Pentax is not doing too bad...

Pentaxke · 01-26-2008, 01:36 PM

It was something I was thinking about, and I just had to check it out:

Canon : 30 : 27 : 57 : 0,47
Nikon : 22 : 26 : 48 : 0,54
Olympus : 13 : 5 : 18 : 0,28
Pentax : 14 : 16 : 30 : 0,53
Sony : 8 : 10 : 18 : 0,56

First figure: # fixed focal lengths lenses in the listing of subjected brand
2nd figure: #zooms in their listing
3rd: total lenses (= 1+2)
4rd: ratio fixed focals in gamma (= 2/3)

For Pentax, I took the figures from the Japanese website (and included the newly anounced ones), for the others, I took the from the according global websites... I did not include the MF Nikkors for obvious reasons...

If I look at these figures, then I would conclude that Pentax is not doing bad after all. Not only have they almost double as much lenses than Sony and Olympus, but also their ratio fixed focals/zooms is far more favorable than that of the others (Nikon aside.)

Ok, it's just statistics, and, as we all know, they don't say everything, but as I said, I was thinking about it, and I just have to make the calculations for my self.

To be fair, I should also mention that both Oly and Sony are new in the game and are still expanding, but Pentax is too, so make your own conclusions...

Last edited by Pentaxke; 01-26-2008 at 01:55 PM.

tux08902 · 01-26-2008, 02:12 PM

I don't particularly care about market statistics. I've never liked Canon cameras, except my A-1, and Nikon's just left a really sour taste in my mouth!

roentarre · 01-26-2008, 02:25 PM

Originally posted by tux08902

Nikon's just left a really sour taste in my mouth!

Why sour taste? I thought the new D3 and 300 are really quite impressive!

alib99 · 01-26-2008, 02:29 PM

Nice statistics.
Apart from statistics, I think now pentax has completed his primes until 300mm (though a fast 135 would be nice) and zooms until 250 mm.
Now they should make 400 and 500mm zooms and primes.

tux08902 · 01-26-2008, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by roentarre

Why sour taste? I thought the new D3 and 300 are really quite impressive!

The Nikon Coolpix 8700 I had was disgusting. I hated the D40 and the D40x. To top that off, the lack of certain features on D40, D40x, and D80 annoyed me too much. Also, I didn't like my uncle's camera. He has a Nikon D200. So, I bypassed them completely.

Lee · 01-26-2008, 03:55 PM

I'm curious what the numbers would be like if you included third party support (Sigma, Tamron, et al.). Not a fair comparison, I think, as the third parties merely target the larger market shares, but it may be interesting.

**NaClH2O** · 01-26-2008, 07:58 PM

I'm sorry but could you explain the fourth number? Ratio fixed focals in gamma? What does that mean?

NaCl(last time I had statistics they were still using slide rules)H2O

mattdm · 01-26-2008, 09:02 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxke

If I look at these figures, then I would conclude that Pentax is not doing bad after all. Not only have they almost double as much lenses than Sony and Olympus, but also their ratio fixed focals/zooms is far more favorable than that of the others (Nikon aside.)

Wait, I don't get it. Even if we accept the proposition that zooms are better than fixed focal length lenses, what does their ratio have to do with anything? A company with only one lens would score a perfect "1" if it were a zoom -- so, uh, yay for them?

Pentaxke · 01-27-2008, 06:29 AM

Originally posted by NaClH2O

I'm sorry but could you explain the fourth number? Ratio fixed focals in gamma? What does that mean?

NaCl(last time I had statistics they were still using slide rules)H2O

My English is far from perfect, so please forgive me:

the fourth number is the number of fixed focal length lenses divided by total account of lenses. I think the more fixed focal lengths a brand has, the better, because in a way it shows the commitment of that brand to photo enthusiasts... But I could be wrong however...

