[ogl]

I think that silver DA pancakes could be cool at silver K200D.

PENTAX / / / / PENTAX K200D silver

Why can't Pentax make silver DA limited? Maybe send letter to Pentax to ask about...? It's good idea! IMO

[k100d]

i personally would prefer black because it doesn't draw as much attention

[MrA]

i personally would prefer black because it doesn't draw as much attention

I've never encountered the silver model, but have heard the opposite said; that silver lenses on black bodies look like cheap rubbish lenses, ergo less prone to theft.

[Zewrak]

I personally would appreciate if they made some more lenses.

[k100d]

is it just me, i'm pretty sure i've seen a photo of a silver DA40. it was for one of the special bodies i think

[Zewrak]

is it just me, i'm pretty sure i've seen a photo of a silver DA40. it was for one of the special bodies i think

Objektiv normal Pentax SMC-FA 43/1,9 Silver Limited

FA 43mm

[melander]

CyberPhoto has the31 ltd in silver to, but its 1600$ in sweden so woudnt dream of buying it here

[k100d]

Objektiv normal Pentax SMC-FA 43/1,9 Silver Limited

FA 43mm

yup i know the FA Limiteds are all available in Silver, but the DAs are not

is it just me, i'm pretty sure i've seen a photo of a silver DA40. it was for one of the special bodies i think

i found it! i wasn't making it up
Pentax 50th Anniversary Asahi Pentax DSLR: Digital Photography Review

[ogl]

I think it's very attractive.
http://a.img-dpreview.com/news/0706/pentax50th-big.jpg

It could be good marketing move. IMO.

[Zebooka]

Yepp
With stylish red or green line

PS: I wanna 2 bodies - black K1D/K2D for my professional shooting, and Silver K2000D with two or three silver limiteds for shooting family/friends

[Zewrak]

I find it amusing that people are so excited about the looks of a camera. It's performance is more important, in my opinion. Bling bling never attracted me.

I'd rather see that Pentax spent time on making new lenses instead. Such as SDM 50/1.2 or 1.4. Well basically SDM primes over all, and more star lenses. And why not proper ones.
Imagine a setup as such ;
FA* 40mm f2
FA* 50mm f1.4.
FA* 75mm f1.8
FA* 135mm f2.8/1.8

If they came, they could be pink with yellow green for what I care.

[ftpaddict]

I find it amusing that people are so excited about the looks of a camera. It's performance is more important, in my opinion. Bling bling never attracted me.

Believe it or not, looks are VERY important. Each manufacturer has to have a trademark look. Think of the red Nikon swoosh under the shutter release button. Instantly recognizable. Or those red rings around the lens from that company whose name I can't remember.

It's all about marketing.


Pentax don't make silver bodies available to the entire world, so there is no point in making silver lenses.

[Zebooka]

Perfomance is allready great for hobby and amateur photographers.

About primes.... There is no need for such line. First of all too much vaious focal lengths, secondly - Pentax is amateur gear, not "Professional" like C* or N*. There is no need in 1.2 primes - no body will by them, as well as 1.8/2.0 primes are not profitable - people preffer zooms.

Aaaaand... Current primes line:
DA Lims: 15/(i guess 4.5), 21/3.5, 35/2.8, 40/2.8, 70/2.4 (here we need something like 105/2.8 or 3.5)
DA* primes: 30/(i guess 1.4 or 1.7), 55/1.4, (here we need 85/1.4 and 135/2.8)

[Gooshin]

I find it amusing that people are so excited about the looks of a camera. It's performance is more important, in my opinion. Bling bling never attracted me.



If they came, they could be pink with yellow green for what I care.

what kind of shoes do you wear?

what kind of pants do you wear?

by your logic you would dress yourself in carboard and garbage bags, much cheaper than real clothing.

[Zewrak]

Funny you would ask really. So funny I had to take a picture of my shoes.

Your comparison does not work though, there is no good function in cardboard and plastic.

My shoes are a pair of Dr.Marteen's military lowcuts with steel platings in the front. I bought them 5 years ago, after my other pair broke down completly. It is my only pair of shoes and I use them every day 365 days a year, I use them at weddings, just finish them up with new black and polish. I use them in the forest when I am out hiking and taking photographs, I wear them in the snow (I do add some extra padding in the winter though, because the plates gets cold.
The shoes cost me about 70£ new, which is about 12£ per year so far.

Usually I wear ordinary blue jeans when I am outdoors and ordinary training pants when I am indoors slacking. A pair of jeans usually cost me about 10-12£ I do not care what brand it is, as long as it is proper jeans cloth that do hold to some wear and tear. They usually last for 2-3 years if I have 3 pairs.

I have one proper suit which cost me about 120£ when I bought it 7 years ago, it still fits and looks mint.

Btw, most of my camera lenses dates earlier then 1980, they all have one thing in common, they are of quality.

I got a motorcycle that was built 1983 (Suzuki GRS 650), runs like a charm, never breaks down. Quality, but not the looks of a HD or one of the newer bikes.

Basically, I live a life where I use thing that can stand to be used and I do put value into quality over looks. My computer don't have a case, it gets too hot .

I do not in anyway, deny that in marketing looks matter. But as I said, I am still amazed that it do that, to the extent it does. Especially when it comes to clothes really, where a crap t-shirt can sell for 5 times more then a quality t-shirt. Only difference is that you get to do PR for the company that does the crap one.