HOYA to sell Pentax - Page 3

MikePerham · 11-04-2009, 08:00 AM

Originally Posted by RawheaD

Hopefully it won't affect it in a bad way, but some radical restructing might be part of the plan.

Better video capabilities is probably something we can look forward to :-)

Or maybe the opposite! Sony has elected to omit video from their DSLRs, supposedly to avoid cannibalizing their video market ...Sony is #1 in Video, JVC #2, so perhaps they may elect to go the same route.

*Yonnie* · 11-04-2009, 08:06 AM

Originally Posted by creampuff

Well this must surely disappoint Pentax news buzzards who are so eager to latch on to news that are detrimental to Pentax.

JVC Kenwood Holdings has issued a press release stating that they did not make any press announcement and that there is no fact to the matter.

http://www.jk-holdings.com/press/200..._091104_02.pdf

Originally Posted by Kunzite

Hoya did the same:
http://www.hoya.co.jp/japanese/news/latest/20091104.pdf
L.E. Found the English article Did they use an online translator?
http://www.hoya.co.jp/english/news/latest/20091104.pdf

The above quotes linked to articles that denied the rumor in the original post.

Originally Posted by opiedog

i have a k2k to use now, but wanted to buy a new body this december.

should i hold off until all this quiets down? man i was hoping HoyaTax was it and it should be smooth sailing. now all this. i'm sure the doomsayers are out in full force.

Buy whichever camera is available to suit your shooting style.

There are still plenty of vehicles on the road that say OLDSMOBILE. They didn't cease to function when the nameplate disappeared. I'm sure that your Pentax gear (bodies and lenses) will continue to function regardless of mergers, acquisitions or divestiture.

Spag · 11-04-2009, 08:14 AM

Originally Posted by MikePerham

Or maybe the opposite! Sony has elected to omit video from their DSLRs, supposedly to avoid cannibalizing their video market ...Sony is #1 in Video, JVC #2, so perhaps they may elect to go the same route.

But Sony is known to take stupid marketing decisions defying common sense, like trying desperately to impose Memory Sticks instead of SD cards, or obstinately refusing to add a headset minijack plug to their Walkman© phones...

Hopefully JVC is not big enough to afford such stupid strategies.

Samsungian · 11-04-2009, 08:34 AM

Olds still exist, but there owners lost resale value. Who wants to pay top dollar for a used car from a shuttered manufacturer?

Same will happen to Saturn owners, they'll loose their used car residual values also.

When I bought my new car 4 years ago I factored in what it might sell for in 6 to 7 years based on what the model was doing when I bought it. I should be able to recoup $12,000 or so and I paid $25,000. If Subaru goes under then my $12,000 guess will be way off, and I'll drive it till it dies instead of using it's high resale value to buy another new car. $12,000 inhand to buy next new car would be much better than the $3,000 I had inhand to spend in 2005.

People can do same with camera gear. They complain its so expensive yet if you buy it right and the manufacturer continues to innovate, and most importantly continues to exist then one can expect a nice return on gear they bought new. Assuming when bought new you got a great deal. I talked the Subaru dealer down an even $5,000 so theres no need to pay window sticker for these Subarus. It was so easy to do.

$5,000 off on a car with 59 miles on it

And my testdrive racked up 14 of those 59 miles.

Originally Posted by Yonnie

The above quotes linked to articles that denied the rumor in the original post.

Buy whichever camera is available to suit your shooting style.

There are still plenty of vehicles on the road that say OLDSMOBILE. They didn't cease to function when the nameplate disappeared. I'm sure that your Pentax gear (bodies and lenses) will continue to function regardless of mergers, acquisitions or divestiture.

Art Vandelay II · 11-04-2009, 08:37 AM

Originally Posted by Supernaut

I wonder how Minolta users felt when a big ugly "SONY" ended up on everything. Something like having a windows logo on the desktop for the hard core linux nerds I guess.

