[biz-engineer]

That gave room for Fuji on the mirrorless segment.

If I understood correctly, the key driver for Pentaxians to buy a Fuji X (or Sony) mirrorless camera was for using their Pentax K / M42 manual focus lenses thanks to focus peaking possible in VF. If Pentax DSLR had such manual focus help features, much less Pentaxians would have bought a Fuji X or Sony A7.

[Fogel70]

If I understood correctly, the key driver for Pentaxians to buy a Fuji X (or Sony) mirrorless camera was for using their Pentax K / M42 manual focus lenses thanks to focus peaking possible in VF. If Pentax DSLR had such manual focus help features, much less Pentaxians would have bought a Fuji X or Sony A7.

A fully featured mirrorless system would not only been for existing Pentax users. It would also have been for getting new users to the brand.
It they had come with a mirrorless system that many users wanted, they could have taken a big part of Fujis market share, as Fuji came out with mirrorless after Pentax.

2011 when Pentax released Q would have been a good year to have released a larger sensor mirrorless system as it were before Fuji had a mirrorless system, before Sony had FF mirrorless and before many of the mirrorless systems were high performers..
It might not have taken that much effort for Pentax to come out with a competitive system.

But instead they tried to protect their existing market share. Which in the end probably led to them losing market share, to where they are today.

[Cerebum]

If I understood correctly, the key driver for Pentaxians to buy a Fuji X (or Sony) mirrorless camera was for using their Pentax K / M42 manual focus lenses thanks to focus peaking possible in VF. If Pentax DSLR had such manual focus help features, much less Pentaxians would have bought a Fuji X or Sony A7.

The K3 has peaking in live view, as for the KP it has outline peaking too, but like you said, no help through the viewfinder other than the square, which is still very good, some brands don't have that, so I am told I bought my Fuji x-e1 because I wanted a cheap camera that I could have fun with. If all Pentax equipment was beamed up by discerning aliens I would go to Fuji but, whilst I am aware that other brands excel in certain areas, the Pentax package, overall, is just better!

[Kunzite]

A fully featured mirrorless system would not only been for existing Pentax users. It would also have been for getting new users to the brand.
It they had come with a mirrorless system that many users wanted, they could have taken a big part of Fujis market share, as Fuji came out with mirrorless after Pentax.

2011 when Pentax released Q would have been a good year to have released a larger sensor mirrorless system as it were before Fuji had a mirrorless system, before Sony had FF mirrorless and before many of the mirrorless systems were high performers..
It might not have taken that much effort for Pentax to come out with a competitive system.

But instead they tried to protect their existing market share. Which in the end probably led to them losing market share, to where they are today.

OK... let's see...
A fully featured mirrorless. So if it's less than fully featured, it won't work. Can Ricoh Imaging actually make a fully featured mirrorless? What is fully featured, anyway?
It would be for existing Pentax users. But, aren't the existing Pentax users those who prefer DSLRs?
It would also have been for getting new users to the brand. Without an USP. Probably with some lower specs and higher price. Good luck with that!
If they had come... nothing can change the past. In 2011 Hoya finished stripping Pentax Imaging Systems and was selling it to Ricoh. Asking if they could've put a similar effort to Fuji and Sony instead doesn't make any sense.
It makes even less sense to claim that such an endeavor "might not have taken that much effort". It did for everyone who tried. And not everyone succeeded.

Pentax is a DSLR brand. It's past time for people to accept this.

[Cerebum]

OK... let's see...
A fully featured mirrorless. So if it's less than fully featured, it won't work. Can Ricoh Imaging actually make a fully featured mirrorless? What is fully featured, anyway?
It would be for existing Pentax users. But, aren't the existing Pentax users those who prefer DSLRs?
It would also have been for getting new users to the brand. Without an USP. Probably with some lower specs and higher price. Good luck with that!
If they had come... nothing can change the past. In 2011 Hoya finished stripping Pentax Imaging Systems and was selling it to Ricoh. Asking if they could've put a similar effort to Fuji and Sony instead doesn't make any sense.
It makes even less sense to claim that such an endeavor "might not have taken that much effort". It did for everyone who tried. And not everyone succeeded.

Pentax is a DSLR brand. It's past time for people to accept this.

I couldn't agree more. Fuji, Sony (ignoring A mount, much like Sony did) and Olympus only had one mount to service. Canon and Nikon were late to the mirrorless game and some people say Nikon is struggling. Had Pentax joined the party we may have lost DSLRs and the K Mount and then where would we be. As it is, Pentax has a unique product niche. Pentax make arguably the best sturdy, fully featured DSLR cameras on the market. Whether that will be enough to keep them alive, only time will tell but I for one love my pentaprisms, my limiteds and everything that makes Pentax a little bit different!

[Kunzite]

As it is, Pentax has a unique product niche. Pentax make arguably the best sturdy, fully featured DSLR cameras on the market. Whether that will be enough to keep them alive, only time will tell but I for one love my pentaprisms, my limiteds and everything that makes Pentax a little bit different!

I keep thinking that we lost diversity; there were lots of different cameras, in the early and mid-film era in particular; and now they all seems to follow the same pattern. Boring.

[Cerebum]

I keep thinking that we lost diversity; there were lots of different cameras, in the early and mid-film era in particular; and now they all seems to follow the same pattern. Boring.

