Pentax rumours become truth: *istDL to come as low budget ..

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Darrell" <spam@this.eh> wrote in message
news:xYWdnS2VkLNhowPfRVn-qw@rogers.com...
>
> "Trapezium" <nil@nil.net> wrote in message
> news:3g5p3eFaom01U1@individual.net...
>>
>> "Johannes Schwab" <perelandra@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:d7k7h9$gro$1@online.de...
>>> Found today on a german website:
>>>
>>> http/www.digifotografen.de/index.php?id=0,62,0,0,1,0
>>
>>
>>
>> Another mediocre step by Pentax along the road to bankruptcy.
>>
>> The last thing that the market needs now is yet another discount
>> de-featured DSLR.
> Actually that is what the market is calling for. The biggest growth in
> dSLR is the sub $1,000(usd) market. People who think the market revolves
> around a $2,000 dSLR body are dreaming.


You're right - but why bring out another low spec dslr? - why not forego the
R&D costs of the 'new' model, and just cut the price of the Ds?

The only reason I can think of is that, for Pentax, the *istDs is too
expensive to produce, and cutting the price long term isn't viable.

So they've cobbled together a camera that can be manufactured for noticeably
less than the cost of producing the Ds - which only seems to confirm that
Pentax have made a conscious decision to become a 'cheap' brand.

This might be what the market wants (although I think that, if necessary,
Canon & Nikon can 'out-cheap' Pentax for as long as it takes to put Pentax
out of business) but it's not what existing Pentax owners want.

They want higher spec DSLR's but they may well have to come to terms with
the fact that Pentax have hoisted their flag in the bargain bin and no
super-de-luxe DSLR will be forthcoming.

So they will exit the brand in search of better things - as (probably) will
the new intake of budget buyers once they get bored with the limitations of
their cut price DL.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Trapezium" <nil@nil.net> wrote in message
news:3g6u8lFb2j5uU1@individual.net...

> This might be what the market wants (although I think that, if necessary,
> Canon & Nikon can 'out-cheap' Pentax for as long as it takes to put Pentax
> out of business) but it's not what existing Pentax owners want.

Canon could definitely do this, if they wanted to. Nikon might have a harder
time of it, since they don't make their own sensors. Pentax has such tiny
market share, that I doubt that Canon and Nikon are interested in cutting
their margins to compete in the super-cheapo segment. People that care only
about price are not the most profitable customers.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Trapezium <nil@nil.net> wrote:

> "Darrell" <spam@this.eh> wrote in message
> news:xYWdnS2VkLNhowPfRVn-qw@rogers.com...
[..]
> > Actually that is what the market is calling for. The biggest growth in
> > dSLR is the sub $1,000(usd) market. People who think the market revolves
> > around a $2,000 dSLR body are dreaming.
>
> You're right - but why bring out another low spec dslr?

To compete.

> - why not forego the R&D costs of the 'new' model, and just cut the price
> of the Ds?
>
> The only reason I can think of is that, for Pentax, the *istDs is too
> expensive to produce, and cutting the price long term isn't viable.

Yup. The *ist DS is a tremendous value at its current price.

> So they've cobbled together a camera that can be manufactured for
> noticeably less than the cost of producing the Ds - which only seems to
> confirm that Pentax have made a conscious decision to become a 'cheap'
> brand.

Actually, if you look at their past products, you find that each SLR
series has a flagship, and then a bunch of reiterations of that flagship
that are cheaper to manufacture. I mean, there's no good reason for
there to be 11 different versions of the MZ/ZX line, other than to mark
which ease-of-manufacturing change was made.

