Is it time to change "kit" concept?

Docrwm · 04-18-2013, 07:51 AM

Originally posted by Steinback

The 18-135mm is available as a kit lens in some markets. I believe the 16-45 was also available as a kit lens for a while.

I think the K-01 and 40mm XS was one of the more interesting kit combinations from any manufacturer in recent years; that pairing was the major reason I bought the kit and I may not have picked up either one on its own.

Yes, they have done each. The 18-135 combo adds a good bit to the price because its DC and WR. If, and when, Pentax comes out with an entry-level dSLR again the WR would be wasted and the DC adds to cost, so why not a screw-drive, non-WR, 18-200ish lens for the soccer moms with an entry-level dSLR?

VisualDarkness · 04-18-2013, 03:35 PM

Originally posted by Docrwm

I agree about the buyers. I routinely see moms at soccer matches that have an expensive Canikon on a strap with a superzoom lens with no hood and sometimes with no lens cap and just walking around with it swinging in the breeze. Those are the people that buy the vast majority of the kits with lenses.

Another thought for Pentax Marketing - why not offer an entry level dSLR with a superzoom? It really is what I see most at various kid events.

For the same reason as they don't kit premium glass with cheaper camera's, they can sell it to you later and they want the initial price to be low enough for impulse buying.

crossmr · 04-19-2013, 05:53 AM

The kit lens is the "dummy" lens for the DSLR user who doesn't really use their DSLR as a DSLR.
anyone who really is into photography already has lenses, and unless they're switching brands/buying something like their first weatherproof camera they're probably just going to buy a body anyway. Not the "kit"

Docrwm · 04-19-2013, 08:21 AM

Originally posted by crossmr

The kit lens is the "dummy" lens for the DSLR user who doesn't really use their DSLR as a DSLR.
anyone who really is into photography already has lenses, and unless they're switching brands/buying something like their first weatherproof camera they're probably just going to buy a body anyway. Not the "kit"

Interesting perspective. How do you get new users in any numbers if you do not put something out that is attractive to them based on their previous experience and at the same time is competitive with other offerings in the same class?

I switched to a dSLR 2 1/2 years ago. I had no lenses of any use at that point left from my SLR experience in the 70s and 80s. I bought the K-x with 18-55 + 55-300 because of its feature set, lens reviews, and low cost.

According to your analysis, and those of the Pentax USA people, neither the lenses nor the low cost should be figured into anyone with a brain's decision making process.

Sorry, that's incredibly short-sighted.

Pentax needs to offer well appointed cameras packaged with lenses that compete with the offerings of Canikon at very competitive prices if they actually want to grow as a company instead of shirk slowly into oblivion.

VisualDarkness · 04-19-2013, 10:32 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Docrwm

Pentax needs to offer well appointed cameras packaged with lenses that compete with the offerings of Canikon at very competitive prices if they actually want to grow as a company instead of shirk slowly into oblivion.

Well, compared to the non-IS 18-55 Canon sends with some camera's the Pentax kit is premium glass.

dboeren · 04-19-2013, 11:03 AM

I agree w Docrwm. Of course one segment is the experienced buyers and they likely will be getting a body-only kit. But to bring in new users you need to appeal to their needs. If most DSLR owners are "soccer mom's with superzooms" then isn't this admitting that this is a major market segment? What's wrong with catering to them and bringing in that revenue and getting more users on the system? Maybe today that's all they're doing, but at some point some of them might catch the photography bug and want to move up to better bodies & lenses and already having them on K-mount will pay off.

Docrwm · 04-19-2013, 11:18 AM

Originally posted by dboeren

I agree w Docrwm. Of course one segment is the experienced buyers and they likely will be getting a body-only kit. But to bring in new users you need to appeal to their needs. If most DSLR owners are "soccer mom's with superzooms" then isn't this admitting that this is a major market segment? What's wrong with catering to them and bringing in that revenue and getting more users on the system? Maybe today that's all they're doing, but at some point some of them might catch the photography bug and want to move up to better bodies & lenses and already having them on K-mount will pay off.

