From: Charlie Self on
On May 4, 9:02�am, John Bean <waterf...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4 May 2007 04:36:33 -0700, Charlie Self
>
> <charlie...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >I just checked U.S. prices for the K10D and the Samsung. Straight
> >body, K10D is $850 (minus 50 buck rebate), Samsung is $1000.  That's
> >at B&H. Not for me.
>
> Charlie, the OP is quoting UK prices so I assume he's in the
> UK. Samsung sells for a *much* lower price than Pentax in
> the UK, not the other way around as it seems to be in the
> US.
>
> That's why I have a Samsung SA50-200 rather than a Pentax
> DA50-200 on my DS.
>
> --
> John Bean

John: Is the swing that great? When the rebate is knocked off, we're
talking about a $200 difference for essentially the same product.
Certainly, if I could get a GX10 for $200 less than the Pentax, I'd be
at least poised to leap, even though I don't really have the hots for
either one...but at $600!

Of course, the OP was writing about either pounds or euros, both of
which are worth more than the buck. And his cost was $1,195. Argh!
Ouch. That's my wallet screaming in commiseration. I'm complaining
about, essentially, an $825 K10D. I apologize.

From: John Bean on
On 4 May 2007 06:15:08 -0700, Charlie Self
<charliediy(a)gmail.com> wrote:

>On May 4, 9:02?am, John Bean <waterf...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 4 May 2007 04:36:33 -0700, Charlie Self
>>
>> <charlie...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> >I just checked U.S. prices for the K10D and the Samsung. Straight
>> >body, K10D is $850 (minus 50 buck rebate), Samsung is $1000. hat's
>> >at B&H. Not for me.
>>
>> Charlie, the OP is quoting UK prices so I assume he's in the
>> UK. Samsung sells for a *much* lower price than Pentax in
>> the UK, not the other way around as it seems to be in the
>> US.
>>
>> That's why I have a Samsung SA50-200 rather than a Pentax
>> DA50-200 on my DS.
>>
>> --
>> John Bean
>
>John: Is the swing that great? When the rebate is knocked off, we're
>talking about a $200 difference for essentially the same product.

We have no rebates :-(

There's a lot of variation but taking a single supplier who
sells both the Samsung "kit" will sell for about the same
price as the Pentax body, so you basically get the lenses
free. The kit lenses are not cheap in the UK, I paid �129
for my Samsung 50-200, the Pentax was �169 - that's over
$300... So yes, you could easily save the equivalent of $200
in the UK by buying a Samsung rather than Pentax, depending
on what kit you buy.


>Certainly, if I could get a GX10 for $200 less than the Pentax, I'd be
>at least poised to leap, even though I don't really have the hots for
>either one...but at $600!
>
>Of course, the OP was writing about either pounds or euros, both of
>which are worth more than the buck. And his cost was $1,195. Argh!
>Ouch. That's my wallet screaming in commiseration. I'm complaining
>about, essentially, an $825 K10D. I apologize.

Yep, that's the way it is. After saving your $200 equivalent
by buying Samsung instead of Pentax here in the UK you would
still be paying $200 more than US prices for Pentax. It's a
funny old world.

--
John Bean
From: Sam on

"Charlie Self" <charliediy(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178278593.746436.242230(a)y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
On May 4, 3:06?am, "Sam" <n...(a)thisaddress.net> wrote:
> "Paul Mitchum" <use...(a)mile23.c0m> wrote in message
>
> news:1hxjs37.jed9g11fe8k00N%usenet(a)mile23.c0m...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Sam <n...(a)thisaddress.net> wrote:
>
> >> "Paul Mitchum" <use...(a)mile23.c0m> wrote in message
> >>news:1hxjpqn.etn724pqlb2lN%usenet(a)mile23.c0m...
> >> > Sam <n...(a)thisaddress.net> wrote:
>
> >> >> Just in case anyone was wondering whether the Samsung GX-10 (K10D
> >> >> clone)
> >> >> is
> >> >> as good as the Pentax version, wonder no more - it's better.
> >> > [..]
>
> >> > Does it have the firmware to control the SDM autofocus in the new DA*
> >> > lenses?<<
>
> >> I don't know - I've put Samsung firmware 1.2 on it today, which gives
> >> all
> >> the current Pentax features, wireless flash, etc.
>
> >> Samsung state that 'weather sealed lenses' are due 'in the first
> >> quarter
> >> of
> >> 2007' - so that obviously means the new DA*'s, which in turn obviously
> >> means
> >> that it's almost certain that the firmware will support in-lens drive.
>
> > Well, no it doesn't mean that at all. The DA* lenses can also use the
> > in-camera motor, and I can imagine Pentax wanting their brand to have
> > the super-cool feature set that Samsung/Schneider doesn't. It'd be nice
> > to know for sure, but I can't even find the cameras on Samsung's
> > website.<
>
> Maybe, but I doubt if Samsung will lose that advantage, given their
> expressed corporate intention to become a major player in the DSLR market.
>
> In fact, it's possible that the 'in lens motor' concept was a Samsung
> requirement at the planning stage of the K10D - GX10 - it was, after all,
> Samsung's cash that made it possible, and they might well have insisted
> upon
> a more up to date drive system, while Pentax wanted to keep the body drive
> for legacy reasons. If that's the case, there is no way they will not
> allow their own GX-10 to support the new lenses
>
>
>
> > By the way, the DA* ship date has been moved to August (ask me how I
> > know).<<
>
> OK - how do you know ;)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I just checked U.S. prices for the K10D and the Samsung. Straight
body, K10D is $850 (minus 50 buck rebate), Samsung is $1000. That's
at B&H. Not for me.