Pentax isn't a 'cheap' brand. They make economical low-end versions of
their products, just like other camera manufacturers. On the other hand,
when I picked up a Canon Rebel XT at the store, I was afraid it was
going to crumble under the pressure of my hand. That is, to me, 'cheap.'
I know that Canon makes worthwhile products, but it's low-end entry is
not one of them. This doesn't mean Canon is a 'cheap' brand, and neither
does it mean they're a 'pro' brand.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Morris Sachs" <westmesa@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I was a Pentax MX 35mm user. I now have a fairly comprehensive Nikon
> DSLR system. I will be very interested in the new Pentax *istDS as I
> have a drawer-full of old K-mount lenses that served me well for many
> years and that are now doing nothing. I wouldn't expect top-line
> performance from the DS, but if it's cheap enough, I'd get it just to
> be able to use my old-buddy K lenses once in a while.

Do just that! Though a photographer off and on for 50 years, I never owned a
Pentax. A week ago I bought a *istDS and now am busy surfing eBay for
exactly the kind of oldie-but-goodie, cheap Pentax lenses you already have.
I chose the Pentax over the Nikon and Canon in the same price range because
the *istDS handles like a true classic SLR, and though full of bells and
whistles is also VERY easy to use in manual fashion... its designers must
have catered to old geezers like me who prefer stick shift to automatic.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Trapezium" <nil@nil.net> wrote:

> So they've cobbled together a camera that can be manufactured for
> noticeably less than the cost of producing the Ds - which only seems to
> confirm that Pentax have made a conscious decision to become a 'cheap'
> brand.

Cheap? The *istDS has a large, bright true pentaprism. The Canon and
Nikon DSLRs in the same price range make do with dimmer, smaller
pentamirrors.

As for market strategy, I wager the "gets no respect" Pentax firm has over
the years sold more SLRs to more satisfied buyers than both Nikon and Canon
combined. Not everybody wants or needs a Corvette... Pentax is the Honda
and Toyota of the camera industry :^)

--
Anti-Spam address: my last name at his dot com
Charles Gillen -- Reston, Virginia, USA

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

RichA <none@none.com> wrote:

> A manual mode only DSLR with basic functions but well-built would be
> very welcome.

The *istDS is exactly that, whenever you want it to be. All controls are
very familiar to us old manual shooters, and not deeply buried in
unaccessable screens.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Morris Sachs" <westmesa@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7rone.11730$iA6.2239@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
>
>>
>> The DS (and, now, the DL) aren't aimed at existing SLR users - they are
>> targetted at the folks moving up from a digital point-and-shoot. That's
>> the only area in the digital camera marketplace where there is growth,
>> and an opportunity for Pentax to capture a little more market share.
>
> I was a Pentax MX 35mm user. I now have a fairly comprehensive Nikon DSLR
> system. I will be very interested in the new Pentax *istDS as I have a
> drawer-full of old K-mount lenses that served me well for many years and
> that are now doing nothing. I wouldn't expect top-line performance from
> the DS, but if it's cheap enough, I'd get it just to be able to use my
> old-buddy K lenses once in a while.

In that case get a DS, you will not be disappointed, it is not a "dumbed
down" D, in fact some of it's features are improved over the D.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Yeah, pretty bad, you get that sometimes,.LOL

I will try again.

Amazon has a page where you can pre-order one.

And while I am here I am still amazed at the people that say the Ds is
"dumbed down" , go to DP Review and do a comparison, it stacks up very well
with other D-SLR's and they work really well.


"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:d7kbs3$6ac$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
> Pete D wrote:
>
>> Amazon already have them for preordering.
>
> I hope you realize how illogical that sounds. ;-)
>
> --
> -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http/www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
> -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http/www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
> -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http/www.pbase.com/shootin
> -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Charles Gillen" <see-my-sig@below.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9669CE6586B7gillen@216.194.192.13...
> "Morris Sachs" <westmesa@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I was a Pentax MX 35mm user. I now have a fairly comprehensive Nikon
>> DSLR system. I will be very interested in the new Pentax *istDS as I
>> have a drawer-full of old K-mount lenses that served me well for many
>> years and that are now doing nothing. I wouldn't expect top-line
>> performance from the DS, but if it's cheap enough, I'd get it just to
>> be able to use my old-buddy K lenses once in a while.
>
> Do just that! Though a photographer off and on for 50 years, I never
> owned a
> Pentax. A week ago I bought a *istDS and now am busy surfing eBay for
> exactly the kind of oldie-but-goodie, cheap Pentax lenses you already
> have.
> I chose the Pentax over the Nikon and Canon in the same price range
> because
> the *istDS handles like a true classic SLR, and though full of bells and
> whistles is also VERY easy to use in manual fashion... its designers must
> have catered to old geezers like me who prefer stick shift to automatic.

