I agree with you Robert (except I like the PZ-1p).
For myself, I've pretty much determined that Pentax couldn't offer me much
more in a 35mm camera than I already have with the PZ-1p. If any new camera
is going to cost close to a $1000, I figure I will get a much better bank
for the buck ratio by going with medium format as in a 67II.
Tom C.
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert VanNatta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, January 15, 2001 2:24 PM
Subject: Re: just talked to Pentax ...(about the MZ-S)
>I guess I agree. The flaming and profanity is simply not needed. There
are
>ways to communicate
>strong feelings without being so obnoxious. That said, it is clear (in
>hindsight) that pentax has made some
>marketing errors over the years that threaten their future. Ten years of
>cameras that looked like plastic junk
>(the P series and SF series come to mind) couldn't have helped.
>
>Having used Pentaxes for 35 years, it seems that pentax has tremendous
engineers
>who invent the niftiest
>new ideas, and some competitor makes the money exploiting the idea.
>
>We all have significant investments in Pentax Iron, and while thier
failures are
>frustrating, their failures are also
>our potential failure, becuase if Pentax flicks out of the SLR business,
our
>investment in glass ends up
>in the land fill.
>
>If Pentax (and pentax users) are going to survive over time we must have
a
>migration path that remains open.
>This implies a need for some serious shoring up on the high end.
Presently
>there is no logical successor
>to the LX, and no logical successor to the P1Z, and there is no migration
path
>to digital.
>
>The photokina displays of a high end silver based camera and a companion
digital
>model are clearly what
>is needed. We can only hope that Pentax goes forth with these and finds a
>'feature/price balance' that
>provides us with a good value and sells well. If they we we all have a
>future, otherwise we need to be
>wishing for a 'canon' adapter for our Pentax lenses. The zx-5(n) is a
great
>camera, and worthy of a nomination for best in its class, but it and its
>crippled children (the zx30-50) won't sustain Pentax in the
>SLR business for much longer. We are now without dispute in the 21st
century
>and those models are clearly from the previous century.
>
>aimcompute wrote:
>
>> My hand is half way up/down.
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> I have long wondered why PENTAX hosted a list that DID HAVE SO MUCH
NEGATIVE
>> CONTENT, both as mentioned above and expressed towards PENTAX, their
>> "inability to compete", their lack of a "New Pro Body", etc., etc. For
one
>> I never felt comfortable leveling outright criticism at PENTAX because it
>> would be akin to biting the hand that is feeding you (by hosting the
list).
>> Why would any self-respecting company (or individual) deliberately
provide a
>> forum in which their reputation would be cast in doubt? To me it makes
>> perfect sense that PENTAX would cease to host a list, the content of
which
>> was questionable as to being in the company's best interest.
>>
>
>snip
>
>> Tom C.
>>
>>
>
>-
>This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
>go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Visit the PUG at
>http://pug.komkon.org.
>
>
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Visit the PUG at
http://pug.komkon.org.
