[Blue]

(1) Yikes! Hyperbolic much?

(2) KEH is selling that lens; Pentax isn't.

(3) Really, "raping"?

Does the new prices effect used prices? By that logic, you could say BH/Adorama is selling that lens, not Pentax. Granted, those have a 1 year warranty. Then again the used gear at KEH has several months warranty.

[AGWoodard]

KEH is selling that lens; Pentax isn't

Why am I not surprised you can't see the bigger picture here?

[AGWoodard]

Does the new prices effect used prices?

Well, I don't know. What do you think?

Two weeks ago, that lens sold new for 509 or 549 something like that,

so.....

how much luck do you think KEH would have had selling it used for 50 bucks more than you could have bought it for new..?

[Blue]

Well, I don't know. What do you think?

Two weeks ago, that lens sold new for 509 or 549 something like that,

so.....

how much luck do you think KEH would have had selling it used for 50 bucks more than you could have bought it for new..?

That was rhetorical. The rest of the post should make that obvious given I was directing that to Quicksands post via quote.

[Medium FormatPro]

Your assessment about Kodak is harsh and only partially accurate. Kodak did recognize the potential for digital imagery. They were pioneers in the field in many ways, including the development of the digital internegative process that is the standard in motion pictures today (but was too far ahead of its time to catch on when Kodak originated it). I'm sure most people would agree that they were not able to prosper in the digital marketplace, but it is always easier to have a vision than it is to execute in a profitable manner. It's a shame to me that people aren't more aware of Kodak's role in digital imagery. I probably also feel the need to defend them because I've been to their building several times, and they've always been generous with their time and with helping student filmmakers.

I've worked directly with Kodak from the 80's up to just a few year ago. I believe that the Wikipedia article in relation to Kodak (actually Eastman Kodak) explains it best - the Kodak (failure) hhappened as a type of sequence or series of events over many years.

I remember it as starting with the Kodak disc camera - and then later in cameras (or camera formats) as the APS cartridge/film.

Also that much like the american automotive industry - they never "saw it coming"; meaning they never saw other companies such as Fuji, Ilford, Agfa, etc... Never forget how Kodak lost the Olympic endorsement deal; and it was a major sign of things to come.

Oh well, to complicated to perhaps explain here - even in outline form. I just know that Kodak wil be greatly missed

[fuent104]

But they haven't gone away yet. At the very least, I think they will continue as a brand name. There really still is a place for them in motion pictures, too. I certainly hope the best for them.

It's funny that you mentioned Agfa. I was watching "Out of Africa" for the first time recently, and the credits state that it was shot on Agfa film.

[Alizarine]

I don't need to ask Pentax. I have been with K-mount ever since its inception. It isn't just in the U.S.A. that the prices have been elevated. It is happening in other countries as well.

Well sir, it just came late in the U.S. I think. Most of the rest of the world had those elevated prices from the beginning and I can only hope the price elevation won't happen in my place.

But they haven't gone away yet. At the very least, I think they will continue as a brand name. There really still is a place for them in motion pictures, too. I certainly hope the best for them.

Who knows, Kodak might even make a comeback.

[Medium FormatPro]

But they haven't gone away yet. At the very least, I think they will continue as a brand name. There really still is a place for them in motion pictures, too. I certainly hope the best for them

One can only hope.

I wouldn't mind seeing Panaflex/Panavision cameras around for quite some time into the future. i wa salo impressed to see quite the number of really popular movies being still shot on film - such as the most recent Star Trek movie - complete with more lens flare than one could ever see on a disposable camera - ouch.

But unfortunately... There's items on the market now for a few years - the Red or RedOne camera line that goes for a fraction of what the Panie's rent for.

I also couldn't help bu tnotice the decline in box office numbers recenty; and almost wonder how many theaters will remain arond in abou ten years or so??

[Blue]

Well sir, it just came late in the U.S. I think. Most of the rest of the world had those elevated prices from the beginning and I can only hope the price elevation won't happen in my place.

The rest of the world didn't always have elevated prices, and just to be clear, they have gone up in the U.K. and other places as well. Perhaps you guys should have been buying Nikon. Considering, the bodies have been made in the Philippines for a long time, it is ironic.

Who knows, Kodak might even make a comeback.

I doubt it since the company had been busted up. We will be lucky if the remaining film lines stay in production. The loss of Kodachrome 64 was the forewarning of Kodak's imminent troubles.

