"Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> SETH wroth:
>
> > This was always the case.
>
>
> No. The electronic revolution broke a number of camera
manufacturers. In fact, developing cost have increased dramatically
after camera became electronic.
As Pål is so fond of saying, this is utter bullshit. The cost of
cameras was always primarily a function of materials used and the
manufacturing process. That's why a Leica rangefinder will always
have to cost more than latest plastic fantastic SLR. This is
inspite of the fact that all of R&D money that went into M6 was
spent years ago, while Canon has to come out with with a new Rebel
evey couple of years.
Pål's "proof" is just plain wrong. Many companies that went bust
were the very ones that lead the "electronic" revolution. Yashica
is a good example. Konica didn't go belly up only because it could
rely on its other businesses. On top of that, many companies
disapeared long before electronic cameras became commonplace.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