UK prices, Charlie. The Samsung twin-lens kit sells for substantially less
than the Pentax equivalent, and has twice the warranty.


From: Sam on

"Pete D" <no(a)email.com> wrote in message
news:463b2bb5$0$17198$5a62ac22(a)per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> "Sam" <not(a)thisaddress.net> wrote in message
> news:4KCdnQJJqo7RYKfbRVnytgA(a)eclipse.net.uk...
>>
>> "Pete D" <no(a)email.com> wrote in message
>> news:463afa2e$0$17199$5a62ac22(a)per-qv1-newsreader-
>>> Wireless flash has been available since 1.10, what Samsung flashes are
>>> you using?<<
>>
>> I've bought the Samsung SEF-36PXF, which is an identical clone of the
>> Pentax AF-360FGZ. It cost �99.99, unlike the Pentax version which goes
>> for between �150 - �200.
>
> Identical clone??? LOL!
>
>
>>>> In fact, it's possible that the 'in lens motor' concept was a Samsung
>>>> requirement at the planning stage of the K10D - GX10 - it was, after
>>>> all,
>>>
>>> Rubbish, this is market driven because the big players have in lens
>>> motors.<
>>
>> 'Rubbish'? - try not to be so agressive. I, personally, have little
>> doubt that in-lens motors were Samsung's idea - they know what the market
>> wants, unlike Pentax who were obliged to constantly reissue dismal
>> variations of their 6mp *istD until Samsung put some money into the pot.
>
> And all yours did not work properly?<<


You mean that there *are* some K10D's that meter properly and produce
images without those attractive noise patterns?!! - amazing, what an
astonishing world we live in! (snigger)


>> Endless product delays are another Pentax specialty (645D,
>> nyone?....) - perhaps, this time, prompted by the fact that they are on
>> the brink of going out of the camera business for good.
>
> Link to this "proof"??<<<

I daresay that you're the sort of clueless fool who would demand to see the
hole in the Titanic's side before getting into a lifeboat - for most people,
at least those with a minimum of three correctly functioning brain cells,
the writing is on the wall and it's extremely legible ;)

At the moment Pentax is standing on the corner like a Tokyo tart, just
waiting for someone to buy her.........I suppose you could say that Pentax
is well and truly shagged bwwwwwwwwhhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!


From: RichA on
On May 4, 9:15 am, Charlie Self <charlie...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 4, 9:02?am, John Bean <waterf...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 4 May 2007 04:36:33 -0700, Charlie Self
>
> > <charlie...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > >I just checked U.S. prices for the K10D and the Samsung. Straight
> > >body, K10D is $850 (minus 50 buck rebate), Samsung is $1000. ?That's
> > >at B&H. Not for me.
>
> > Charlie, the OP is quoting UK prices so I assume he's in the
> > UK. Samsung sells for a *much* lower price than Pentax in
> > the UK, not the other way around as it seems to be in the
> > US.
>
> > That's why I have a Samsung SA50-200 rather than a Pentax
> > DA50-200 on my DS.
>
> > --
> > John Bean
>
> John: Is the swing that great? When the rebate is knocked off, we're
> talking about a $200 difference for essentially the same product.
> Certainly, if I could get a GX10 for $200 less than the Pentax, I'd be
> at least poised to leap, even though I don't really have the hots for
> either one...but at $600!
>
> Of course, the OP was writing about either pounds or euros, both of
> which are worth more than the buck. And his cost was $1,195. Argh!
> Ouch. That's my wallet screaming in commiseration. I'm complaining
> about, essentially, an $825 K10D. I apologize.

For whatever reason, that Samsung is MIA, where exactly can you find
stock in the U.S.? Kind of hard to sell vapourware.
Reminds me of the Olympus E-400 debacle.