They really should have left the Minolta name for sure, but oh well, at least they fixed Minolta's awful looking 45 degree grip pattern on their lenses. This is heinous:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2229/...b34c0efc87.jpg

Where as this looks nice:
http://static.lensbuyingguide.com/img/800/1213.jpg

Fortunately Pentax has no such cosmetic problems, so hopefully JVC or whomever buys them leaves the name in tact. But then again, its a sad fact but JVC has far better name recognition then Pentax does. A Best Buy salesman once asked me what kind of camera I had and I said Pentax; he responded with: "never heard of them".

*Ratmagiclady* · 11-04-2009, 08:45 AM

I think I'm going to consider this one debunked, for now, since it's actually been denied. I'm not seeing an advantage to denial if Hoya actually wants to do this to please shareholders...

In any event, when Sony bought out Konica-Minolta, the brand name just didn't come with the sale. I'd hope nothing like that would happen with the Pentax brand, if it came to that, or at least that they'd be smart enough to not try naming the cameras 'JVC' ...the Pentax name's too important and is just beginning to accumulate some new name recognition to go with the old. At least they'd be better off putting a different name up there on the prism, something that sounds more photographic.

*pxpaulx* · 11-04-2009, 08:48 AM

Originally Posted by Ratmagiclady

I think I'm going to consider this one debunked, for now, since it's actually been denied. I'm not seeing an advantage to denial if Hoya actually wants to do this to please shareholders...

In any event, when Sony bought out Konica-Minolta, the brand name just didn't come with the sale. I'd hope nothing like that would happen with the Pentax brand, if it came to that, or at least that they'd be smart enough to not try naming the cameras 'JVC' ...the Pentax name's too important and is just beginning to accumulate some new name recognition to go with the old. At least they'd be better off putting a different name up there on the prism, something that sounds more photographic.

How about Pantex? Pintax? Maybe not!

keyser · 11-04-2009, 09:30 AM

I could easily imagine that in the event of this unlikely takeover. The cameras will be branded JVC-Pentax which would play OK with me.

As for Sony abandoning the Minolta name and refusing to add top quality video to their SLRs. That company has a history of cutting off their nose to spite their face. If anybody remembers Hi-MD which came out as 1Gb MP3 players were still uncommon and held an INTERCHANGABLE but cheap 1Gb disk... they could have ruled the market. They were hamstrung by their music division who were scared of piracy, so DRM and closed source protocols pretty much killed that off.

So, there are worse companies that could buy pentax! ...the thought just occurred to me that Nikon or Canon would be the worst right now

*Igilligan* · 11-04-2009, 10:08 AM

And this time it hits with a big thud!

All of our hopes and dreams of Pentax being turned over to a real camera company are gone. Now sold to a Video Company.

I have been hesitant to buy any Kmount lenses of late, focusing instead on the M42's which can be used with other models... Now that decision just got a bit easier.

EDIT --- Never mind I decided I dont care. ( but anyone who thinks that JVC would not rebrand the Pentax cameras, need only look at how large JVC is on all of their video cameras... They love big JVC letters...

THUD!

Urkeldaedalus · 11-04-2009, 10:22 AM

The main reason for optimism, if this rumor turns out to be true, is that if JVC is willing to sell its Victor Entertainment music group (to stop the bleeding) to obtain Pentax and consolidate its focus on video/imaging, then it would seem unlikely to me that they would then turn around and gut Pentax and use it solely for its brand name, especially since the Pentax brand name doesn't necessary hold the same luster (unfortunately) as it has in past years. The cameras might say JVC on them, but if they turn out to be good cameras, I'm willing to deal with it.

The main reason for pessimism, it seems to me, is primarily the fear of the unknown. Has Hoya been that great for Pentax so far? It seems debatable. But at least we know what Hoya plans to do with Pentax. Wait a second, no we don't. But at least we can guess. Somewhat.

If I had to guess, being privy to absolutely no information regarding this situation, is that the first part of the rumor (JVC thinking about selling Victor) is the most true and probable part of the article. The second part of this plan (JVC buying Pentax from Hoya) could only happen after the first part occurs, so it would have to be somewhat speculative on someone's part, even if negotiations truly are going on at this point.