Yes, absolutely agree, they handle so nicely it continues to amaze and
thrill me. I have a couple of older lenses, they are great, 50mm F2 K mount,
50mm F1.8 S mount, Tamron 28mm F2.8, metering works very nicely stopped
down. Looking for something a bit bigger for some long shots. Not that happy
with the kit Sigma lenses that I got but they are okay under most
conditions.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Paul Mitchum" <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gxi3x3.qavw75opjvz4N%usenet@mile23.c0m...
> Trapezium <nil@nil.net> wrote:
>
>> "Darrell" <spam@this.eh> wrote in message
>> news:xYWdnS2VkLNhowPfRVn-qw@rogers.com...
> [..]
>> > Actually that is what the market is calling for. The biggest growth in
>> > dSLR is the sub $1,000(usd) market. People who think the market
>> > revolves
>> > around a $2,000 dSLR body are dreaming.
>>
>> You're right - but why bring out another low spec dslr?
>
> To compete.
>
>> - why not forego the R&D costs of the 'new' model, and just cut the price
>> of the Ds?
>>
>> The only reason I can think of is that, for Pentax, the *istDs is too
>> expensive to produce, and cutting the price long term isn't viable.
>
> Yup. The *ist DS is a tremendous value at its current price.
>
>> So they've cobbled together a camera that can be manufactured for
>> noticeably less than the cost of producing the Ds - which only seems to
>> confirm that Pentax have made a conscious decision to become a 'cheap'
>> brand.
>
> Actually, if you look at their past products, you find that each SLR
> series has a flagship, and then a bunch of reiterations of that flagship
> that are cheaper to manufacture. I mean, there's no good reason for
> there to be 11 different versions of the MZ/ZX line, other than to mark
> which ease-of-manufacturing change was made.
>
> Pentax isn't a 'cheap' brand. They make economical low-end versions of
> their products, just like other camera manufacturers. On the other hand,
> when I picked up a Canon Rebel XT at the store, I was afraid it was
> going to crumble under the pressure of my hand. That is, to me, 'cheap.'
> I know that Canon makes worthwhile products, but it's low-end entry is
> not one of them. This doesn't mean Canon is a 'cheap' brand, and neither
> does it mean they're a 'pro' brand.<<<


Yes, but, my contention is that Pentax may have decided to *become* a
solely cheap brand and that the cut-down DL is part of a strategy that will
involve ending the costly production of the Ds once the DL is on stream

If I'm correct, Pentax will not bother offering a high spec-D
eplacement. - they might well have decided to try and make some money at
the bottom end of the market and to forgo higher spec/lower profit cameras.

This would be disappointing for current Pentax owners who are waiting to
upgrade to a higher spec dslr.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Darrell wrote:

> Today the Minolta Canada rep confirmed a soon to be announced 5D to compete
> in the Rebel, *istDS, D50, E300 market..

... noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo..........

Any references?




