;
Exactly.
Here's what Canon are saying. It might show some of their mindset.
[To tell the truth, we (Canon) still do not know the size and t
: "K.Takeshita" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pentax Discuss"
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:03 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
This, I agree and more level-headed. I am sure more than 90% of people
here
think the same way, myself included.
It just did not
On 7/26/05 8:26 PM, "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i'm not selling any of my Pentax equipment to finance whatever i get because
> i don't need to. i just won't use it as much because it isn't able to do the
> job that i need from a camera system. meeting 80% of my needs isn't good
> eno
ent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 9:49 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
Apart from the fact their core market and Pentax enthusiast aren't
necessarily the same, I agree. What I can't understand, however, is why
this criticism comes now in 2005 (I whined about the same thing 10 years
a
Herb wrote:
> Pentax hasn't demonstrated that it knows one of the simplest business rules,
> make sure you know who your loved ones are (core market) protect that
> market. Pentax ought to be making a camera that sells to Pentax enthusiasts
> who have been buying lots of those lenses that we al
belly up.
Herb...
- Original Message - From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:49 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
Um, not immediately. You might have to wait for the collector
community to rev up if Pentax were to pass out of
you're assuming i would sell within 2 years of them going belly up.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:49 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
Um, not immediately. You might have to w
will be worth more.
Herb
- Original Message - From: "Pål Jensen"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 7:40 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
In a couple of years time, when Pentax have close down their image/
camera division or is bankrupt, you
s the current users, that's
bad.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
No one is saying "Pentax is doomed". That seems to be the words that some
se
no, they will be worth more.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 7:40 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
In a couple of years time, when Pentax have close down their image/camera
division or i
more accurate reading was done instead of the
mischaracterization/misepresentation that is occuring.
Tom C.
From: Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
To:
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 01:40:16 +0200
Herb wrote:
> Pentax ca
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:36 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
OK, we've heard that they said that. I guess that means after the Optio
60 then... I'm not sure what they mean by t
Pål wrote:
Pentax are adressing this issue and will reduce the number of digital P&S
to three models. After all, >it is the P&S market that has bursted. They
will make SLR's their main business (again); after all, >thats where the
profit is at present.
OK, we've heard that they said that. I
Herb wrote:
>. DSLRs make
> more profit, but there is going to be about a year to two year's time before
> the entire market is saturated too, just like digital P&S, and then profit
> margins are going to disappear as well.
[snip]
> sensible business people are the ones that are saying what
Godfrey wrote:
> I suspect Contax will likely be back with another CZG licensee, or
> CZG subsidiary.
I wouldn't bet on it.
Pål
Kodak makes the sensor for the 645D.
Herb...
- Original Message -
From: "Kostas Kavoussanakis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pentax Discuss"
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 7:48 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
making the FF DSLR. Now the sensor cost is com
- Original Message -
From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 7:32 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
I'm not sure the 645D is meant to make money. Theres isn't a single slr
system in existence were every item is profita
Message -
From: "Tom Reese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 7:02 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
Pentax has to be conservative. They have limited resources and can't
afford to make a mistake. They can't develop 10 products hoping one will
On 7/25/05 7:48 AM, "Kostas Kavoussanakis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> it, in spite of the challenge, simply because they made a head start. But
>> watching the demise of Kyocera/Contax, the killing of the project was
>> probably prudent and right.
>
> What do you think ar ethe chances of sayi
On Jul 25, 2005, at 9:53 AM, Raimo K wrote:
The Contax brand is dying - film and digital - the last one to die
will be
the 645 in December, according to PopPhoto.
The Contax brand isn't dying. Contax as a label is owned by Carl
Zeiss Group, and licensed to Kyocera since the mid-1970s; prio
gt;
To: "Pentax Discuss"
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 6:26 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
On 7/25/05 9:49 AM, "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Poor implementation I guess
It appears so.
I knew for the fact that Pentax solved the problem when Kyoc
On 7/25/05 9:49 AM, "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Poor implementation I guess
It appears so.
I knew for the fact that Pentax solved the problem when Kyocera could not,
because a well-known Pentax person disclosed that Kyocera approached Pentax
for help. This was just before Kyoce
:
http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
- Original Message - From: "Pål Jensen"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 2:38 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
Raimo wrote:
The Philips sensor had the same difficulties in the Pentax camera as
well -
On 25 Jul 2005 at 16:43, Raimo K wrote:
> That´s what I heard from Finnish representatives.
