Originally posted by redbirdpete Surely any attempt to produce a new film SLR would fail due to the vast amount of quality SLR's available for less than 10% of original cost? OK, with Pentax there is the problem that their later autofocus SLR's have long term survival problems, but I was able to pick up a fully functional z-1 for £20. (It only works when there is film in it - don't know if that is an original feature).
qft. I picked up several MZ-S's and PZ-1p's in near-mint condition for 20% of their original price while bracing for the analog camera apocalypse. I've seen a steady decline in the availability of used film cameras in
pristine condition. Now I'm seeing more heavily used cameras being sold for scrap and dwindling avenues for repair (Eric)
i.e. it would be difficult to market a new film SLR for $500 while you can buy a decent used film camera for $20. But, this is just a phase. In less than ten years I expect that only toy cameras will be available for sale. I don't like toy cameras, unless they have a mount for my SLR lenses.
The mantra that "Pentax was late to the DSLR market" is just rubbish. I didn't see that sentiment when Samsung Galaxy followed the iPhone.
I also don't agree that low market demand requires the extinction of a technology. How much demand was there for film photography before the Kodak Instamatic? Sometimes a company needs to create the demand for a product which you didn't you know you needed.
And, (rant continues) I don't agree that old technology is obsolete technology e.g. film. The "Wheel" is roughly 5,520 years old and nobody is complaining that it's obsolete.