Oh, they can afford to lose a sale; it costs them far less than trying to please everybody.
Let's face it - we've seen some feature-lists here that are never going to show up on a $2000 body in the next 3 years (and even some that will never show up on a camera aimed at any market Pentax stand a hope of capturing). I anticipate that when Pentax *do* release their next camera (which I confidently predict will have neither a mechanical aperture simulator coupler nor a full-frame sensor) all the loudest complainers will, yet again, find reasons not to purchase one. (I also expect that a few of us - including Paul Stenquist, Bruce Dayton, and myself - will purchase one, and find that it is perfectly capable of capturing wonderful images) On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 11:45:12AM -0400, P. J. Alling wrote: > They should, they can't afford to lose a sale. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >In a message dated 9/22/2005 8:31:26 AM Pacific Standard Time, > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >Wish all you want Canon don't care... > >========= > >The question is, sorry, does Pentax care a lot more? > > > >Hehehehehe. I think companies they is companies. > > > >Marnie aka Doe ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > -- > When you're worried or in doubt, > Run in circles, (scream and shout).
