That's not necessarily true, right now I'm not that impressed with the
autofocus capabilities that my current camera displays. Most of the
time I'd much rather manually focus, and for that I'd rather use an M or
K or even A series lens. If Pentax improved autofocus enough that I
used it all the time I'd surely want autofocus lenses to replace most of
my M, K and A mount lenses, unless those lenses were something very
special. Additionally right now on film I have 17mm - 600mm covered with
primes (though a couple of these primes are not Pentax made) and 20-600
covered with zooms, (with a gap between 210 and 400mm), but due to the
reduced size of APS-C sized sensors my collection is deficient in the
ultra wide range. The 17mm fisheye is like a 22-24mm lens on 35mm and
my widest prime 24mm gives the AOV as a 35mm on film. The same is true
of the FA 20-35mm, as you all know it looks like a 28-50mm. I'm a prime
candidate, (get it prime... oh, never mind), for some wide lenses.
Maybe the DA fisheye zoom or the 12-24, the 14mm etc. Reasonably fast
wide lenses with reasonable manual focus feel are no brainers. The only
reason I don't have the 14mm is that I've been perpetually short of
funds for the last two years, and I'd really like an A 15mm so I can use
in on my LX as well. Not that I've shot a lot of film lately. Pentax
will still sell lenses.
David Savage wrote:
>Say Pentax did reimplemented the aperture "simulator" in a future
>body, you buy the body (for $900, as an example). As a long time
>Pentax user with a vast collection of K/M glass you're happy as a pig
>in shit.
>
>Pentax on the other hand have sold you a $900 body & that's all their
>going to get.
>
>Now lets look at a buyer just coming into Pentax they buy the $1000
>kit (body + 18-55 lens). In time said user reaches the limitations of
>the kit lens & decides to buy some new ones. They decide on a DA 16-45
>(~$390) & FA 31 (~$880). That's an extra $1270 of product that Pentax
>has sold. (And if you don't think this scenario is realistic, go over
>to the the Pentax SLR forum at DPreview and you'll find a lot of
>people like that.)
>
>And this is the point some are try to help you understand. Pentax
>makes more profit from new users (& long time users) who buy new
>products & accessories, as apposed to the minimal profit they make
>from longtime users who only want a body that fully supports their old
>K/M lenses.
>
>Also, you didn't answer my initial question, so I'll ask it again:
>
>If you were in the business of manufacturing & selling cameras &
>associated equipment which type of customer would you prefer?
>
>Keep in mind that Pentax are a company driven by profits and not some
>sort of feel good institute.
>
>As to Canon being a good place to start from scratch, I'm sure there
>were/are a lot of FD users who disagree. Also how much would it cost
>you to replace your K/M lens line up with Canon equivalents? (If it's
>even possible)
>
>Dave
>
>On 10/14/06, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>Its unethical to disable legacy products without
>>Good cause and there isnt anything cost or technically
>>Or new improvements causing it. You cant say its better for them to
>>Screw prior customers to sell new lenses they wouldn't
>>Need if they supported them fully. I wont condone it.
>>I would rather switch brands then do that. Canon is
>>>From what I can see the best brand to start from scratch with.
>>And if you have to buy new lenses just for this disabling camera,
>>Then you are essentially starting from scratch arent you?
>>jco
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>David Savage
>>Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 12:32 AM
>>
>>True, but some customers are more more desirable than others.
>>
>>If you were selling a product that supported legacy as well as the new
>>accessories (read lenses) which customer would you prefer:
>>
>>Customer type 1)
>>Slaps down their credit card and buys a $900 camera body that works
>>perfectly with there collection of 30 year old lenses, and who has no
>>intention of ever buying a new lens
>>
>>or...
>>
>>Customer type 2)
>>Slaps down their credit card and buys a $900 camera body & $390 DA
>>16-45mm f4. And who at some stage may pick up a $200 FA 50mm f1.4,
>>$540 DA 70mm f2.4 Ltd, $675 FA 77mm f1.8 Ltd., $880 FA 31mm f1.8
>>Ltd.....
>>
>>Pentax certainly aren't going to make as much profit from customer
>>type 1. Pentax have clearly indicated which customer they desire most.
>>
>>Now in all honesty John, if you were in the business of manufacturing
>>& selling cameras & associated equipment which customer would you
>>prefer?
>>
>>Dave
>>
>>On 10/14/06, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>All customers are desireable. I don't buy
>>>The argument that they only make money
>>>On lens sales and "give away" the bodies
>>>For no profit or even worse, loss.
>>>jco
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
--
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