> And how could same sensor have noise in one camera and not in another?
Poor implementation I guess, most CCDs are a hybrid analogue/digital devices so
don't exhibit fixed performance.
Rob Studdert
HUR
]>
To:
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 2:38 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
Raimo wrote:
The Philips sensor had the same difficulties in the Pentax camera as
well -
Actually, it didn't..
Pål
A lot of the NY fashion photogs used Pentax 6x7, perhaps close to half
of them. Some of the PAs I've talked to used to hate working with those
guys, because they were afraid of misloading the 6x7.
Paul
On Jul 25, 2005, at 7:33 AM, Pål Jensen wrote:
Paul wrote:
I agree. Very interesting and i
I just can't stop reading what you write, Ken, many thanks for taking
the time. A few questions.
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005, K.Takeshita wrote:
it, in spite of the challenge, simply because they made a head start. But
watching the demise of Kyocera/Contax, the killing of the project was
probably p
Herb wrote:
> when you run a business, you stay in business only by doing what
> consistently makes money and dropping what doesn't. if those 40% of all
> Japanese medium format photographers buy as many 645Ds as Pentax hopes, the
> camera will make money and be profitable at something resembl
Raimo wrote:
> The Philips sensor had the same difficulties in the Pentax camera as well -
Actually, it didn't..
Pål
Paul wrote:
> I agree. Very interesting and informative. However, I don't think
> Pentax has a large studio pro market any more.
I don't think Pentax ever catered to the studio shooters. Pentax MF cameras
have mostly been used by outdoor photographers.
Pål
://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
- Original Message -
From: "K.Takeshita" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pentax Discuss"
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 2:04 AM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
On 7/24/05 6:06 PM, "K.Takeshita" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Herb Chong wrote:
being too conservative is why (Pentax is ) having the problems they are
having now.
Pentax has to be conservative. They have limited resources and can't
afford to make a mistake. They can't develop 10 products hoping one will
make them a lot of money and recoup the costs of
On 24/7/05, K.Takeshita, discombobulated, unleashed:
>I do wish grandma had a hairy ball.
Mark!
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
- Original Message -
From: "K.Takeshita" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pentax Discuss"
Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 8:39 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
the danger is that then medium format will be the ONLY camera market they
will be in at the end of 2
On 7/24/05 10:09 PM, "Mishka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> nevermind "the sky is falling" remarks. there are a few pissed people here
> who wish pentax were canon. like a saying goes, "if grandma were grandpa,
> she would have hairy balls". i think what P is doing makes a lot of sense
> (although
ken,
nevermind "the sky is falling" remarks. there are a few pissed people here
who wish pentax were canon. like a saying goes, "if grandma were grandpa,
she would have hairy balls". i think what P is doing makes a lot of sense
(although it doesn't really serve *my* needs). and thanks again for inf
After this, I will shut up :-);
My thoughts in-line.
Ken
On 7/24/05 6:58 PM, "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> the danger is that then medium format will be the ONLY camera market they
> will be in at the end of 2 years,
Where is the fact on which your opinion is based?
> also, what m
ken, thanks a lot! you are making too much sense for this list.
best,
mishka
On 7/24/05, K.Takeshita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/24/05 6:58 PM, "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> the danger is that then medium format will be the ONLY camera market they
> will be in at the end of 2 years, having no longer anything competitive in
> the 35mm-type body range because they can't sell enough to make any money at
> it.
On 7/24/05 6:33 PM, "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, I don't think
> Pentax has a large studio pro market any more. Most of the studio pros
> I've encountered have already switched to Hassy digital or Canon 1DS
> Mark II. The number shooting film has decreased dramatically.
On 7/24/05 6:06 PM, "K.Takeshita" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I believe it has far less to do with their technical ability to
> produce larger sensor SLR.
At the risk of being redundant, I might add one more point.
