If either of these really was the issue, do you not think Pentax would have been completely up-front, and just said that it was? And that we wouldn't all have completely understood?

Hard disk prices went through the roof after the Thai floods, and still haven't come back down. But people understood the laws of supply and demand well enough to realise that if components were impossible to come by, disks were going to get pricey.

However, I find it hard to believe that there was so much stock in the channels that the tsunami and/or floods are only having an effect on prices now.

Seriously

That made me laugh out loud, and I'm still chuckling.

That so ******* could have been me

But it sadly wasn't

I'm really staggered at the equanimity with which some people accept huge price hikes.

I don't dispute that companies have to make money. I don't dispute that prices have to go up. Nor do I dispute that Pentax build quality is good.

But prices that go up 30% or more in one go is not the normal sort of inflation we deal with all the time.

I'm amazed that even the most Pollyanna-esque of Pentax fans can just react along the lines of "ah that's Ok then".

You took the words out of my mouth here.

No one is quibbling about camera prices, and no one would be quibbling if the lens prices were increasing by a few percent a year with inflation - or even above inflation.

It's sudden large increases that inevitably make people reassess things.

I'm sure I speak for many when I say that it's a great pleasure to see someone from Pentax Ricoh here.

Equally, I'd ask you to bear with us - there are a lot of real Pentax enthusiasts here, and although we love the brand, there's quite a bit of pent-up frustration with some aspects, and we're sometimes prone to expressing those frustrations a little, erm, directly, to say the least

So providing you're reasonably thick-skinned, you'll be fine.

Again, welcome!!

Now, about that electronic level...

This strategy would make Pentax incredibly vulnerable to pricing strategies from Sigma and Tamron then.

Unless Sigma keep their prices up to match Pentax, some people at least will desert Pentax for Sigma, and if enough of them do that, Pentax risk being completely stuffed - with unprofitable bodies, and not enough lenses being sold to make up for it.

Sigma won't care if Pentax go out of business - they'll pick up the increased sales from the people that move to Canon or Nikon.

I'm not convinced by this 'loss leader' argument at all - rapid depreciation doesn't mean people don't buy new expensive gear - just look at the car industry.

PM sent

Can you be absolutely clear here, please?

Are you saying that quick-shifting an SDM lens damages it?

It's quite an assertion - do you have any actual evidence for this, or are you speculating?

Now, regarding:

Well, on the 17-70, the AF is fast and quiet.

But it's a bit of a jump to then infer that all SDM lenses are likely to be faster than all screw-drive ones.

It's simply not so, and I don't think I've ever heard anyone suggest that it is.

It may be, of course, that, comparing lenses with similar length focus-throw, SDM is generally faster than screw-drive. I don't have enough experience to comment on that.

Not because of its optics.

Easily.

If the relationship is one of correlation, rather than causation.