[Wheatfield]

Hey guys, don't forget selling cameras also do generate some lenses sales, and I wouldn't be surprised if lenses sales did bring better margins.

Of course they do. And like all things sold, more expensive lenses generate more profit than mass market low priced ones.
Which brings up a salient point: How many entry level buyers are also buying Pentax * lenses? I bet that most are buying the kit lens, maybe an inexpensive telephoto zoom, and probably not much else. This is the way it is in Canonland, Nikon land and Sonyland, I don't see why Pentaxland would be any different.
Again, the high end buyer is generating more profit for the company.
More profit per unit means faster ROI. Faster ROI means the product is less of a gamble for the company. A long ROI stands a greater chance of failure if there is a sudden and unforeseen upheaval in the market, not to mention shareholder pushback (what do you mean we won't see a dividend payout for 10 years because of this?).

The low end market (entry level) is a great enticement for the consumer, they can get most of what they want in a budget friendly package. Manufacturers give them this by cutting margins (and usualy build quality) to the bone. Unfortunately, when margins are low, volumes need to go up significantly to make the product profitable in the long term, the long term these days being a few years at most.
This is why Canon, arguably the queen of entry level with the Rebel, just made really minor changes to the camera year over year. A total redesign every year would not have been financially viable, but an inexpensive tweak here and there on an already finalized package allowed them to put a new label on an old product year over year and make the punters think they were getting something new rather than the same old snake oil.

Also, the volume market for new cameras has been killed by cell phones (remember those pesky devices are getting pretty serious cameras).

[Photos-by-Chas]

They aren't made anymore, Chas. The green ones are 'it'. If a brand new replacement aperture block goes in as a repair, it also has the green solenoid.

The DIY crowd buying old white ones on eBay have got the right idea.

That does not mean that the source for the solenoids has not changed them to the proper materials to fix it. According to reports here, the suit was essentially stopped as the findings were that the improper materials were used in the original parts. Have those materials been updated and used properly in the solenoids used in the currently produced K-70s? What indications or proof is there that the materials being used in the current models have not been changed?

[ThorSanchez]

Of course they do. And like all things sold, more expensive lenses generate more profit than mass market low priced ones.
Which brings up a salient point: How many entry level buyers are also buying Pentax * lenses? I bet that most are buying the kit lens, maybe an inexpensive telephoto zoom, and probably not much else. This is the way it is in Canonland, Nikon land and Sonyland, I don't see why Pentaxland would be any different.

If I recall correctly, we've had threads showing data that a typical camera results in 1.5 or 1.7 lenses sold. That may even be across all cameras, so I'd assume 2-3 for higher-end cameras, but one, maybe two for budget-oriented models.

We all use our own experiences, for whatever that's worth, but my sister and nephew are my go-to examples of typical camera buyers. She bought a K-50 and only used the 18-55 kit lens until several years later I bought her a used 55-300 for Christmas. My nephew has an old *ist with a nearly free 24-70 (?) as his only lens. I don't think they are unusual, but we probably all think our circumstances are typical.

[slartibartfast01]

According to reports here, the suit was essentially stopped as the findings were that the improper materials were used in the original parts.

I don't remember any reports saying that, do you have a link?

[reh321]

Of course they do. And like all things sold, more expensive lenses generate more profit than mass market low priced ones.
Which brings up a salient point: How many entry level buyers are also buying Pentax * lenses? I bet that most are buying the kit lens, maybe an inexpensive telephoto zoom, and probably not much else. This is the way it is in Canonland, Nikon land and Sonyland, I don't see why Pentaxland would be any different.
Again, the high end buyer is generating more profit for the company.
More profit per unit means faster ROI. Faster ROI means the product is less of a gamble for the company. A long ROI stands a greater chance of failure if there is a sudden and unforeseen upheaval in the market, not to mention shareholder pushback (what do you mean we won't see a dividend payout for 10 years because of this?).