Precisely! Thanks. I thought I might have been the only one that sees that issue.

dboeren · 04-19-2013, 11:43 AM

Something else to note is that soccer mom's camera is sometimes really soccer dad's camera who knows a bit more what he's doing.

I know my wife has borrowed my K-30 on a couple occasions, but I always make her promise to be good to the lens, ie - not to touch it and always keep the cap on when not in use.

TaoMaas · 04-19-2013, 11:49 AM

Originally posted by i83N

Why vice versa, cheep body and good lens?

That's actually a very good question and a far smarter way to approach entry-level photography, I think. As fast as technology changes, why not have a throw-away body paired with a "keeper" lens? The problem I see is..."How do you market such a thing?" It usually takes being involved in photography for a while before people realize that the best return on their investment in photography is in buying good lenses...not bodies.

**woodywesty** · 04-19-2013, 01:48 PM

Why not just expand the concept of "kit" to include high end bodies combined with a high end lens? Say you buy a K-5 series body then Pentax discounts "X" % on a new Pentax lens at the same time like they have been doing on their decent 18-135 lens. Except that folks buying their best bodies might just want a high end lens as well...

Just a thought, Bob

VisualDarkness · 04-19-2013, 02:12 PM

Originally posted by woodywesty

Why not just expand the concept of "kit" to include high end bodies combined with a high end lens? Say you buy a K-5 series body then Pentax discounts "X" % on a new Pentax lens at the same time like they have been doing on their decent 18-135 lens. Except that folks buying their best bodies might just want a high end lens as well...

Just a thought, Bob

Just like Pentax does at the moment in some places? People are getting the 31/1.8 and/or 77/1.8 as "kits".

Docrwm · 04-19-2013, 02:41 PM

Originally posted by woodywesty

Why not just expand the concept of "kit" to include high end bodies combined with a high end lens? Say you buy a K-5 series body then Pentax discounts "X" % on a new Pentax lens at the same time like they have been doing on their decent 18-135 lens. Except that folks buying their best bodies might just want a high end lens as well...

Just a thought, Bob

Pentax just did that with $250 per lens discounts for a K-5II/s and an FA lens - it was very tempting. I applauded them for it, but it did kick off some conspiracy paranoia about the FAs being discontinued among the usual suspects around here

They also package K-5/II/IIs cameras with 18-135s already.

I was thinking more along the lines of a consumer superzoom with a K-r replacement.

p38arover · 04-19-2013, 03:09 PM

I have a Sigma 28-300 superzoom that would be, for many photographers, almost all they'd ever need - and it was cheap. True, it may not go wide enough for some but it's no worse than the 55mm Takumar "kit" lens that came with my Spotmatic in '68 (although the Takumar's IQ is much better). We learned to compose or zoom with our feet with those 50 or 55mm lenses.

**ivanvernon** · 04-19-2013, 03:23 PM

I will be the devil's advocate and say that Pentax ought to commended for including a kit lens as good as the 18-50 3.5. The lens is capable of making some really nice images, many of them posted on this forum. I would use the two copies in my collection a lot in fact, if I did not have the Tamron 17-50 2.8.

p38arover · 04-19-2013, 03:31 PM

Originally posted by ivanvernon

I will be the devil's advocate and say that Pentax ought to commended for including a kit lens as good as the 18-50 3.5.

Actually, I'd like to see side-by-side pix (of the same scene) of the DA 18-55 AL WR kit lens vs. the 16-45 F4 that seems to be held in high regard.

