Very well put. Years ago, I had a Nikon F3HPwith the SB12 (?) winder...a
damned good camera, yes, but I have had just as good results with my current
beasties, the Super Program and P5. I was trying to impress people at the
time, in more ways than one, and it got me nowhere but broke.
----- Original Message -----
From: Bucky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 12:24 PM
Subject: Re: MZ-S review in Amateur Photographer (first UK review)
> Prejudice is the biggest obstacle Pentax faces, period.
>
> We live in an age where 99% of people who drive SUVs rather than minivans
do
> so not because they will EVER, EVER, EVER drive off-road, but because they
> feel more hip driving them to the grocery store. It's an age where people
> will pay $4 for a coffee from Starbuck's (I once saw a person pouring
coffee
> from a generic styrofoam cup into a Starbuck's cup - for what reason? It
> certainly won't taste any better - or worse, for that matter). Less
> recently, look at the triumph of VHS over Beta - an inferior format
winning
> out due solely to marketing. It's fundamentally irrational.
>
> There's a person on one of the photo newsgroups who calls herself
"Annika".
> She posts pictures taken with what she calls the "fabulous EOS 1V". They
> are badly composed, badly exposed snapshots that would be laughed off the
> PUG, were they ever to appear in that forum. She insists the camera is
> fabulous, and you know what? I bet it is. It sure doesn't show in her
> pictures, which could easily be duplicated with my Stylus Epic. What she
> has purchased is not photographic potential. It's pride of ownership and
a
> very light wallet. That's fine, if that's what she wants. It doesn't
bode
> well for Pentax, though. Unlike the F5, no one's going to buy the MZ-S to
> impress the folks who see them wearing it around their neck.
>
> My point? Pretentious poserism is rampant. By and large, people buy
image,
> specifications, test results, self-esteem, pride of ownership over
> functionality. By and large, they buy not what they need, or think they
> will need, but what gives them the image they want.
>
> Pentax makes a wide range of good equipment. They certainly have a line
of
> high-quality glass that includes more choices than 99% of the gear-buying
> public will ever need, myself included. The have backward compatibility
> second to none. But Pentax has little cachet to sell its 35mm equipment
for
> it. Many salesmen, and most consumers, are going to have to be seriously
> persuaded before they give it a fair shake. It's all right, though.
We'll
> all live.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Terence Mac Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 9:52 AM
> Subject: Re: MZ-S review in Amateur Photographer (first UK review)
>
> > The point I aimed at was that I think its disingenuous of Pentax to
pitch
> > this fine camera against the "pro" market, as they will get more reviews
> in
> > this vein. Pitching it as a compact, portable, well built and featured
> > model is all well and good, but it will always be compared to others.
>
>
> -
> 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 .
>
-
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 .
