If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
HOYA SWALLOWS PENTAX !
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
HOYA SWALLOWS PENTAX !
RiceHigh wrote:
http://ricehigh.blogspot.com/2006/12...ws-pentax.html from another source: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-6145349.html |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
End of an Era
jeremy wrote:
mechanical build quality had deteriorated noticably. Just like new cars. Better fuel economy and more amenities, at the expense of less sheet metal and smaller overall size. So, basically, you prefer cars with lots of sheet metal and large size? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
End of an Era
Well, many of us sensed that it was coming.
Pentax had been a longtime user of Hoya optical glass, but to see Hoya swallow Pentax us is disconcerting. These mergers nearly always result in big changes, and I would not be surprised if the "Pentax" name disappears entirely over the next few years. Pentax, for me, was never really the same after they changed their name from Asahi Optical Co. to Pentax Corp. They came out with uninspiring cameras that came and went without making their marks, unlike the Spotmatic series did. They cheapened their lenses once they introduced the "A" series. THis was particularly disconcerting because the optical performance of the "A" lenses was superior to that of the screwmounts and the original K-mounts, while the mechanical build quality had deteriorated noticably. Just like new cars. Better fuel economy and more amenities, at the expense of less sheet metal and smaller overall size. When I heard that Pentax had just invested in a lot of factory space in VIETNAM I knew that they had given up on their legacy. I'm depressed. THat's progress, I suppose. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
End of an Era
In article , acl
wrote: jeremy wrote: mechanical build quality had deteriorated noticably. Just like new cars. Better fuel economy and more amenities, at the expense of less sheet metal and smaller overall size. So, basically, you prefer cars with lots of sheet metal and large size? Damn straight _I_ do. Sheet metal, true internal structure (not just some flimsy suppoorts for the outer skin), and large size. I'd take high strength composite fiber/plastics (NOT fiberglass!) if they ever start making cars with them (oops, sorry, that was an inadvertent cue for RichA to enter the thread with his obsession), but until then, I want METAL around me. The more the better. Ever seen a serious wreck? Ever been in one? From 1979 to 1996, I worked as a professional, full time paramedic (in Portland, OR and other places), and the last 6 years was also a firefighter. I've _seen_ (and sometimes had to scrape up) the difference in outcomes. Sorry, but to hell with fuel economy... with the millions of people on the road in this country who merely know "how to operate a motor vehicle" as opposed to actually knowing how to _drive_ their vehicles (and there is a HUGE difference between those two skillsets), I want a tank around me, if possible. Again, damn straight I prefer a vehicle with some substance to it rather than today's tin cans that a wrinkle in the sheet metal causes major loss of body integrity and strength (literally). -- You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence. -- Charles A. Beard |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
End of an Era
Ken Lucke wrote: In article , acl wrote: jeremy wrote: mechanical build quality had deteriorated noticably. Just like new cars. Better fuel economy and more amenities, at the expense of less sheet metal and smaller overall size. So, basically, you prefer cars with lots of sheet metal and large size? Damn straight _I_ do. Sheet metal, true internal structure (not just some flimsy suppoorts for the outer skin), and large size. I'd take high strength composite fiber/plastics (NOT fiberglass!) if they ever start making cars with them (oops, sorry, that was an inadvertent cue for RichA to enter the thread with his obsession), but until then, I want METAL around me. The more the better. Ever seen a serious wreck? Ever been in one? From 1979 to 1996, I worked as a professional, full time paramedic (in Portland, OR and other places), and the last 6 years was also a firefighter. I've _seen_ (and sometimes had to scrape up) the difference in outcomes. Sorry, but to hell with fuel economy... with the millions of people on the road in this country who merely know "how to operate a motor vehicle" as opposed to actually knowing how to _drive_ their vehicles (and there is a HUGE difference between those two skillsets), I want a tank around me, if possible. Again, damn straight I prefer a vehicle with some substance to it rather than today's tin cans that a wrinkle in the sheet metal causes major loss of body integrity and strength (literally). -- You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence. -- Charles A. Beard Recent study on the news the other night. You are twice as likely to die in an accident with a small car than a large one, internal compensation devices (airbags) nothwithstanding. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
End of an Era
Ken Lucke wrote: In article , acl wrote: jeremy wrote: mechanical build quality had deteriorated noticably. Just like new cars. Better fuel economy and more amenities, at the expense of less sheet metal and smaller overall size. So, basically, you prefer cars with lots of sheet metal and large size? Damn straight _I_ do. Sheet metal, true internal structure (not just some flimsy suppoorts for the outer skin), and large size. I'd take high strength composite fiber/plastics (NOT fiberglass!) if they ever start making cars with them (oops, sorry, that was an inadvertent cue for RichA to enter the thread with his obsession), but until then, I want METAL around me. The more the better. Ever seen a serious wreck? Ever been in one? Yes, I've been in one from which I was lucky to get out alive. Can't say it changed my view (if anything, it enhanced my opinion that how a car handles is more important than how robust it is). I agree that if a tank hits me then it's better to be in another tank, though. From 1979 to 1996, I worked as a professional, full time paramedic (in Portland, OR and other places), and the last 6 years was also a firefighter. I've _seen_ (and sometimes had to scrape up) the difference in outcomes. Sorry, but to hell with fuel economy... with the millions of people on the road in this country who merely know "how to operate a motor vehicle" as opposed to actually knowing how to _drive_ their vehicles (and there is a HUGE difference between those two skillsets), I want a tank around me, if possible. Again, damn straight I prefer a vehicle with some substance to it rather than today's tin cans that a wrinkle in the sheet metal causes major loss of body integrity and strength (literally). Well, we have very different priorities in cars, I must admit. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
End of an Era
jeremy wrote:
Well, many of us sensed that it was coming. Pentax had been a longtime user of Hoya optical glass, but to see Hoya swallow Pentax us is disconcerting. These mergers nearly always result in big changes, and I would not be surprised if the "Pentax" name disappears entirely over the next few years. Actually, the "Pentax" name is one of the more valuable things Hoya's getting from the deal. I expect they'll be keeping it at least in the photography business. The driving factor behind the merger appears to be Pentax and Hoya combining their efforts in the medical imaging field. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
End of an Era
RichA wrote:
Recent study on the news the other night. You are twice as likely to die in an accident with a small car than a large one, internal compensation devices (airbags) nothwithstanding. OTOH, my own experience indicates a smaller, more nimble vehicle allows the driver avoid accidents he might not be able to avoid in a larger, heavier, less maneuverable automobile. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
End of an Era
jeremy wrote:
Well, many of us sensed that it was coming. Pentax had been a longtime user of Hoya optical glass, but to see Hoya swallow Pentax us is disconcerting. They had already swallowed a big chunk of Pentax, as their subsidiary brand Tokina makes most of the popular lenses (not the special stuff) David |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
HOYA SWALLOWS PENTAX ! | RiceHigh | Digital Photography | 1087 | January 8th 07 11:49 PM |
HOYA SWALLOWS PENTAX ! | RiceHigh | 35mm Photo Equipment | 1073 | January 8th 07 11:49 PM |
hoya and pentax merging | map | Digital Photography | 0 | December 21st 06 06:14 PM |
Hoya 67mm circular polarizer + Hoya Skylight + Nikon D70 - some problems | Nicolae Fieraru | Digital Photography | 16 | April 10th 05 11:10 AM |
Hoya 67mm circular polarizer + Hoya Skylight + Nikon D70 - some problems | Nicolae Fieraru | Digital Photography | 0 | April 9th 05 06:03 AM |