I am sure the list members here remember the infamous MZ-D. If Pentax
actually
a" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pentax Discuss"
Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 6:06 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
4. I believe the answer to why P create and market 645D first is rather
simple. I believe it has far less to do with their technical ability to
produce larg
I agree. Very interesting and informative. However, I don't think
Pentax has a large studio pro market any more. Most of the studio pros
I've encountered have already switched to Hassy digital or Canon 1DS
Mark II. The number shooting film has decreased dramatically. So Pentax
may already have
On 24/7/05, K.Takeshita, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Besides PDML, I only watch lists in Japan, so my info and observations are
>naturally biased toward what's happening in Japan, which may or may not
>apply directly to the rest of the world.
[big snip]
Ken, thanks for taking the time to write
On 7/22/05 4:43 AM, "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK I hear all you say and I can appreciate the company philosophy but how does
> the 645D fit into it, it's hardly a conservative move. A camera to replace the
> *ist D six months ago surely wouldn't have been too much of an impositio
Message -
From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 9:12 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
Did you buy them all new? The prices for most second hand Pentax lenses
have been steadily rising. I could sell many of my lenses at a profit.
selling them to buy Canon equipment is
enough to buy a second 1DsMk2 to go with the first one.
Herb
- Original Message - From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 11:08 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
Hmm. If you seriously be
o:
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 11:08 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
Hmm. If you seriously believe that there are cameras/lenses better suited
to your needs, Rob, why haven't you sold off your Pentax gear and
invested in them?
I guess I don't understand fealty to a camer
On 22 Jul 2005 at 20:08, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> Hmm. If you seriously believe that there are cameras/lenses better
> suited to your needs, Rob, why haven't you sold off your Pentax gear
> and invested in them?
Two very basic reasons, lots of cash tied in lenses and not residing in the
cen
which century?
mishka
On 7/22/05, Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Look. There will be a higher end K-mount DSLR from Pentax next year. If
>
> I'm caught in a wormhole - I heard this at the turn of the century.
>
> Cheers,
> Cotty
nikon has a couple of models that exceed it too, but i wouldn't
call it "setting the standards" -- it seems to play catch up, as everybody else.
who else? minolta? oly? sigma? they probably are quite good, but hardly
way ahead of pentax (if ahead at all).
in all honesty, i feel pentax is right i
On Jul 22, 2005, at 8:00 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
by "other manufacturers" do you mean, canons? all one of them?
i am not aware of anyone else setting standards in 35mm dslrs.
Do you seriously believe that there is only one DSLR from one
manufacturer that
exceeds the capabilities of any one
On 22 Jul 2005 at 22:56, Mishka wrote:
> by "other manufacturers" do you mean, canons? all one of them?
> i am not aware of anyone else setting standards in 35mm dslrs.
Do you seriously believe that there is only one DSLR from one manufacturer that
exceeds the capabilities of any one of Pentax's
by "other manufacturers" do you mean, canons? all one of them?
i am not aware of anyone else setting standards in 35mm dslrs.
mishka
On 7/22/05, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm whining (no comments) but it's just difficult having to watch other
> manufacturers delivering products
On 22/7/05, Pål Jensen, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Look. There will be a higher end K-mount DSLR from Pentax next year. If
>you can wait that long; wait. If not, switch.
I'm caught in a wormhole - I heard this at the turn of the century.
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Pl
True. I called it a "useless toy." Then a local Canon shooter showed me
what you could do with 6 megapixel RAW images and PSCS. I was hooked.
Paul
On Jul 22, 2005, at 4:44 PM, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: "keithw"
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits
- Original Message -
From: "keithw"
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
It was amusing to see those most reticent to succumb to Pentax' first
offering of a DSLR, finally give in. And to listen to the pleased comments
after they did.
I recall calling the istD a
My $0.02:
I might consider spending $2500-3000 (by today's USD) but I can safely
say that I would not spend $5000-6000 on any DSLR, big sensor or not.
So a really high end, expensive Med format DSLR is of no use to me. What
I would like are the current D/DS features with a somewhat bigger sensor
Rob Studdert wrote:
> I guess the very bottom line for me is that it isn't just
> inconvenient, it's getting difficult and becoming limiting
> having to tote and juggle two systems, plus quality film and
> processing is now a significant cost. My frustration is
> compounded by the fact that I'
On 22 Jul 2005 at 10:23, Malcolm Smith wrote:
> I do indeed still use film and thus I have a choice. You have MF for a high
> quality image capture. What it really comes down to is wanting it all in one
> package, inconvenient as it is, you already have it, albeit in two different
> forms of equip
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, keithw wrote:
Their buying of the *istD started out very slowly, but all of a
sudden, it seemed that 70% or more of the regulars had them!
