Godfrey, I couldn't have said it better myself. You have articulated my thoughts almost exactly.
Thanks, Bruce Wednesday, February 15, 2006, 7:18:00 PM, you wrote: GD> I do not understand this "gotta have new more better faster more now" GD> attitude. The rumors and supposedly informed folks have said here and GD> on every Pentax oriented forum for months that they will have new SLR GD> products to announce at Photokina 2006, NOT PMA. GD> Products announced for PMA have been in the pipeline for 7-10 months GD> at least. Just because they're going to focus on higher end cameras GD> like SLRs doesn't mean they're going to dump every new product in the GD> P&S range. GD> I'm not exasperated with Pentax. I'm exasperated with the knee-jerk GD> reactions by Pentax users, both here and on the other forums. To me, GD> the fact that they came out with a very successful *ist D, then GD> followed it with a very solid and useful *ist DS, DL, DS2 models that GD> are closely related shows that they have good guts in the design, and GD> are willing to put in the time and money for a carefully considered GD> development program. GD> There is NOTHING wrong with the D or the DS/DL/DS2 bodies. They may GD> not be the top-end market leaders on features or speed, and they may GD> not be at the state of the art on resolution anymore, but they are GD> solid, reliable, consistent, high quality cameras which are GD> absolutely useful and produce excellent photographs. GD> Pentax' conservative design and development is very appealing to me, GD> and is not so very different from Nikon's. Nikon's upgrade for their GD> D100 body, the D200, took just about as long as the time between GD> Pentax D introduction and the upcoming D2 rumored to be announced in GD> the fall. The D100, like the *ist D, was slow, a little feature- GD> sparse, but produced excellent pictures. And the D200 is a superb, GD> state of the art body. I see no reason why the D2, with a similar GD> time in development, will be any less. GD> Godfrey
