[zapp]

Looks like a lot of “camera engineers” are on the market in Japan. Pentax is still alive. Time to increase market share and check out Olympus resources that are on sale/available.
A business worth 150M with 150M loss per year and a product portfolio stuck in 4/3 really just needs a nail in the coffin. Amazing how much money Olympus dumped in great new glass for a dead system in recent years. There are more companies than Olympus invested in 4/3.
To be honest, we don’t know how well Pentax is doing, but sticking to classic formats and keeping a slow pace should keep you alive.

[Fontan]

A piece of information that comes from SankeiBiz, an online publication of the Sankei Shimbun (lit. 'Industrial and Economic News') group:

オリンパスが映像事業売却　3年連続赤字、ファンドに年内完了目指す - SankeiBiz（サンケイビズ）：自分を磨く経済情報サイト

I'm referring to this sentence: 事業売却後も一定期間はオリンパスのブランド名は残るという。

Translation: The Olympus brand name will remain [with the NewCo] for a certain period after the business is sold.

In other words, JIP will be allowed to use the Olympus brand for their cameras, lenses and voice recorders for an interim period after the entry into force of the transaction, then they'll have to drop it.

It does sound like the brand is to remain as is, but I acquisitions like this they all say that in the beginning as I doubt they legally bound to follow through as stated. Olympus certainly dominates medical equipment markets but with COVID crisis hospitals are spending less to refurbish equipments as their revenues are way down due to cut back on elective procedures.

Ricoh has in my view operated Pentax division rather responsively for the users/customers but I am wondering in this diminishing market how much longer they are willing to carry on just for the sake of iconism that goes with the brand.

[pres589]

Why would you assume Ricoh doesn't make money with Pentax, and why would you assume that there's not sharing of tech that isn't easy to pinpoint at one segment of Ricoh Imagine but they all benefit from? Lens coatings, AF logic & detection, optical designs, UX research, materials sciences, etc etc. This isn't the Pentax Is Doomed thread.

[FozzFoster]

idk much about anything, but it would seem to me that one of these companies is doing much better at runnin a business than the other...

Attached Images

   

[Fontan]

Why would you assume Ricoh doesn't make money with Pentax, and why would you assume that there's not sharing of tech that isn't easy to pinpoint at one segment of Ricoh Imagine but they all benefit from? Lens coatings, AF logic & detection, optical designs, UX research, materials sciences, etc etc. This isn't the Pentax Is Doomed thread.

Well I agree that this is by any means a Pentax is Doomed thread. Yes. And, I have no idea if Ricoh makes money off of Pentax. But - that being said, I cannot imagine if there are any companies making huge strides selling digital cameras in this economic climate, and also with the rising of cell phone cameras. I think it is fair to assume that Pentax is able so sustain because Ricoh is a huge conglomerate that is at this point in time willing. I hope Ricoh remains willing and sustain Pentax for years to come.

[lesmore49]

idk much about anything, but it would seem to me that one of these companies is doing much better at runnin a business than the other...

I'm in the same boat as you are...in that I don't know much about much when it comes to the wheelings and dealings of corporations.

But your charts do illustrate a point to the mind of a layman....me, in this instance.. I think it's better that a company make a small regular profit...then a company dealing with a downward business trajectory.

Interesting comment from Clackers that made me think about Ricoh's management of Pentax since it took ownership.

" The Canon CEO said mirrorless proved to be a failure in that regard, for them, each MILC simply stole a sale from a DSLR, it did not grow the market or even arrest its slide."


I think Ricoh's strategy of keeping Pentax on a conservative course....maintaining the K mount and introducing/ producing a few very good DSLR's and lenses....and thereby not spreading themselves too thin has been a good strategy.

My take .

[guinnessman]

Why would you assume Ricoh doesn't make money with Pentax, and why would you assume that there's not sharing of tech that isn't easy to pinpoint at one segment of Ricoh Imagine but they all benefit from? Lens coatings, AF logic & detection, optical designs, UX research, materials sciences, etc etc. This isn't the Pentax Is Doomed thread.

I've seen positive news, in regards to the Theta and GR line, nothing is ever mentioned about Pentax in regards to the imaging division. They could be fine, barely treading water, or losing money.

I do see Olympus in Pentax too...so conservative, so unassuming, that most people figure that they're already under. Preaching to Pentaxians on here or dpreview does nothing. If they don't attract new users, they'll lose market share through attrition, ie current users selling gear or dying off. Using old lenses doesn't make current Ricoh money for example, and I can use those same old lenses on other systems, there's no magic sauce in my K3 there, for example.

To be blunt, there's little to no money being made in cameras now, they're all side gigs for bigger conglomerates, but even Olympus is jettisoning off dead weight.

[GUB]

Using old lenses doesn't make current Ricoh money for example,

Can you back that up with statistics? I wonder whether Pentax's dedication to backwards compatibility may be a strength. We may be crazies here on PF with great arsenals of lenses but I suspect the bulk of bodies are sold with a brace of kit zooms and see nothing else. El cheapo kit zooms are not going to be moneymakers for any company.

[RGlasel]

I wonder which camera company is to bite the dust Next.

Sony. Sony already went ahead and parked its still camera business in a separate company, just like Olympus created Newco, except Sony doesn't have a tentative buyer yet.