You what? Where did you find that figure from?
Kostas
Like the largest bulk of any published statis
Jostein wrote:
Kostas,
After I bought mine in November 2003, I kept track of all the list members who
confessed to buying before the List. :-)
A couple of months later my count passed 110, and I gave up on it. Many of the
regulars were on my list already then.
... and I bought mine after tha
Kostas,
After I bought mine in November 2003, I kept track of all the list members who
confessed to buying before the List. :-)
A couple of months later my count passed 110, and I gave up on it. Many of the
regulars were on my list already then.
Jostein
Quoting Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROT
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, keithw wrote:
Their buying of the *istD started out very slowly, but all of a sudden, it
seemed that 70% or more of the regulars had them!
You what? Where did you find that figure from?
Kostas
Rob Studdert wrote:
> It's about film, not bells and whistles. I want a DSLR that
> I'm confident will provide me with the equivalent if not
> better than the quality that I was used to using top end 35mm
> film bodies and expensive film. The *ist D isn't there yet
> though I assume that you k
On 21 Jul 2005 at 20:28, K.Takeshita wrote:
> Yes, Pentax has been slow, and that is their most sin. Technically, they
> have everything needed to produce a pro level DSLR.
> The problem with Pentax, and it probably comes from their size, is that they
> are
> timid in making a bold move in the m
On 22 Jul 2005 at 7:27, Malcolm Smith wrote:
> Well, given that no matter how many 'bells and whistles' are added to the
> camera and people are still not happy, I'd say it was odds on they will. It
> all
> seems strange to me as a happy owner of an LX and an *ist D as they are. If
> you
> want
E.R.N. Reed wrote:
> Tom Reese wrote:
>
> > Pål Jensen wrote:
> >
> >> According to Pentax the *ist name is reserved (thank God)
> >
> > > for what they consider entry level; typically ones first dslr.
> > > If they are to be believed high-end bodies will not have
> that stupid
> > > name. Lets
keithw wrote:
E.R.N. Reed wrote:
Cotty wrote:
On 21/7/05, Pål Jensen, discombobulated, unleashed:
Huh? I've no interest in entry level cameras
The *ist D is an entry level camera?
Strange but true.
Well it was Pentax's entry-level DSLR when it was introduced, that's
for sure.
Tom Reese wrote:
Pål Jensen wrote:
According to Pentax the *ist name is reserved (thank God)
> for what they consider entry level; typically ones first dslr.
> If they are to be believed high-end bodies will not have that
> stupid name. Lets hope they don't invent something even more stupid.
prices are holding relatively steady for DSLRs, but there only about a year
left.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "K.Takeshita" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pentax Discuss"
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 8:28 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
Incide
On 7/21/05 7:53 PM, "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> someone here picked up a *istDL and wasn't impressed either, compared to the
> DS or the D.
I understand that it started doing what is is supposed to do. Penetrating
into the price conscious market, just like D50 is intended for. Hop
On 7/21/05 7:51 PM, "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> a less
> than 1 year cycle on the bottom.
Much shorter than that. Is it really necessary? I do not know.
Ken
Subject: Re: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
someone here picked up a *istDL and wasn't impressed either, compared to
the DS or the D.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Jorn Ostergaard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 7:46 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Pen
On 7/21/05 7:39 PM, "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A two year announcement to production cycle in this market means they will
> definitely lose many potential sales, it's just too slow.
Yes, Pentax has been slow, and that is their most sin. Technically, they
have everything needed t
y 21, 2005 7:09 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
Depending on what they see an sufficient technology to upgrade from the
istD with, we may have a bit of a wait until the technology going into it
is enough behind the curve to satisfy their rather odd mindset about
competing in the marketplace.
someone here picked up a *istDL and wasn't impressed either, compared to the
DS or the D.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Jorn Ostergaard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 7:46 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
A guy who just
Canon is on a 2 year replacement cycle for the top of the line and a less
than 1 year cycle on the bottom.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 7:39 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
A two y
o realize that
in those sizes they most of the time will get their prints, they can't see
the extra quality 8.2 Mp will give them.