--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http/www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http/www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http/www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Trapezium" <nil@nil.net> wrote in message
news:3g7so1Fb0dv8U1@individual.net...
>
> "Paul Mitchum" <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
> news:1gxi3x3.qavw75opjvz4N%usenet@mile23.c0m...
>> Trapezium <nil@nil.net> wrote:
>>
>>> "Darrell" <spam@this.eh> wrote in message
>>> news:xYWdnS2VkLNhowPfRVn-qw@rogers.com...
>> [..]
>>> > Actually that is what the market is calling for. The biggest growth in
>>> > dSLR is the sub $1,000(usd) market. People who think the market
>>> > revolves
>>> > around a $2,000 dSLR body are dreaming.
>>>
>>> You're right - but why bring out another low spec dslr?
>>
>> To compete.
>>
>>> - why not forego the R&D costs of the 'new' model, and just cut the
>>> price
>>> of the Ds?
>>>
>>> The only reason I can think of is that, for Pentax, the *istDs is too
>>> expensive to produce, and cutting the price long term isn't viable.
>>
>> Yup. The *ist DS is a tremendous value at its current price.
>>
>>> So they've cobbled together a camera that can be manufactured for
>>> noticeably less than the cost of producing the Ds - which only seems to
>>> confirm that Pentax have made a conscious decision to become a 'cheap'
>>> brand.
>>
>> Actually, if you look at their past products, you find that each SLR
>> series has a flagship, and then a bunch of reiterations of that flagship
>> that are cheaper to manufacture. I mean, there's no good reason for
>> there to be 11 different versions of the MZ/ZX line, other than to mark
>> which ease-of-manufacturing change was made.
>>
>> Pentax isn't a 'cheap' brand. They make economical low-end versions of
>> their products, just like other camera manufacturers. On the other hand,
>> when I picked up a Canon Rebel XT at the store, I was afraid it was
>> going to crumble under the pressure of my hand. That is, to me, 'cheap.'
>> I know that Canon makes worthwhile products, but it's low-end entry is
>> not one of them. This doesn't mean Canon is a 'cheap' brand, and neither
>> does it mean they're a 'pro' brand.<<<
>
>
> Yes, but, my contention is that Pentax may have decided to *become* a
> solely cheap brand and that the cut-down DL is part of a strategy that
> will involve ending the costly production of the Ds once the DL is on
> stream
>
> If I'm correct, Pentax will not bother offering a high spec-D
> placement. - they might well have decided to try and make some money at
> the bottom end of the market and to forgo higher spec/lower profit
> cameras.
>
> This would be disappointing for current Pentax owners who are waiting to
> upgrade to a higher spec dslr.

Until they support the people buying the cameras with well priced middle of
the range lenses they will not sell as many cameras as they should, the D
and the Ds are excellent cameras let down a little by suitable glass, all
the old stuff works well but the new support is poor and expensive.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Trapezium <nil@nil.net> wrote:

> If I'm correct, Pentax will not bother offering a high spec-D
> replacement.

And if you're wrong, they might.

*shrug*

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I agree with you Charles. The *istDS behaves like a classic SLR.
While I have a zoom to go with it (Sigma 18-125 DC), one combination I
love is to use this modern istDS with an old manual focus Vivitar
24f2.8 (which gives me the equivalent of a 35mm in film format).

I used to love my Leica CL with a 40mm and there are plenty of people
who would swear by a Leica M with a 35mm Summicron. I was hoping for
an inexpensive digital rangefinder but with the Epson RD-1 at
$2000plus, I went for the Pentax instead. Along with it and with my
old 24mm, I am basically trying to replicate the experience of a small
camera with an easy to focus and fast to shoot wide-angle for "street
photography".

by the way, I am also driving a stick shift 11 years old Volvo..

