Back many years ago, I purchased a Petri FT camera because it was inexpensive and I had no idea how to use a SLR. That camera sort of bit the dust, after I carried it around two Mediterranean cruises with the Navy and also around numerous places in the USA. I replaced it with a K1000 SE which, I found, was very similar in handling to the FT. I liked the fully manual operation and the ease of handling. I fell in love with the K1000 so much I ended up with another. Still liked my original Petri and have since replaced it with two others. All together I now have two K1000 SEs and two FTs, all in excellent working order. Three years ago I started employment with a company taking photos of school students for yearbooks. The company uses Canon cameras (20Ds, now 40Ds), which are very nice, but to me are a bit cumbersome and heavy. I decided to go digital and bought a Pentax istDL which I really like. However, I would like a little more mp resolution so have been looking to pick up a K2000 after reading they reportedly seem similar to the K1000 in durability.
That said, I am wondering, why most of the companies are discontinuing a camera model soon after introducing it and pushing a "new" or "upgraded" model? I understand the K2000 is now discontinued and replaced with the K7, which also shoots video. So, why are they all pushing the video component in a DSLR? Personally, I wish to be a "photographer" not a "videographer". If I wanted to shoot video, I'd have a video camera, not a still camera.
|