/Jorn
- Original Message -
From: "Herb Chong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 2:07 AM
Subject: Re: Re: Pentax P
- Original Message -
From: "Herb Chong"
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
Kodak makes more money on dye sub consumables.
See, my comprehension is miniscule
William Robb
Pål Jensen wrote:
Cotty:
The *ist D is an entry level camera?
Strange but true.
Yes. When the original *istD was released it was as cheap as they
came. It is an entry level DSLR even if it costed Nikon F5 money! As
this was Pentax first and only DSLR it had to try to please all.
Therefo
On 22 Jul 2005 at 1:12, Pål Jensen wrote:
> Sure, but again theres one big difference from the past: Pentax have fairly
> recently allocated 60% of their R&D towards DSLR's. This is a far cry from
> their
> interest level in slrs' from the past decade or more. It would be ridiculous
> to
> sugge
Kodak makes more money on dye sub consumables.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 6:43 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
Much better system than Kodak's.
Why they have so stubborly
continuing to lose money in the imaging products division means that someone
is going to fold the tent on them.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
I
rollei and hasselblad used to think otherwise. of course,
it was their mistake :)
mishka
On 7/21/05, Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Herb wrote:
>
>
> > hundreds of thousands vs millions.
>
>
> The millions of lenses are entry level plastic zoom lenses of questionable
> quality. The
E.R.N. Reed wrote:
Cotty wrote:
On 21/7/05, Pål Jensen, discombobulated, unleashed:
Huh? I've no interest in entry level cameras
The *ist D is an entry level camera?
Strange but true.
Well it was Pentax's entry-level DSLR when it was introduced, that's for
sure.
(Also its top-lev
On 22 Jul 2005 at 0:24, Pål Jensen wrote:
> For the same reason as many switched from 35mm to medium format. From reading
> the various MF forums it seems to me that most Pentax 645 owners comes from
> Canon EOS; mostly the 1n or 1v. It may be argued that an 18mp MF based DSLR
> doesn't offer enou
,
2006, Canon will announce a DSLR with more than 18MP?
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 5:06 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
If it occurs it may be fine, but I'm not going to invest a whoppi
On 7/21/05 6:47 PM, "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All the above is based on facts with some speculation thrown in
I think that's pretty much the true story. I also heard from Pentax that FA
lenses (at least some of them) were initially designed as water proof (or
splash proof, pr
Herb wrote:
> Pål says he doesn't have and isn't interested in any current Pentax DSLR.
> he's probably in line for the 645D.
I'm in line for any Pentax DSLR that I can afford and that appeal to me;
K-mount or MF. In the mean time I have perfectly working Pentax MF and K-mount
film system I
On 21 Jul 2005 at 20:42, Joaquim Carvalho wrote:
> Won't the 645 Digital "high end" enough?
> http://www.livingroom.org.au/photolog/reviews/pentax/pentax_645_digital.php
> ...and it doesn't look larger than a film 645 Has anyone been to the Photo
> Imaging Expo and tried it?
Any pictures of the 6
Herb wrote:
> lots of people who bought a *istD said it was good enough, for now. it's
> almost two years since then and what was good enough then isn't good enough
> now. it won't be good enough until none of my lenses can resolve what the
> camera's sensor is capable of capturing. i'm willin
- Original Message -
From: "Pål Jensen"
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
According to Pentax the *ist name is reserved (thank God) for what they
consider entry level; typically ones first dslr. If they are to be
believed high-end bodies will not have that stupid
- Original Message -
From: "E.R.N. Reed"
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
Well it was Pentax's entry-level DSLR when it was introduced, that's for
sure.
(Also its top-level, but apparently that's beside the point.)
That is the point.
The thing i
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C"
Subject: Re: Pentax Profits Fall 42%
My point is that Pentax has had ALOT of time to produce and compete and is
obviously a slow performer in turning out new products that are not simply
variations on a theme,and downgrades at
Pål says he doesn't have and isn't interested in any current Pentax DSLR.
he's probably in line for the 645D.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: "Kostas Kavoussanakis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 12:28 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax
Tom wrote:
> As said earlier, the 645D would be a niche product, at too high a price
> point for most, and for the majority of us on the list, at least, would
> require the additonal purchase of a bunch of lenses.
Sure, but the same could be said about the top Canon and Nikon models as well.
T
1 - 100 of 308 matches
Mail list logo
