Rob Studdert wrote:
On 26 May 2005 at 0:44, Alan Chan wrote:
My observation is that the success of Pentax back in the Spotmatic and M series
period was due to their unique yet affordable SLR bodies. However, since the A
series, the lack of these quality has failed to capture the attention of the
general public. To prove this theory, after the long struggling with the SF &
Z/PZ series, the introduction of the MZ/ZX-5 have put Pentax back in serious
business again, something not even the MZ-S could do due to its cost. So it
seems "unique + affordable" have always been the winning combination for Pentax
135 system. And I think the DS possess these quality as well, although a little
short on unique. Am I wrong?
So if someone with no SLR kit and with no potential access to your lenses asked
you for honest advice on which entry level DLSR kit to consider would point
them the Pentax way (ie *ist Ds) or towards Canon (350D)?
Possibly. Or maybe I'd recommend a Nikon... But that's me; I sort of
like being different and/or have a certain prejudice against selecting
the market leader...I'd recommend a Mac or Linux box over MS Windows any
day, too, if you know what I'm saying... I guess I just don't follow the
argument that says "they must be the best because they are the largest".
My reasoning is more like "they're probably not that good because they
don't have to as long as the sell so much anyway just by because they
are large"...
I'm great at selling Canon, I just say you'll end up being as frustrated as me
if you go the Pentax route.
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
