Re: *istd: first visual impression

2003-02-28 Thread Pål Jensen
Mike wrote: > I don't see what is so bad about Pentax making a camera that is as good as > the D100, which is one of the best-selling, best-performing DSLRs on the > world market. Seems like a pretty good mark to hit to me. If I wanted a Nikon I would have bought one. I've never been a closet Nik

Re: *istd: first visual impression

2003-02-27 Thread Mike Johnston
> I think it is very well specified camera in small body but its presentation > and design is very derivative. You could remove the Pentax name with Nikon or > perhaps Minolta and no one would have noticed. In this is the real point; no > one except those with K-mount lenses will notice. I had expe

Re: *istd: first visual impression

2003-02-27 Thread Pål Jensen
Mike wrote: > Pål, > I'm surprised you're being so critical. I think the *ist D is very > attractively styled, and it's certainly eliciting a lot of excited > utterances around here. And there's certainly nothing wrong with the Sony 6 > mp sensor--it's a very good sensor and 6 mp is the ideal size

Re: *istd: first visual impression

2003-02-27 Thread Mike Johnston
>> It wouldn't be half bad if it sold like F80s. > > > But why should it? It is not that the *Ist D is bad in any way. But it is an > also ran looking like a F80 with sensor of a one year old Nikon DSLR. The only > selling point will be price. Lets just hope that the compettition does not put > o

Re: *istd: first visual impression

2003-02-27 Thread Peter Jansen
Pål wrote: ..."looking like a F80 with sensor of a one year old Nikon DSLR." Hmm. Is this camera going to suffer the same fate as the Pz-1/p Too similar top the competition --- _Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bruce wrote: > > > > It wouldn't be half bad if it sold like F80s.

RE: *istd: first visual impression

2003-02-27 Thread Rob Brigham
Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 27 February 2003 15:10 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: *istd: first visual impression > > > Bruce wrote: > > > > It wouldn't be half bad if it sold like F80s. > > > But why should it? It is not that the

Re: *istd: first visual impression

2003-02-27 Thread Pål Jensen
Bruce wrote: > It wouldn't be half bad if it sold like F80s. But why should it? It is not that the *Ist D is bad in any way. But it is an also ran looking like a F80 with sensor of a one year old Nikon DSLR. The only selling point will be price. Lets just hope that the compettition does not p

Re: *istd: first visual impression

2003-02-27 Thread Bruce Rubenstein
It wouldn't be half bad if it sold like F80s. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Instead we got something that looks like a Nikon F80.

Re: *istd: first visual impression

2003-02-27 Thread Pål Jensen
Alin wrote: > Wheels a la PZ-1p! What a disappointment... impacts significantly on > the design and makes it more of a C/N clone. The film *ist is more > stylish and distinguishable. I agree. I have no doubt that it will appeal to people sitting on old K-mount glass, but it won't steal a s