On Thursday, March 28, 2002, at 12:29 AM, Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
It's considerably more expensive than any of these cameras. I suspect
that the
number of cameras sold, over $500, isn't very big. Pentax needs
something more
competitive in the $350 - $500 class.
How does the MZ-6 or ZX-L
- Original Message -
From: Creature's Comfort creatures.comfort@e-
For me, there doesn't seem to be any new 35mm, SLR camera that
would satisfy me. In fact, there are very few new cameras of any
configuration or brand that I'd want to rush down to the store and buy.
I might consider
The whole brand identification issue is something of a red herring. There are
many reasons that have to do with more options, choices, up to date technology
and used market availability for knowlegeable ameteurs with other brands.
Beyond entry level SLRs, Pentax makes niche product bodies and
Hi,
I've given some thought to that, and to be honest, I don't know the
answer. For me, there doesn't seem to be any new 35mm, SLR camera that
would satisfy me. In fact, there are very few new cameras of any
configuration or brand that I'd want to rush down to the store and buy.
I might
In medium format I'd stay with Pentax. That was a recent choice for me,
and the decision was based on three factors: 6x7 configuration,
affordability, and lens quality.
I haven't ever given serious thought to what I would choose in 35mm.
Like Shel, I have little desire for automation. I would
Paul,
A scary thought, loss of all your camera gear, even if replaced by cash.
My choice - Purchase MX, 67II and upgrade computer along with the addition
of a film scanner.
Invest time in getting things right. That's me done.
Malcolm
In medium format I'd stay with Pentax. That was a recent
The perfect straight man...
You can still buy other make cameras that are strictly MF and don't have
winders. Nikon USA lists 4 MF bodies: F3HP, FM3a, FM2n FM10 (my understanding
is that the F3 is out of production, but still available new).
You may not be interested in switching brands, but
On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
It would be interesting to know how many people would stay with
Pentax, and try to duplicate what they have now, if every piece of
their gear disappeared and was replaced with an equivalent sum of
money. This is the place that new camera buyers
: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 12:17:32 -0500
From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pentax WILL produce a digital SLR!
In medium format I'd stay with Pentax. That was a recent choice for me,
and the decision was based on three factors: 6x7 configuration,
affordability, and lens quality
I seldom contribute, because there are so many that have
better and quicker answers than mine. Here I thought my
input might be appropriate.
Back in 1968 when I was still in high school, my folks
surprised me with a pretty astounding Christmas
present. They had selected a Spotmatic with a
- Original Message -
From: Nitin Garg
Subject: Re: Pentax WILL produce a digital SLR!
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 12:50:44AM -0500, Doug Brewer wrote:
Okay, I'll play.
a.) Yes, that's likely true for a significant percentage of
them. Read my post in answer to Bruce.
I presume you
On Thursday, March 28, 2002, at 12:29 AM, Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
It's considerably more expensive than any of these cameras. I suspect
that the
number of cameras sold, over $500, isn't very big. Pentax needs
something more
competitive in the $350 - $500 class.
What are the Elan 7, N80
Uh, $350 - $500 with Minolta at the high end of the range. I just picked the
more popular bottom end serious amateur cameras and looked up their prices.
By price the PZ1-p also fits.
It's not a question of how well these cameras actually function, but of
perceived value based on cost, paper specs
In a message dated 28-Mar-02 1:13:53 PM Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Actually, the worlds first Kentucky Fried Chicken Restaurant is in Salt
Lake City, Utah. (go figure)
Huh ... The one in Corbin, Ky, claims to be first.
Or maybe you mean the first KFC not connected
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 12:13:45PM -0700, William Johnson wrote:
Nitin Garg wrote:
much snipping
I dont have an opinion of Kentucky: never been
there, dont know anything about it except for KFC started from there and
being a vegetarian know nothing about KFC beyond its name.
2002 14:22:23 EST
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Kentucky Fried Chicken (was)Re: Pentax WILL produce a
digital SLR!
