Why do people want pentax to gain market share?

schmik · 10-13-2009, 04:59 PM

It seems that a lot of people here really want pentax to gain market share. Why?

The only reason i want them to do better is that in the past they have shown that they can be cheaper then the others. If they sell more they might just drop prices again due to increased volume.... that sounds like a pipe dream when i actually type it out

Personally I am quite happy shooting something different to all the other clowns.

Why do other want them to gain share so much?

So that they can say "told ya so" to the canikons?

mike

Arpe · 10-13-2009, 05:17 PM

To ensure continuation of supply.

zplus · 10-13-2009, 05:18 PM

Originally Posted by Arpe

To ensure continuation of supply.

And to fund more R&D!

*raymeedc* · 10-13-2009, 05:20 PM

Originally Posted by schmik

Why do other want them to gain share so much?

So that they won't go out of business! No demand, no product.

schmik · 10-13-2009, 06:43 PM

All of the above activities seem to be being met by the current market share.

*RawheaD* · 10-13-2009, 08:30 PM

Originally Posted by schmik

All of the above activities seem to be being met by the current market share.

Except for the fact that they've really not been in the black for a while (or, were in the red for a long time).

It's kind of like with Apple and Macs. 10 years ago, I was worried about their market share, and wanted them to do better, because my fear was that if they don't make profits and continue to do so, they'd go out of business and I would be without my computing platform of choice.

Now, knowing that there's no way Apple is going out of business (in fact they're one of the most, if not the most, profitable tech company out there), I don't really give a rat's ass about market share (although they seem to be doing pretty well there, too).

*Ash* · 10-13-2009, 08:35 PM

Niche products - niche market share.
As long as they're in the black I'm not concerned either...

*dadipentak* · 10-13-2009, 08:45 PM

Originally Posted by schmik

All of the above activities seem to be being met by the current market share.

Perhaps (or not) but in a very turbulent and competitive market, Pentax is too close to the edge to settle for maintaining its current share and certainly can't afford to lose market share.

*Wheatfield* · 10-13-2009, 09:51 PM

Originally Posted by schmik

All of the above activities seem to be being met by the current market share.

Ummm, there are about a dozen holes in the lens line that are big enough to drive a truck through and the K-7 could still use better AF.

*Ash* · 10-13-2009, 10:02 PM

Originally Posted by Wheatfield

Ummm, there are about a dozen holes in the lens line that are big enough to drive a truck through and the K-7 could still use better AF.

What other lenses (apart from your desired APS-C equivalent 'fast fifty' which you want faster than the 31 ltd) do you actually want Pentax (or Tamron or Sigma) to make?

Barnster · 10-13-2009, 10:19 PM

Originally Posted by schmik

It seems that a lot of people here really want pentax to gain market share. Why?

The only reason i want them to do better is that in the past they have shown that they can be cheaper then the others. If they sell more they might just drop prices again due to increased volume.... that sounds like a pipe dream when i actually type it out

Personally I am quite happy shooting something different to all the other clowns.

Why do other want them to gain share so much?

So that they can say "told ya so" to the canikons?

mike

Why leave a great brand and products on the backseat?It's time to stop drowning the Pentax brand with Nikon And Canon and bring themselves to the forefront.I would love to walk into any camera shop and see wall to wall Pentax instead of wall to wall Nikon,Canon.I get sick of looking into a magazine and it's full of Nikon,Canon cameras.I think Pentax is entitled to a good chunk of the market share.Let the world shout 'Pentax' for once.

*LeDave* · 10-13-2009, 11:39 PM

Because they're cheaper than others and have better build quality, and I already invested a bit in Pentax and I am going to upgrade to a K-7 in one or two months, if they die then I have nothing left for my equipment.

Douglas_of_Sweden · 10-14-2009, 01:52 AM

Originally Posted by Ash

What other lenses (apart from your desired APS-C equivalent 'fast fifty' which you want faster than the 31 ltd) do you actually want Pentax (or Tamron or Sigma) to make?

A prime fisheye.
A DA*30/1.4 something.
A ltd longer than the DA70ltd (a DA90/2 ltd would be perfect).
A DFA*200/4 macro on the fantastic FA*200/4 macro lens.
A DFA*85/1.4.
A DFA*135/1.8.
Something longer than 300mm.
A fast wide angle, like a DA*20/1.8.

Maybe not a dussin wholes of truck size, but still some important wholes. And it is not because I would buy all of these lenses.
Having said this, Pentax still have the most complete APS-C lens line.

*Ash* · 10-14-2009, 05:28 AM

Originally Posted by Douglas_of_Sweden

A prime fisheye.
A DA*30/1.4 something.
A ltd longer than the DA70ltd (a DA90/2 ltd would be perfect).
A DFA*200/4 macro on the fantastic FA*200/4 macro lens.
A DFA*85/1.4.
A DFA*135/1.8.
Something longer than 300mm.
A fast wide angle, like a DA*20/1.8.

Maybe not a dussin wholes of truck size, but still some important wholes. And it is not because I would buy all of these lenses.
Having said this, Pentax still have the most complete APS-C lens line.

Seems to be an awful lot to ask for when the DA 10-17 is already very good, the 31 ltd is only half a stop slower than your requested 30/1.4, and DFAs are not quite as relevant now as when Pentax releases their FF camera.

Something longer than 300mm is a good request IMO, whether zoom or prime, but a fast wide angle - where would you need that kind of speed?

Douglas_of_Sweden · 10-14-2009, 05:42 AM

Originally Posted by Ash

Seems to be an awful lot to ask for when the DA 10-17 is already very good, the 31 ltd is only half a stop slower than your requested 30/1.4, and DFAs are not quite as relevant now as when Pentax releases their FF camera.

Something longer than 300mm is a good request IMO, whether zoom or prime, but a fast wide angle - where would you need that kind of speed?

Yes, the DA10-17 is good and uniquue, but I'd like to see an even wider fish eye prime. I know there are 3rd party alternatives, but there is no real reason why Pentax could not have their own. They used to have. In the FA's they had both a fixed FE and a FE-zoom.

The 31ltd is not a SDM and weatherprotected DA*. Besides, it is not my idea, but Pentax.

I called them DFA only because they would be based on older designs and therefore happen to cover full frame, like the DFA50 and DFA100 macro's. (I think actually Pentax to be consistent should have called also the DA200 and DA300 for DFA lenses since they appear to cover FF)
Of course they could base a 85mm and a 135mm on entirely new designs, but if they can tweak the excellent existing designs for digital that would save time and money. I want a 85mm because it roughly correspond to old times 135mm and a 135mm because it roughly corresponds to a 200mm.

Fast wide angle: street shooting at low light (I live at almost 60N so we have low light a large fraction of the year), low light shooting in pub/concert/theater etc environments... I don't need it for landscapes...I love the DA15/4ltd, my current favorite lense, but at a certain point it gets too dark to use even at 1600ISO, and I don't find the 3200ISO really usefull.

But I don't expect Pentax do make these lenses unless they have a profit to base it on. But I do what I can to give them that profit

But if they can, each of these lenses would improve their lens line, and even if I would only buy a few of them, in fact some of them like a DFA200 macro, would cost an arm and a leg, but they would give Pentax respect and bring in more users, even professionals.