Yes, and not too long ago it was thought by the majority on this list that digital was too expensive and no one would ever buy a DSLR.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Pentax To Sell Tokyo HQ, Quit Low-Profit Ops To Lift Corp Value >> >> TOKYO (Nikkei)--Pentax Corp. plans to sell its Tokyo headquarters and >> withdraw from less profitable businesses under strategies the camera maker >> has >> crafted to block a takeover bid by optical glass manufacturer Hoya Corp. , >> The >> Nikkei learned Wednesday. >> =========== >> >> I think that gives the news a slightly different slant. > > Yes, that makes a heck of a lot more sense. I can't imagine the 645D would > be > particularly profitable, and even though I'm disappointed in its demise, I > can't say I'm surprised. Of all the pro studio photographers I met while > working at Reed's (many dozens, at least), maybe two of them used digital > medium format. One only used it because he was close friends with our > Hasselblad rep. > > While digital medium format is a nice idea and has a few image quality > benefits, I just don't think it makes sense from a cost point of view. > Unfortunately for us Pentaxians, Pentax needs to stick with what will make > them > money if they want to stay independant (and keep their medical devices > business > at the same time). > > This probably means the aperture simulator will never show up again, even in > a > hypothetical K1D. Pentax needs all the new-sales revenue it can get right > now. > > John > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