Pentaxke · 01-27-2008, 06:32 AM

Originally posted by mattdm

Wait, I don't get it. Even if we accept the proposition that zooms are better than fixed focal length lenses,

It is the other way around: in my opinion it is better for a particular brand to have more fixed focals.

Originally posted by mattdm

what does their ratio have to do with anything? A company with only one lens would score a perfect "1" if it were a zoom -- so, uh, yay for them?

You're completely right. That's why I place Pentax ahead of Sony, even if the ratio of fixed focals is a bit better with Sony...

Pentaxke · 01-27-2008, 06:34 AM

Originally posted by Lee

I'm curious what the numbers would be like if you included third party support (Sigma, Tamron, et al.). Not a fair comparison, I think, as the third parties merely target the larger market shares, but it may be interesting.

That would be completely unfair I think. For instance: Tokina brands the same lenses as Pentax (well more or less

), but they are not available in Pentax K mount...

**NaClH2O** · 01-27-2008, 06:37 AM

Originally posted by Pentaxke

My English is far from perfect, so please forgive me:

the fourth number is the number of fixed focal length lenses divided by total account of lenses. I think the more fixed focal lengths a brand has, the better, because in a way it shows the commitment of that brand to photo enthusiasts... But I could be wrong however...

Oh, OK, didn't get that. But even if that is true, Canon still has as many primes as Pentax has lenses in total. Besides I'm thinking that zooms probably sell better than primes, so I don't think that Canon has to worry about Pentax for a while yet.

NaCl(not that I think Pentax/Hoya is in any problem business wise)H2O

01-26-2008, 01:36 PM	#1
Pentaxke Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Belgium Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 476	Pentax is not doing too bad... It was something I was thinking about, and I just had to check it out: Canon : 30 : 27 : 57 : 0,47 Nikon : 22 : 26 : 48 : 0,54 Olympus : 13 : 5 : 18 : 0,28 Pentax : 14 : 16 : 30 : 0,53 Sony : 8 : 10 : 18 : 0,56 First figure: # fixed focal lengths lenses in the listing of subjected brand 2nd figure: #zooms in their listing 3rd: total lenses (= 1+2) 4rd: ratio fixed focals in gamma (= 2/3) For Pentax, I took the figures from the Japanese website (and included the newly anounced ones), for the others, I took the from the according global websites... I did not include the MF Nikkors for obvious reasons... If I look at these figures, then I would conclude that Pentax is not doing bad after all. Not only have they almost double as much lenses than Sony and Olympus, but also their ratio fixed focals/zooms is far more favorable than that of the others (Nikon aside.) Ok, it's just statistics, and, as we all know, they don't say everything, but as I said, I was thinking about it, and I just have to make the calculations for my self. To be fair, I should also mention that both Oly and Sony are new in the game and are still expanding, but Pentax is too, so make your own conclusions... Last edited by Pentaxke; 01-26-2008 at 01:55 PM.

01-26-2008, 03:55 PM	#6
Lee New Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: West Vancouver Posts: 20	3rd Party Support I'm curious what the numbers would be like if you included third party support (Sigma, Tamron, et al.). Not a fair comparison, I think, as the third parties merely target the larger market shares, but it may be interesting.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Too bad Pentax was there first.	lurchlarson	Pentax DSLR Discussion	11	09-01-2010 10:54 PM
FA 31mm Limited assembled in Vietnam - bad QC or bad luck.	Voe	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	64	03-03-2010 05:44 PM
Are K-7 leaks good or bad for Pentax?	cateto	Pentax News and Rumors	2	05-20-2009 02:35 AM
Tamron Adaptall... Bad lens or bad adapter	Okami	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	05-01-2008 06:52 PM
Do I have this Pentax thing bad? Just look.	Peter Zack	General Talk	19	04-21-2008 02:23 AM

01-26-2008, 02:12 PM	#2
tux08902 Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: North Brunswick, NJ Posts: 473	I don't particularly care about market statistics. I've never liked Canon cameras, except my A-1, and Nikon's just left a really sour taste in my mouth!