04-19-2013, 01:48 PM	#25
woodywesty Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Northern Wisconsin Posts: 725	New body/Lens Bundle? Why not just expand the concept of "kit" to include high end bodies combined with a high end lens? Say you buy a K-5 series body then Pentax discounts "X" % on a new Pentax lens at the same time like they have been doing on their decent 18-135 lens. Except that folks buying their best bodies might just want a high end lens as well... Just a thought, Bob

04-19-2013, 03:23 PM	#29
ivanvernon Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Medina, OH Photos: Albums Posts: 7,224	Kit lens I will be the devil's advocate and say that Pentax ought to commended for including a kit lens as good as the 18-50 3.5. The lens is capable of making some really nice images, many of them posted on this forum. I would use the two copies in my collection a lot in fact, if I did not have the Tamron 17-50 2.8.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Misc "Time Capsule" 1970 Welcome to my psychedelic "pad"	charliezap	Post Your Photos!	14	02-25-2012 05:55 PM
Good A 50mm F1.4 aperture lever ruined by "vandals", is there a way to cure it?	minahasa	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	24	09-15-2011 10:40 AM
"The World Is a More Violent Place Than It Used to Be." -- NOT!!!	MRRiley	General Talk	3	08-18-2011 11:31 AM

04-18-2013, 07:51 AM	#16
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Originally posted by Steinback The 18-135mm is available as a kit lens in some markets. I believe the 16-45 was also available as a kit lens for a while. I think the K-01 and 40mm XS was one of the more interesting kit combinations from any manufacturer in recent years; that pairing was the major reason I bought the kit and I may not have picked up either one on its own. Yes, they have done each. The 18-135 combo adds a good bit to the price because its DC and WR. If, and when, Pentax comes out with an entry-level dSLR again the WR would be wasted and the DC adds to cost, so why not a screw-drive, non-WR, 18-200ish lens for the soccer moms with an entry-level dSLR?

04-18-2013, 03:35 PM	#17
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Originally posted by Docrwm I agree about the buyers. I routinely see moms at soccer matches that have an expensive Canikon on a strap with a superzoom lens with no hood and sometimes with no lens cap and just walking around with it swinging in the breeze. Those are the people that buy the vast majority of the kits with lenses. Another thought for Pentax Marketing - why not offer an entry level dSLR with a superzoom? It really is what I see most at various kid events. For the same reason as they don't kit premium glass with cheaper camera's, they can sell it to you later and they want the initial price to be low enough for impulse buying.

04-19-2013, 05:53 AM	#18
crossmr Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Liverpool, UK Posts: 318	The kit lens is the "dummy" lens for the DSLR user who doesn't really use their DSLR as a DSLR. anyone who really is into photography already has lenses, and unless they're switching brands/buying something like their first weatherproof camera they're probably just going to buy a body anyway. Not the "kit"

04-19-2013, 08:21 AM	#19
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Originally posted by crossmr The kit lens is the "dummy" lens for the DSLR user who doesn't really use their DSLR as a DSLR. anyone who really is into photography already has lenses, and unless they're switching brands/buying something like their first weatherproof camera they're probably just going to buy a body anyway. Not the "kit" Interesting perspective. How do you get new users in any numbers if you do not put something out that is attractive to them based on their previous experience and at the same time is competitive with other offerings in the same class? I switched to a dSLR 2 1/2 years ago. I had no lenses of any use at that point left from my SLR experience in the 70s and 80s. I bought the K-x with 18-55 + 55-300 because of its feature set, lens reviews, and low cost. According to your analysis, and those of the Pentax USA people, neither the lenses nor the low cost should be figured into anyone with a brain's decision making process. Sorry, that's incredibly short-sighted. Pentax needs to offer well appointed cameras packaged with lenses that compete with the offerings of Canikon at very competitive prices if they actually want to grow as a company instead of shirk slowly into oblivion.

04-19-2013, 10:32 AM - 1 Like	#20
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Originally posted by Docrwm Pentax needs to offer well appointed cameras packaged with lenses that compete with the offerings of Canikon at very competitive prices if they actually want to grow as a company instead of shirk slowly into oblivion. Well, compared to the non-IS 18-55 Canon sends with some camera's the Pentax kit is premium glass.