The low end market (entry level) is a great enticement for the consumer, they can get most of what they want in a budget friendly package. Manufacturers give them this by cutting margins (and usualy build quality) to the bone. Unfortunately, when margins are low, volumes need to go up significantly to make the product profitable in the long term, the long term these days being a few years at most.
This is why Canon, arguably the queen of entry level with the Rebel, just made really minor changes to the camera year over year. A total redesign every year would not have been financially viable, but an inexpensive tweak here and there on an already finalized package allowed them to put a new label on an old product year over year and make the punters think they were getting something new rather than the same old snake oil.

Also, the volume market for new cameras has been killed by cell phones (remember those pesky devices are getting pretty serious cameras).

You may pontificate all you want. I will repeat and then not reply.
I purchased my KP expecting it to be my last camera.
If Pentax wants any more of my money, they need to release a better camera in my price range {no more than $1000}.
They have shown they can do it - a K-70 follow up with the K-3iii f0cusing would definitely qualify.
Comparing a K-3ii to a K-70 says they can do it if they want to.

"The ball is in their court."

[Wheatfield]

If I recall correctly, we've had threads showing data that a typical camera results in 1.5 or 1.7 lenses sold. That may even be across all cameras, so I'd assume 2-3 for higher-end cameras, but one, maybe two for budget-oriented models.

We all use our own experiences, for whatever that's worth, but my sister and nephew are my go-to examples of typical camera buyers. She bought a K-50 and only used the 18-55 kit lens until several years later I bought her a used 55-300 for Christmas. My nephew has an old *ist with a nearly free 24-70 (?) as his only lens. I don't think they are unusual, but we probably all think our circumstances are typical.

I expect that data doesn't include the vast majority of lenses sold, which are those that come as part of a kit. I'm betting your experience is pretty much the norm for the person who never gets past casual use where a camera and kit zoom lens combo is the only purchase made.
To get down to an average of 1.5 lenses per user bought, there are about 50 users who have bought no additional lenses just to offset my lens purchases.
I admit I am not a typical user, but any advanced user who ends up with half a dozen lenses is skewing the average up by a significant number.
My guess is that the typical entry level buyer stops at the initial purchase of a cheap body and kit lens. A small number will buy a second kit quality zoom that gives more reach.

[photogem]

That does not mean that the source for the solenoids has not changed them to the proper materials to fix it. According to reports here, the suit was essentially stopped as the findings were that the improper materials were used in the original parts. Have those materials been updated and used properly in the solenoids used in the currently produced K-70s? What indications or proof is there that the materials being used in the current models have not been changed?

They have been changed since Dec. 2015 and thus we have far less failures.
But some do fail and when it is the solenoid it brings up memories and those who love to point their fingers.

I also believe that with some research the solenoid could come back to its original made in Japan specs and then this is history.

[Serkevan]

I expect that data doesn't include the vast majority of lenses sold, which are those that come as part of a kit. I'm betting your experience is pretty much the norm for the person who never gets past casual use where a camera and kit zoom lens combo is the only purchase made.
To get down to an average of 1.5 lenses per user bought, there are about 50 users who have bought no additional lenses just to offset my lens purchases.
I admit I am not a typical user, but any advanced user who ends up with half a dozen lenses is skewing the average up by a significant number.
My guess is that the typical entry level buyer stops at the initial purchase of a cheap body and kit lens. A small number will buy a second kit quality zoom that gives more reach.

It includes the kit lenses, because the average DSLR lens price (during shipping) was about ~100 USD. MILC lenses are significantly more expensive per unit.

On that note, that applies to bodies: the only DSLR bodies sold in any meaningful capacity are the cheapest of the cheapest these days, the average price per unit has been plummeting since 2018. Last I check it was at about 300€ per unit. The MILC price per unit has done nothing but go up, it's more than double that of the average DSLR... To the point where now 75-80% of the market's revenue is from mirrorless.