Huh ... The one in Corbin, Ky, claims to be first.
Or maybe you mean the first KFC not connected to Sanders' motel?
puzzled
ERNR
At 01:24 PM 3/28/02 -0500, Nitin wrote:
Identifying is different (somewhat) from feeling pride. If the basis of
Joe Nikon's pride is the same as that of Moe Pentax, and Joe gets to
identify with a lot more shooters than Moe does, I dont see why Moe
should feel pride while Joe is having his
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 04:21:39PM -0500, Doug Brewer wrote:
At 01:24 PM 3/28/02 -0500, Nitin wrote:
Identifying is different (somewhat) from feeling pride. If the basis of
Joe Nikon's pride is the same as that of Moe Pentax, and Joe gets to
identify with a lot more shooters than Moe does, I
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 11:19:02PM +0100, Pål Jensen wrote:
Nitin wrote:
If the basis of
Joe Nikon's pride is the same as that of Moe Pentax, and Joe gets to
identify with a lot more shooters than Moe does, I dont see why Moe
should feel pride while Joe is having his insecurities
On Tuesday, March 26, 2002, at 10:28 PM, Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
Pentax has to have some cameras, for people who don't
already have Pentaxes, that people think of when models like Elan 7,
N80 and
Maxxum 7 are considered. The ZX-5n is nice, but it's old and doesn't
compare
well on paper.
At 01:53 AM 3/27/02 -0500, you wrote:
Isn't it still possible for some org to still buy pentax ?
Why would a company buy Pentax when Canon or Nikon will =give= them equipment?
But of all people there with their brand by choice, u still dont know
how many are pentaxers, do you ?
Yes, if you
At 12:55 PM 3/27/02 -0500, Nitin wrote:
small companies ?
How small?
I personally cannot count ratios or percentages this way. YMMV.
You count the whole group. Then count the Pentax shooters. Take the number
of Pentax shooters and divide it by the number in the whole group. That
will give
Nikon has a long and storied history of giving equipment, either out-right
or on extended loan to influential photogs/organizations in order to be
seen as the equipment the pros use. That practice, along with
availability of loaners/repairs for those same organizations/photogs or at
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 02:10:08PM -0500, Doug Brewer wrote:
At 12:55 PM 3/27/02 -0500, Nitin wrote:
small companies ?
How small?
small enough perhaps for nikon/canon to not bother with them and they
have to make their own buys.
I personally cannot count ratios or percentages this
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 03:50:38PM -0500, Doug Brewer wrote:
Nitin, I really don't know what you are arguing. When I wrote:
ANYway... Should you happen to be watching or
attending some sporting event and glance down into
the pits or along the sidelines to see someone
happily
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 12:50:44AM -0500, Doug Brewer wrote:
Okay, I'll play.
a.) Yes, that's likely true for a significant percentage of them. Read my post in
answer to Bruce.
I presume you mean its true they are shooting using equipment of their
choice.
b.) If you are the only
I've stayed out of this one so far, but here are a few thoughts.
This isn't about quality or price!
Pentax will never get into the 35mm pro world in the same way as Canon and
Nikon until and unless it does the same deals with rentals and loaners as they
do. Even then, it would take years to
On September 15, 2000, I posted this as beginning of a thread called Pentax on the
Sidelines. I believe it is still valid.
Quote
Just some thoughts on a Pentax presence in the pro arena: It ain't gonna happen.
When I say pro here, I'm talking about sport shooters, a miniscule percentage of
There seems to be this concept that the world, outside of Pentax, is divided up
into pros and neophytes. Whatever happened to those exerienced amateurs? You
know, all thoses people who by models in between entry level and pro? I seem to
recall that Canon, among others, makes a few models besides
On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 10:10:03PM -0500, Doug Brewer wrote:
Quote
ANYway... Should you happen to be watching or attending some sporting
event and glance down into the pits or along the sidelines to see
someone happily shooting away with Pentax equipment, you can be proud,
because you know
I'm sorry, but I don't understand.
