Pentax designed and marketed two Professional 35mm Cameras, the MX which
was designed to compete directly with the OM1 also considered a
Professional camera when it was introduced, and the LX which was clearly
meant to be a professional camera.. Both had extensive systems and with
many accessories interchangeable between them, (more a function of
frugality than planning, I'm afraid). The PZ-1p is touted by list
members who have some possibility of knowing as being the results of an
aborted plan for a Pro/Semi Pro body, so maybe there were actually 3
Pentax Pro. 35mm bodies. Based on this history, I see no reason for
Pentax to not have a Pro/Semi Pro body at the top of their K mount
digital line. If they can produce a "pro spec" K mount camera with
relatively high quality for a lower price while re-using much of the
technology in their consumer DSLR it'll be good for us.
Steve Sharpe wrote:
>At 6:30 PM -0700 9/2/06, Douglas Newman wrote:
>
>
>>--- "George Sinos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Keppler always has an interesting take on the
>>> industry.
>>>
>>>
>>Indeed, very interesting.
>>
>>It is worth noting that Herb uses a Pentax *ist D and
>>a Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D - not a Canon or Nikon. (He
>>is a long-time Pentax and Minolta user.)
>>
>>It is interesting that he implies that Pentax are not
>>really interested so much in "serious" photographers
>>as point-and-shooters who will be attracted by
>>"colorful graphics on the LCD panel". Not the
>>direction I would like to see them moving in...
>>
>>
>
>My hypothesis is that Pentax designed their 35mm cameras for the
>varying levels of amateur users. For the pros they had their two
>medium format lines. How all this translates over to the digital age
>remains to be seen.
>
>
>
--
Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler.
--Albert Einstein
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