01-26-2008, 02:25 PM	#3
roentarre Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 11,783	Originally posted by tux08902 Nikon's just left a really sour taste in my mouth! Why sour taste? I thought the new D3 and 300 are really quite impressive!

01-26-2008, 02:29 PM	#4
alib99 Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 90	Nice statistics. Apart from statistics, I think now pentax has completed his primes until 300mm (though a fast 135 would be nice) and zooms until 250 mm. Now they should make 400 and 500mm zooms and primes.

01-26-2008, 02:54 PM	#5
tux08902 Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: North Brunswick, NJ Posts: 473	Originally posted by roentarre Why sour taste? I thought the new D3 and 300 are really quite impressive! The Nikon Coolpix 8700 I had was disgusting. I hated the D40 and the D40x. To top that off, the lack of certain features on D40, D40x, and D80 annoyed me too much. Also, I didn't like my uncle's camera. He has a Nikon D200. So, I bypassed them completely.

01-26-2008, 07:58 PM	#7
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	I'm sorry but could you explain the fourth number? Ratio fixed focals in gamma? What does that mean? NaCl(last time I had statistics they were still using slide rules)H2O

01-26-2008, 09:02 PM	#8
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948	Originally posted by Pentaxke If I look at these figures, then I would conclude that Pentax is not doing bad after all. Not only have they almost double as much lenses than Sony and Olympus, but also their ratio fixed focals/zooms is far more favorable than that of the others (Nikon aside.) Wait, I don't get it. Even if we accept the proposition that zooms are better than fixed focal length lenses, what does their ratio have to do with anything? A company with only one lens would score a perfect "1" if it were a zoom -- so, uh, yay for them?

01-27-2008, 06:29 AM	#9
Pentaxke Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Belgium Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 476 Original Poster	Originally posted by NaClH2O I'm sorry but could you explain the fourth number? Ratio fixed focals in gamma? What does that mean? NaCl(last time I had statistics they were still using slide rules)H2O My English is far from perfect, so please forgive me: the fourth number is the number of fixed focal length lenses divided by total account of lenses. I think the more fixed focal lengths a brand has, the better, because in a way it shows the commitment of that brand to photo enthusiasts... But I could be wrong however...

01-27-2008, 06:32 AM	#10
Pentaxke Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Belgium Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 476 Original Poster	Originally posted by mattdm Wait, I don't get it. Even if we accept the proposition that zooms are better than fixed focal length lenses, It is the other way around: in my opinion it is better for a particular brand to have more fixed focals. Originally posted by mattdm what does their ratio have to do with anything? A company with only one lens would score a perfect "1" if it were a zoom -- so, uh, yay for them? You're completely right. That's why I place Pentax ahead of Sony, even if the ratio of fixed focals is a bit better with Sony...

01-27-2008, 06:34 AM	#11
Pentaxke Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Belgium Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 476 Original Poster	Originally posted by Lee I'm curious what the numbers would be like if you included third party support (Sigma, Tamron, et al.). Not a fair comparison, I think, as the third parties merely target the larger market shares, but it may be interesting. That would be completely unfair I think. For instance: Tokina brands the same lenses as Pentax (well more or less ), but they are not available in Pentax K mount...

01-27-2008, 06:37 AM	#12
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	Originally posted by Pentaxke My English is far from perfect, so please forgive me: the fourth number is the number of fixed focal length lenses divided by total account of lenses. I think the more fixed focal lengths a brand has, the better, because in a way it shows the commitment of that brand to photo enthusiasts... But I could be wrong however... Oh, OK, didn't get that. But even if that is true, Canon still has as many primes as Pentax has lenses in total. Besides I'm thinking that zooms probably sell better than primes, so I don't think that Canon has to worry about Pentax for a while yet. NaCl(not that I think Pentax/Hoya is in any problem business wise)H2O

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search