Mike wrote: >All this smacks of great good sense to me. What they're going to do is >release a smaller-CCD-size, LOWER COST, 3-5-mp digital SLR ASAP, and put >off MR-42 until both the market and the technology are more stable. > >I like the idea. What it means for the Pentax loyalist is that we will >have a potentially MUCH more affordable digital SLR to cut our teeth on, >technology we buy now will be more reliable and more tried-and-true, and >we will still be able to use all our existing lenses and system accessories.
I certainly hope you're correct. Right now I'm still *furious* at this latest development. I spent several thousand dollars on equipment this year, largely based on the confidence that the digital SLR was coming and what I bought would be compatible. This sudden change, whatever the rationale, is inexcusable. Yes, digital technology is advancing at a tremendous rate and the market for it isn't stable. But in October of 2001 they can't really expect me to believe that this is NEWS to them and that it's taken them by surprise. >P.S. I have to say that I'm totally NOT sold on the idea that a "full-size" >sensor (meaning 35mm size, 24mm x 36mm) is a good idea. I am. At least if your statement that "we will still be able to use all our existing lenses" is important. It is to me and I love wide angles, so I'd be totally screwed by a smaller CCD. Hell, I'm totally pissed off just *thinking* about my recently acquired Pentax 80-200/2.8 becoming a 90-260 (I almost bought the Sigma because it went down to 70mm rather than 80). >I'm really not sure it is. A smaller sensor size is really a great advantage: >it means lenses can be significantly smaller and lighter and significantly >faster, and depth of field can be greater for a given angle of view. All >these are true advantages. I suspect that 24 x 36mm sensors will prove to >be an evolutionary dead end in the long run. Right now we think we "want" >this because it conforms to the old standards. No, I "want" it because it makes all my lenses (an investment of several thousand dollars) compatible: my 20mm will still give me the angle of view of a 20mm. >But once digital shakes free of 35mm conventions, the smaller CCD size >will seem like just one more natural advantage of digital. Having the *option* of using a smaller size CCD would certainly be an advantage. But one of the natural advantages of Pentax is backwards and forwards lens compatibility and I don't think having a 15mm lens act like a 22mm really qualifies. That said, if Pentax doesn't have *some* kind of digital SLR on the market by spring I think they'll have missed the boat for good. -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com - 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 .