At 10:30 PM -05003/26/02, Nitin Garg wrote, or at least typed:
The happy-pentax-shooter need not be shooting pentax by choice much the
same way as you say the given-nikon-or-canon-to-shoot ones are.
--
Douglas Forrest Brewer
Ashwood Lake Photography
I think you are correct about Pentax not pursuing the pro market. Pentax
is stuck at the chicken-or-egg phase of that market and seems to have no
inclination to try to get into it. I can understand that as ROI would
probably suck if not be outright negative.
The 35mm SLR Pentax market
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Patrick
White [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
The only problem I can see with their marketing strategy on this is that
they continue to take it in the shorts on brand perception because of this.
No serious professional (or professional wannabe) would consider Pentax
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Hall
Subject: Re: Pentax WILL produce a digital SLR!
When your talking about pro gear you're really only talking
about four
brands, Leica, Hassleblad, Nikon and Canon. Most
self-proclaimed
advanced amateurs almost certainly would never have the kind
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whether or not the amateur will ever invest in the pro camera
is immaterial. What is important to the consumer is the cachet
value that the brand imparts. Having an F5 in the lineup makes
an F50 look like better equipment.
The benefit derived is purely
Bruce wrote:
Pentax will
have a hard time being price competetive with a first DSLR compared to the more
experienced makers.
Who are the more experienced makers? Just because Nikon and Canon released immature
digital slr's at a loss at an early stage doesn't necessarily put them in a better
... any ideas anyone?
Gabe
- Original Message -
From: Bruce Rubenstein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 5:28 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax WILL produce a digital SLR!
The Kodak cameras were expensive. I don't see why quoting the Canon price
isn't
fair. It's
Uh, right. Let's see who's where in 5 years.
--- Pål_Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Who are the more experienced makers? Just because Nikon and Canon released
immature digital slr's at a loss at an early stage doesn't necessarily put
them in a better position.
Pål
Yahoo! Movies -
]
Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 5:28 PM
Subject: Re: Pentax WILL produce a digital SLR!
The Kodak cameras were expensive. I don't see why quoting the Canon price
isn't
fair. It's on the BH site and they are taking orders. Repeating a price,
based
on speculation, to make a point is stretching
Bruce Rubenstein wrote:
Uh, right. Let's see who's where in 5 years.
Pentax seems to have marketing savvy. I wouldn't count them out. Bruce, on the
other hand, will be back on the Nikon list.
Paul
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net
I appreciate the verve, enthusiasm, and good intentions with
which you made that statement but 5 years ago was 1997 and
computers were a lot more powerful than you give them credit for
being. Unless you have some good, recognized references for a
statement like that, you shouldn't make it.
Len
The DSLRs that pros are buying aren't close to 7k. The ones based on pro
bodies are under 5K. The D60 D100 (based on midline consumer bodies) are
around 2k. What I've found interesting is that pro Canon shooters who would
never have considered using an Elan 7, have snapped up the D30 (same body)
Len Wrote:
I appreciate the verve, enthusiasm, and good intentions with
which you made that statement but 5 years ago was 1997 and
computers were a lot more powerful than you give them credit for
being. Unless you have some good, recognized references for a
statement like that, you shouldn't
Bruce Wrote:
The DSLRs that pros are buying aren't close to 7k. The ones
based on pro bodies are under 5K. The D60 D100 (based on
midline consumer bodies) are around 2k. What I've found
interesting is that pro Canon shooters who would never have
considered using an Elan 7, have snapped up
On Sat, 23 Mar 2002, Len Paris wrote:
I appreciate the verve, enthusiasm, and good intentions with
which you made that statement but 5 years ago was 1997 and
computers were a lot more powerful than you give them credit for
being. Unless you have some good, recognized references for a
45 matches
Mail list logo