[Alizarine]

The rest of the world didn't always have elevated prices, and just to be clear, they have gone up in the U.K. and other places as well. Perhaps you guys should have been buying Nikon. Considering, the bodies have been made in the Philippines for a long time, it is ironic.

Sorry, by "elevated" I just meant higher, from the start. Singapore is so far the closest in terms of pricing to the U.S., as far as I know, within around a hundred or so dollars for modern lenses produced. And yes, it's quite a Nikon country here, which is why Canon is getting their hands on every Canon-using big-name photographer and a few big-name local celebrities to pump up their sales.

Sad to say the bodies being made here doesn't make a difference in local price (the K-5 sells here for a whopping equivalent of $1300~1400, body only, with taxes and stuff in).

[SuperK5]

One can only hope.

I wouldn't mind seeing Panaflex/Panavision cameras around for quite some time into the future. i wa salo impressed to see quite the number of really popular movies being still shot on film - such as the most recent Star Trek movie - complete with more lens flare than one could ever see on a disposable camera - ouch.

But unfortunately... There's items on the market now for a few years - the Red or RedOne camera line that goes for a fraction of what the Panie's rent for.

I also couldn't help but notice the decline in box office numbers recently; and almost wonder how many theaters will remain around in about ten years or so??

I think the decline in Box Office Numbers is a self inflicted wound!!! The Movies are far too expensive, The Snack Bar is also far too expensive. And last but not least... for the last few years the vast majority of films coming out just plain SUCK!!! If they want to get me back to the movies they better start making them so i don't feel like i've wasted 2 hours of my life after the movie is done!!! ....they try to blame the internet for lost music and movie sales but the truth is most of what they have been putting out recently is just plain garbage....compared to the good old days of course!!!

[Blue]

Sorry, by "elevated" I just meant higher, from the start. Singapore is so far the closest in terms of pricing to the U.S., as far as I know, within around a hundred or so dollars for modern lenses produced. And yes, it's quite a Nikon country here, which is why Canon is getting their hands on every Canon-using big-name photographer and a few big-name local celebrities to pump up their sales.

Sad to say the bodies being made here doesn't make a difference in local price (the K-5 sells here for a whopping equivalent of $1300~1400, body only, with taxes and stuff in).

If they had been "elevated" from the start here, I would be running Pentax film bodies and Nikon digital bodies. My first digital body was in fact a Nikon. When the K200d and K20d came out, I got one of each since I had been into Pentax for long time.

[fuent104]

I think the decline in Box Office Numbers is a self inflicted wound!!! The Movies are far too expensive, The Snack Bar is also far too expensive. And last but not least... for the last few years the vast majority of films coming out just plain SUCK!!! If they want to get me back to the movies they better start making them so i don't feel like i've wasted 2 hours of my life after the movie is done!!! ....they try to blame the internet for lost music and movie sales but the truth is most of what they have been putting out recently is just plain garbage....compared to the good old days of course!!!

Panavision cameras will be around forever. The flares in Star Trek would have been present on digital cameras, though; they are created by the animorphic lenses they used.

[fuent104]

"forever" might be a bit extreme. They will last for a while, though.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

It was for the folks that Canon L glass and other premium FD glass.

How many of them do you think there would still be around if Canon would have stuck to a breech-lock mount indefinitely?

If Ricoh were to announce the demise of the K-mount, imagine how the value of your DA* and DA ltd lenses would go.

Pentax will not be affected by the depreciation of lenses they have sold already. And it is not difficult to provide backward compatibility at the same level of usability that the K-01 offers.

Plus, you forget Canon wasn't on a slide at that point but Asahi had already began to slide at that point.

Exactly: Canon made a big change when they had a lot to lose, but Asahi/Pentax/Hoya/Ricoh should absolutely avoid such changes even though they have little to lose?

Of course, sticking to a mount until its end of life is nothing new for Pentax, so it is not surprising they plan to stick to the K mount until it will become obsolete as well. What I find surprising is that Ricoh thinks it's a good idea too - I would have hoped for an infusion of ideas from them, not for adopting Pentax's mindset AS IS.

Pentax is at 5% market share in the SLR world at present, so I think a fiasco may be in reverse for them.

On the contrary, bold moves are most affordable when you have little left to lose.