 

[Darrell]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:d7n452$roc$3@inews.gazeta.pl...
> Darrell wrote:
>
>> Today the Minolta Canada rep confirmed a soon to be announced 5D to
>> compete in the Rebel, *istDS, D50, E300 market..
>
> ... noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo..........
>
> Any references?
>
Just his word of mouth, but it has been rumoured for a while now. Knowing
Minolta it will be late

 

[Darrell]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Paul Mitchum" <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gxizd5.h76g7f18jmvl2N%usenet@mile23.c0m...
> Trapezium <nil@nil.net> wrote:
>
>> If I'm correct, Pentax will not bother offering a high spec-D
>> replacement.
>
> And if you're wrong, they might.
>
> *shrug*

They have already announced a M-F dSLR, so they have shown some commitment

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Paul Mitchum" <usenet@mile23.c0m> wrote in message
news:1gxizd5.h76g7f18jmvl2N%usenet@mile23.c0m...
> Trapezium <nil@nil.net> wrote:
>
>> If I'm correct, Pentax will not bother offering a high spec-D
>> replacement.
>
> And if you're wrong, they might.
>
> *shrug*

They already do, it's called 4z5 medium format? Lets face it all D-SLR's are
just toys compared to the big digitals, just depends how much you want to
pay for your toys.

 

[Darrell]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Escaper" <escaping@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1117759574.458374.308210@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>I agree with you Charles. The *istDS behaves like a classic SLR.
> While I have a zoom to go with it (Sigma 18-125 DC), one combination I
> love is to use this modern istDS with an old manual focus Vivitar
> 24f2.8 (which gives me the equivalent of a 35mm in film format).
>
> I used to love my Leica CL with a 40mm and there are plenty of people
> who would swear by a Leica M with a 35mm Summicron. I was hoping for
> an inexpensive digital rangefinder but with the Epson RD-1 at
> $2000plus, I went for the Pentax instead. Along with it and with my
> old 24mm, I am basically trying to replicate the experience of a small
> camera with an easy to focus and fast to shoot wide-angle for "street
> photography".
>
> by the way, I am also driving a stick shift 11 years old Volvo..
>
Darn modern cars, in my day the 3 on the tree shift took some skill

I do love my *ist D, and my LX... but I think my Argus C4 has film in it at
the moment.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Escaper" <escaping@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1117759574.458374.308210@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>I agree with you Charles. The *istDS behaves like a classic SLR.
> While I have a zoom to go with it (Sigma 18-125 DC), one combination I
> love is to use this modern istDS with an old manual focus Vivitar
> 24f2.8 (which gives me the equivalent of a 35mm in film format).
>
> I used to love my Leica CL with a 40mm and there are plenty of people
> who would swear by a Leica M with a 35mm Summicron. I was hoping for
> an inexpensive digital rangefinder but with the Epson RD-1 at
> $2000plus, I went for the Pentax instead. Along with it and with my
> old 24mm, I am basically trying to replicate the experience of a small
> camera with an easy to focus and fast to shoot wide-angle for "street
> photography".
>
> by the way, I am also driving a stick shift 11 years old Volvo..
>

Gotcha beat--'89 240 stick, but that's a topic for another group.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <0JOne.1329$fX3.1127@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com>,
Morris Sachs <westmesa@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Escaper" <escaping@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:1117759574.458374.308210@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>>I agree with you Charles. The *istDS behaves like a classic SLR.
>> While I have a zoom to go with it (Sigma 18-125 DC), one combination I
>> love is to use this modern istDS with an old manual focus Vivitar
>> 24f2.8 (which gives me the equivalent of a 35mm in film format).
>>
>> I used to love my Leica CL with a 40mm and there are plenty of people
>> who would swear by a Leica M with a 35mm Summicron. I was hoping for
>> an inexpensive digital rangefinder but with the Epson RD-1 at
>> $2000plus, I went for the Pentax instead. Along with it and with my
>> old 24mm, I am basically trying to replicate the experience of a small
>> camera with an easy to focus and fast to shoot wide-angle for "street
>> photography".
>>
>> by the way, I am also driving a stick shift 11 years old Volvo..
>>
>
>Gotcha beat--'89 240 stick, but that's a topic for another group.

I've still got my 1978 MX. And a 1983 Super Program. And a PZ-1p.
(And I still drive a one-owner-since-new 1986 Mustang GT convertible)