Therefore, it is quite probable that -these days- the average DSLR buyer is buying a D3500 with 18-55*. The average MILC buyer is buying something in the whereabouts of the X-E4/A6400/Z50/RP/Z5 with, probably, a decentish travel zoom and maybe a tele zoom.


*In fact, all the photography newbies I know bought a D5600 with 18-55.

[reh321]

I expect that data doesn't include the vast majority of lenses sold, which are those that come as part of a kit. I'm betting your experience is pretty much the norm for the person who never gets past casual use where a camera and kit zoom lens combo is the only purchase made.
To get down to an average of 1.5 lenses per user bought, there are about 50 users who have bought no additional lenses just to offset my lens purchases.
I admit I am not a typical user, but any advanced user who ends up with half a dozen lenses is skewing the average up by a significant number.
My guess is that the typical entry level buyer stops at the initial purchase of a cheap body and kit lens. A small number will buy a second kit quality zoom that gives more reach.

The question of lenses is complicated.
When I purchased my first SLR, it came with a Pentax-M 50mm f/2, which I still have, and it is usable on current cameras.
After that camera was ruined by spray at Niagara Falls, I purchased another SLR, which was kitted with a Pentax-A 50 mm f/1.7.
After a 20 Canon “vacation”, I purchased a K-30, which was kitted with some kind of 18-55mm.
In short order, I purchased a new DA 18-135mm and sold the kit lens - then I purchased a DA 55-300mm lens.
Less than three years later, I purchased a KP sans lens, planning to use the lenses I had been using with the K-30.
In the next couple of years, I purchased a DA 20-40mm Ltd and a DA 55-300mm PLM.
If I would purchase a K-90, I would expect to use my current lenses.
When @Adam had raffles giving away K-1 cameras, I originally didn’t participate because I didn’t want to purchase ‘DFA’ lenses right then, but then I realized the lenses I was using with my K-30 now were “FF” lenses {actually a FA 28-105mm and several Takumars}, so I could retire the K-30, and use the K-1 with the lenses I had been using with it. Of course, I didn’t ‘win’ then, but it remains as my plan if I should ever get a K-1.

[mikesbike]

I also believe that with some research the solenoid could come back to its original made in Japan specs and then this is history

That would make good sense. If it could be made right back then, which it was, it could be made that way again. And the old, good solenoid came on some relatively inexpensive camera models.

[photogem]

In February I wrote:

I also believe that with some research the solenoid could come back to its original made in Japan specs and then this is history.

@mikesbike answered:

That would make good sense. If it could be made right back then, which it was, it could be made that way again. And the old, good solenoid came on some relatively inexpensive camera models.

And so it is.

Pentax has modified the solenoid again, it is now pretty much up to the specs.
See:
Solenoid in Pentax K-70 - Page 5 - PentaxForums.com

and here:
A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY: Development of the solenoid in Pentax cameras - Page 6 - PentaxForums.com

So I think ABF with the K-70 should now be history, as well as any Pentax repaired with this new solenoid!

[zbrueningsen]

I repaired my own K-30 with about an hour of work and a YouTube video. I just sanded down the A piece and have had 0 issues since.

[slartibartfast01]

I repaired my own K-30 with about an hour of work and a YouTube video. I just sanded down the A piece and have had 0 issues since.

From your other post it is less than 2 months since the repair. Cameras repaired by sanding or filing often fail again and 2 months is too soon to know.

[zbrueningsen]

From your other post it is less than 2 months since the repair. Cameras repaired by sanding or filing often fail again and 2 months is too soon to know.

Do you have a link for that? I’m not disputing your statement. I’m just curious and would love to read about more people’s experience on this.

[slartibartfast01]

Do you have a link for that? I’m not disputing your statement. I’m just curious and would love to read about more people’s experience on this.

There are a few threads dedicated to the subject. Here is one
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/151-pentax-k-30-k-50/388728-why-you-shouldnt-file-sand-china-solenoid-avoid-lenovo-solenoids.html#post4667936