Ah well, 2010 should be an interesting year

*res3567* · 11-04-2009, 10:51 AM

Originally Posted by RawheaD

I agree Kenwood ain't half bad. But even if they were frikkin' McIntosh, I wouldn't want their logo on my Pentax camera

Yea I agree.

Originally Posted by LeDave

JVC and Kenwood sucks! It will be interesting how Pentax will go with JVC and Kenwood, I always thought they were cheap "Wal-Mart exclusive-like" brands.

No I dissagree. I have a Kenwood EXCELON headunit in my ride which is their top of the line brand. When I go to WalMart, I don't usually see Kenwood equipment in the auto parts dept. I see JVC, Dual, Pioneer, and Jenson. Have you ever owned or listened to any Kenwood headunits?

*Ratmagiclady* · 11-04-2009, 11:12 AM

Originally Posted by keyser

I could easily imagine that in the event of this unlikely takeover. The cameras will be branded JVC-Pentax which would play OK with me.

I'm sure they could sneak a JVC logo on there somewhere, but in this unlikely scenario, if they could keep the Pentax name, they could keep the Pentax name.

As for Sony abandoning the Minolta name and refusing to add top quality video to their SLRs. That company has a history of cutting off their nose to spite their face. If anybody remembers Hi-MD which came out as 1Gb MP3 players were still uncommon and held an INTERCHANGABLE but cheap 1Gb disk... they could have ruled the market. They were hamstrung by their music division who were scared of piracy, so DRM and closed source protocols pretty much killed that off.

So, there are worse companies that could buy pentax! ...the thought just occurred to me that Nikon or Canon would be the worst right now

Hrm, that would be... weird. I think if they bought Pentax they'd probably just part out the whole thing and consider competition eliminated. Sony's 'abandonment' of the Minolta name has to do with them simply not getting the rights to use it when they split up Konica-Minolta. At the time they had a bigger business in business machines, if I recall correctly, and those parts kept the name. Something like copiers and I think still film-based minilabs. (those were nice) So, Sony really didn't have a choice. I still think they'd do better to put the 'Alpha' name up on the prism and call it a camera marque, especially if they don't want to tie their camera brand in with their own video cameras.

*geezer52* · 11-04-2009, 11:32 AM

Originally Posted by LeDave

That really sucked, they should have at least kept the Minolta name. That's really sad how Sony just took it and slapped Sony on it. I hope JVC doesn't slap JVC over the Pentax logo.

I suppose it depends on how the new owners (assuming) view the Pentax nameplate. If they see Pentax as a revered and respected name in photography, then they'll probably keep it. If they see Pentax as a tired, once-was, also-ran, name in photography, then they'll probably drop it. In electronics, Sony had as much a name for quality as Minolta and in the move to Digital they probably felt the Sony name had more pull.

Note however, Sony did not slap their name on their lenses. I can see JVC putting their name on future cameras but keeping the Pentax name on the lenses. Not that I would like it, but that does make a small amount of sense.

excelonman · 11-04-2009, 11:34 AM

This is a simply another small step towards the consolidation of manufacturers which is necessary in today's rapidly changing digital marketplace.

JVC and Kenwood have maintained their distinct DNA even though they are under the same corporate umbrella. Don't jump to conclusions!

Whether this rumour is true, remains to be seen and will take some time to complete.

FYI. Kenwood products are not sold at Wal-Mart........

*monochrome* · 11-04-2009, 01:02 PM

Originally Posted by excelonman

This is a simply another small step towards the consolidation of manufacturers which is necessary in today's rapidly changing digital marketplace.

JVC and Kenwood have maintained their distinct DNA even though they are under the same corporate umbrella. Don't jump to conclusions! . . . .

When Procter & Gamble purchased Neutrogena (a very well-capitalized, growing, value-added HBA products company) they didn't change all the shampoos to Head&SHoulders and Herbal Essence brnad, nor the Makeups to Max Factor brand (but they did change the inernal formulas a bit).