Originally posted by creampuff I may be the minority but I agree 100% with Ned's assessment. Pentax does not need a pared down low cost model. The approach to offer feature laden cameras that caters to varying photographic skill level is a sound approach applicable for the present.
Yes, but I think his statement regarding entry level SLR as merely P & S cameras is very inaccurate. I see nothing wrong with a $450 Pentax body, with reasonably priced lens's. These entry level buyers are likely to be brand loyal as their needs and skill increase.
The more I think about Ned's interview, the more I am shaking my head. He says: "Pentax had great success with the K1000 in the ’70s and ’80s, as the photography student’s first SLR, when it was time to upgrade, many of them moved up to another brand. So we never gained a long-term relationship with these customers." That is a very untrue statement. How many Pentax users on this board had K1000 cameras. I did, and mine was used and beat on, but I loved it. When I was ready to move over to a DSLR from my Sony P&S, I would have definately gone with Canon or Nikon if not the experience with my old film K1000. Also, had my only option been a $1300 istD, I would have bought the EOS. The $600 ist DS fit my budget, and that's what I got. I have since purchased the K100d, K10D, and K20D.
So in conclusion, I feel that Ned's statement is either naive, or he is trying to not let the cat out of the bag in regard to a new model coming out. At the same time, what else could he say...."gee, we only have 2 models because that's all we can afford to market and develop". That would sound worse I suppose/ My opinion, I think Pentax needs the 20, 200, 2000, and a K1d. People invest in systems, and they always look to move up.