Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote:
Boris Liberman wrote on 01.06.05 14:12:
Sylwek, I think the main issue here is like this. Imagine for a
moment, just for sake of this discussion, that Pentax or Minolta are
considering investing into development of FF DSLR, but still on the
marketing level. Now they read the news. What would they say - "these
guys at Kodak are not stupid, and they've just cancelled the FF DSLR
they had"... Perhaps the technology is not still there, not from the
cost effectiveness point of view. So they decide to not even think of
pursuing a FF DSLR...
Is it good? Is it bad? I've no clue. But I think it is a plausible scenario.
That by the way would be my response to Kostas' question as well...
Who knows, perhaps development of FF DSLR is *the* next breakthrough
which now will be postponed, perhaps indefinitely... Or may be not...
Who really knows? For now it seems unlikely that FF will ever be popular.
Demand is low and thus production too hence price high... And it seems that
pros prefere cameras as good photographics tools - that's why APS-C sensor
based D2X is and was selling much better than FF Kodaks even though their
price was very similar.
Or maybe the Nikon would still have sold more than the Kodak even if
they had swapped sensors? Differently put, don't you think the Nikon
sold more than the Kodak just because the Nikon is a Nikon and the Kodak
is, well, not a Nikon, or a Canon, or even a Pentax...
- T
