This is not at all what I have heard many times in the past. Not saying who is right or wrong but I have often been told that Pentax USA was independent which was why they do not supply international warraties wherease everywhere(?) else does. Not sure why else they would do that.
Now that it has been disputed would be nice if someone could dig out the definitive answer with proof? > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 19 August 2004 02:32 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Pentax Imaging > > > Pentax USA belongs to Pentax Japan Lock Stock and Barrel. That's the > way it's been since > Honeywell lost the distributorship in the 70's. > > William Robb wrote: > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "P�l Jensen" > >Subject: Re: Pentax Imaging > > > > > > > > > > > >>True, but this seem to be a problem in the US and Australia and > >> > >> > >nowhere(?) else. In this part of the world theres no problem with > >distribution or getting stuff provided it is still avaiable. > > > > > >>The distribution channels seem excellent; my 600mm lens was > >> > >> > >delivered by overnight express mail from Pentax headquarters > in Belgium > >directly to my door. > > > >Out of curiosity, P�l, do you know which of Pentax' distributors > >worldwide are owned by the mother corp, and which ones are private > >companies? I know of only the USA and Aussie ones that are private > >companies, and they both seem to generate a lot of > complaints regarding > >distribution of goods. > > > >William Robb > > > > > > > > > > > > >