By the way, anyone want to recommend a m43 prime for portraits? My daughter bought a OM-D EM-5 Mk II a couple of years ago and she is looking to supplement her 14-150 walk-around zoom. It seems to me that we camera buffs are not very logical; my daughter's kit is much smaller than my K-30 and 18-135 zoom, it gives up 1 stop in useful ISO range and I don't like EVF's period, but here is a product line that seems to check all the MILC boxes and it doesn't sell well enough to stay viable. All because it doesn't have a "man-sized" sensor.

[surfar]

anyone want to recommend a m43 prime for portraits?

The 45mmf1.8 is quite good but the 75mm f1.8 is considered special but costs twice or more than the 45.Theres a 45 f1.2 PRO lens as well.

The slower 45 does well enough.

[clackers]

I've seen positive news, in regards to the Theta and GR line, nothing is ever mentioned about Pentax in regards to the imaging division. They could be fine, barely treading water, or losing money.

It's the one and the same division, Guinnessman. They are releasing a K-new, they made the acclaimed GR III, the stunning DFA* 50, they do a high tech double 1" sensor Theta for industry, etc. They have a portfolio that's just right for these troubled times. Nikon and Olympus sell more cameras and lenses, but guess what? They have the wrong lineups, they're going broke, they make losses.

I do see Olympus in Pentax too...so conservative, so unassuming

?

Olympus culture is very different. Aggressive accounting that was a national scandal. Going their own way with a 43 digital format rather than APS-C or FF. Ditching that entirely as a mistake and going with cute m43. Trying cheap m43, small m43, big m43, expensive m43. They advertised heavily, being darlings of DPR and Northrup and the Youtubers, and paying pros to switch brands and say 'I switched from Canon to Olympus because' ... all the usual crap Ricoh refuses to get trapped in.

Olympus really did desperately try to be trendy rather than stay in the black. At the end of the day, that's all a corporation wants. Not clicks on Youtube, or a thumbs up from Jarrod Polin or whoever.

[RGlasel]

The 45mmf1.8 is quite good but the 75mm f1.8 is considered special but costs twice or more than the 45.Theres a 45 f1.2 PRO lens as well.

The slower 45 does well enough.

Thanks for this, I've already sent my daughter a message.

[Rondec]

Sony. Sony already went ahead and parked its still camera business in a separate company, just like Olympus created Newco, except Sony doesn't have a tentative buyer yet.

By the way, anyone want to recommend a m43 prime for portraits? My daughter bought a OM-D EM-5 Mk II a couple of years ago and she is looking to supplement her 14-150 walk-around zoom. It seems to me that we camera buffs are not very logical; my daughter's kit is much smaller than my K-30 and 18-135 zoom, it gives up 1 stop in useful ISO range and I don't like EVF's period, but here is a product line that seems to check all the MILC boxes and it doesn't sell well enough to stay viable. All because it doesn't have a "man-sized" sensor.

For some things, like macro, wildlife, and even portraiture, micro four thirds is excellent. I would just say that someone who shoots weddings in low light settings (like my wife) or shoots landscapes at sunrise and pushes the images pretty hard (like me) wants as much sensor real estate to work with. I can tell a difference between K-1 images and K3/K5 images when it comes to ability to push shadows and maintain color, avoid noise. When I shot APS-C I really had to do a lot of bracketing, which is fine, but with a K-1 with pixel shift, I don't have to.

Olympus' problem really had to do with the fact that they didn't have enough differentiation of one product to the next. All their cameras had similar enough specs and had weird enough names that I don't think I could have identified any of them, except for the x series. Beyond which, it feels like micro four thirds is kind of a dead end now. There is a reason why Panasonic joined the L mount alliance and it had to do with wanting to take a step forward in image quality that they couldn't with micro four thirds.

[bobbotron]

The 45mmf1.8 is quite good but the 75mm f1.8 is considered special but costs twice or more than the 45.Theres a 45 f1.2 PRO lens as well.

The slower 45 does well enough.

I had the 45 1.8 for a while, it is a very good lens, definitely up to the task of taking some portraits, and not too long.

[Mistral75]

Sony. Sony already went ahead and parked its still camera business in a separate company, just like Olympus created Newco, except Sony doesn't have a tentative buyer yet.

(...)

Not exactly.

What Sony put, effective the 1st of April, 2020, under the umbrella of an intermediate holding company named Sony Electronics Corporation (to be renamed Sony Corporation as of the 1st of April, 2021) is not their still camera business but the three businesses that comprise their Electronics Products & Solutions (EP&S) segment: Imaging Products & Solutions, Home Entertainment & Sound and Mobile Communications.

Sony Electronics Corporation to be Established - 20200326_01E.pdf

Announcement of New Sony Group Organizational Structure - 20200519_01E.pdf

Electronics Products & Solutions, and therefore Sony Electronics Corporation, includes the following businesses:

1. Televisions (LCD and OLED televisions) (32,8% of EP&S revenue)
2. Still and Video Cameras (interchangeable lens cameras, compact digital cameras, consumer video cameras and video cameras for broadcast) (19,5%)
3. Mobile Communications (smartphones and internet-related service business) (18,4%)
4. Audio and Video (Blu-ray disc players and recorders, home audio, headphones and memory-based portable audio devices) (17,6%)
5. Other (display products such as projectors and medical equipment) (11,7%)

In FY2019 (April2019 - March 2020) Sony Electronics Corporation achieved a revenue of ¥1,991bn and an operating profit of ¥87bn.

Quite a different beast than Olympus Imaging (revenue: ¥44bn ; operating loss: ¥10bn).