04-19-2013, 11:03 AM	#21
dboeren Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Marietta, GA Photos: Albums Posts: 148	I agree w Docrwm. Of course one segment is the experienced buyers and they likely will be getting a body-only kit. But to bring in new users you need to appeal to their needs. If most DSLR owners are "soccer mom's with superzooms" then isn't this admitting that this is a major market segment? What's wrong with catering to them and bringing in that revenue and getting more users on the system? Maybe today that's all they're doing, but at some point some of them might catch the photography bug and want to move up to better bodies & lenses and already having them on K-mount will pay off.

04-19-2013, 11:18 AM	#22
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Originally posted by dboeren I agree w Docrwm. Of course one segment is the experienced buyers and they likely will be getting a body-only kit. But to bring in new users you need to appeal to their needs. If most DSLR owners are "soccer mom's with superzooms" then isn't this admitting that this is a major market segment? What's wrong with catering to them and bringing in that revenue and getting more users on the system? Maybe today that's all they're doing, but at some point some of them might catch the photography bug and want to move up to better bodies & lenses and already having them on K-mount will pay off. Precisely! Thanks. I thought I might have been the only one that sees that issue.

04-19-2013, 11:43 AM	#23
dboeren Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Marietta, GA Photos: Albums Posts: 148	Something else to note is that soccer mom's camera is sometimes really soccer dad's camera who knows a bit more what he's doing. I know my wife has borrowed my K-30 on a couple occasions, but I always make her promise to be good to the lens, ie - not to touch it and always keep the cap on when not in use.

04-19-2013, 11:49 AM	#24
TaoMaas Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: Oklahoma City Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,574	Originally posted by i83N Why vice versa, cheep body and good lens? That's actually a very good question and a far smarter way to approach entry-level photography, I think. As fast as technology changes, why not have a throw-away body paired with a "keeper" lens? The problem I see is..."How do you market such a thing?" It usually takes being involved in photography for a while before people realize that the best return on their investment in photography is in buying good lenses...not bodies.

04-19-2013, 02:12 PM	#26
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Originally posted by woodywesty Why not just expand the concept of "kit" to include high end bodies combined with a high end lens? Say you buy a K-5 series body then Pentax discounts "X" % on a new Pentax lens at the same time like they have been doing on their decent 18-135 lens. Except that folks buying their best bodies might just want a high end lens as well... Just a thought, Bob Just like Pentax does at the moment in some places? People are getting the 31/1.8 and/or 77/1.8 as "kits".

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-19-2013, 02:41 PM	#27
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Originally posted by woodywesty Why not just expand the concept of "kit" to include high end bodies combined with a high end lens? Say you buy a K-5 series body then Pentax discounts "X" % on a new Pentax lens at the same time like they have been doing on their decent 18-135 lens. Except that folks buying their best bodies might just want a high end lens as well... Just a thought, Bob Pentax just did that with $250 per lens discounts for a K-5II/s and an FA lens - it was very tempting. I applauded them for it, but it did kick off some conspiracy paranoia about the FAs being discontinued among the usual suspects around here They also package K-5/II/IIs cameras with 18-135s already. I was thinking more along the lines of a consumer superzoom with a K-r replacement.

04-19-2013, 03:09 PM	#28
p38arover Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Western Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,084	I have a Sigma 28-300 superzoom that would be, for many photographers, almost all they'd ever need - and it was cheap. True, it may not go wide enough for some but it's no worse than the 55mm Takumar "kit" lens that came with my Spotmatic in '68 (although the Takumar's IQ is much better). We learned to compose or zoom with our feet with those 50 or 55mm lenses.

04-19-2013, 03:31 PM	#30
p38arover Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Western Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,084	Originally posted by ivanvernon I will be the devil's advocate and say that Pentax ought to commended for including a kit lens as good as the 18-50 3.5. Actually, I'd like to see side-by-side pix (of the same scene) of the DA 18-55 AL WR kit lens vs. the 16-45 F4 that seems to be held in high regard.