It will be interesting to see what comes next. Whilst it wasn't a K-01 or a Q, the KP with its interchangeable grips was different enough to hugely divide opinion (I love mine). Given the size of the pentaprism market though, can Pentax afford to spend R&D Yen on another K-S1?

[Kunzite]

It will be interesting to see what comes next. Whilst it wasn't a K-01 or a Q, the KP with its interchangeable grips was different enough to hugely divide opinion (I love mine). Given the size of the pentaprism market though, can Pentax afford to spend R&D Yen on another K-S1?

I'm not expecting another K-S1; as that was essentially a cheaper camera, thus made to be sold in higher volumes.

My hope is that we'll see an evolution of the DSLR concept. They can get simpler and, at the same time, better.

[awscreo]

Surveys are so full of it lol. Did they survey the entire population of Japan?

[Fogel70]

OK... let's see...
A fully featured mirrorless. So if it's less than fully featured, it won't work. Can Ricoh Imaging actually make a fully featured mirrorless? What is fully featured, anyway?

The Q was a fully featured mirrorless system except for the tiny senor that limited it from having a future. Had they put the effort they put on Q on a competetive system with larger sensor it had a greater chance of it still being produced. Leading to a bigger market share and a larger R&D dep that could support both DSLR and mirrorless. To make a mirrorless system with a larger sensor than in the Q would not take much more resources. And if they used an APS-C sensor it would have been alot more synergies with development of DSLRs.

It would be for existing Pentax users. But, aren't the existing Pentax users those who prefer DSLRs?
It would also have been for getting new users to the brand. Without an USP. Probably with some lower specs and higher price. Good luck with that!

As I said mirrorless is not only for existing users, it is also for getting new users to the brand. Pentax could have offered a lot of USP other than a tiny sensor.

If they had come... nothing can change the past. In 2011 Hoya finished stripping Pentax Imaging Systems and was selling it to Ricoh. Asking if they could've put a similar effort to Fuji and Sony instead doesn't make any sense.

Q was released in 2011 so the development started long before that. But I agree that the Hoya takeover may have affected Pentax mirrorless venture, and may be a reason for ending up with Q.

It makes even less sense to claim that such an endeavor "might not have taken that much effort". It did for everyone who tried. And not everyone succeeded.

That Pentax would not succed with Q was pretty clear from the start.

Pentax is a DSLR brand. It's past time for people to accept this.

Pentax is a DSLR brand now as they no longer have resouced to put on anything else. But in 2011 both Ricon and Pentax where also mirrorless brands. But they both put their resources on niche systems that has little chance of being competetive for the future.

[Kunzite]

The Q was a fully featured mirrorless system except for the tiny senor that limited it from having a future. Had they put the effort they put on Q on a competetive system with larger sensor it had a greater chance of it still being produced. Leading to a bigger market share and a larger R&D dep that could support both DSLR and mirrorless. To make a mirrorless system with a larger sensor than in the Q would not take much more resources. And if they used an APS-C sensor it would have been alot more synergies with development of DSLRs.

The Q was a low effort mirrorless, a compact with a nice interface and interchangeable mounts. Parts of it were made by 3rd-parties, particularly the "toy" lenses - and even so, the lens line was very limited. Not in the Pentax sense.
A competitive system with larger sensor would've been on a different level. Not leading to a larger R&D but requiring it.
But as I said, Q was IMHO whatever Pentax Imaging Systems could do under Hoya. Have you seen Hoya acting on increasing Pentax' market share? I didn't. On the contrary, they reduced it, while everyone else grew.

As I said mirrorless is not only for existing users, it is also for getting new users to the brand. Pentax could have offered a lot of USP other than a tiny sensor.
Q was released in 2011 so the development started long before that. But I agree that the Hoya takeover may have affected Pentax mirrorless venture, and may be a reason for ending up with Q.
That Pentax would not succed with Q was pretty clear from the start.

There's not much supporting the idea that mirrorless would get Pentax new users, though.
I don't care about "could have", particularly when it implies Hoya investing into Pentax rather than trying to sell them.
Hoya took over Pentax in 2007. In 2008 Hoya completed merging Pentax into their own structures. In 2009 new lens development took a serious hit.
That wasn't the environment in which Pentax could launch an entire new mirrorless lens line.

Pentax is a DSLR brand now as they no longer have resouced to put on anything else. But in 2011 both Ricon and Pentax where also mirrorless brands. But they both put their resources on niche systems that has little chance of being competetive for the future.

Ricoh bought Pentax because they could not turn around their camera division on their own. Ricoh had no mirrorless; their GXR was their alternative to having a mirrorless line (that is, to having a mount and dedicated lenses).

And I don't get your point. In an alternate Universe, indeed, Pentax could've been a mirrorless brand just like everyone else (or perhaps, Sony would stay with DSLRs. We can imagine anything.).
In this one, though, Pentax is a DSLR brand. They never seriously deviated from this - despite two experiments.

[reyprotski]

Hi all,
Quite the contrary, I read an article on my Google feed re survey on Japan's favorite camera brands and surprise surprise, Pentax came in first. I can think we can attribute that to Japanese being traditional and Pentax or Asahi in that nature has it's legacy deeply rooted.

[RobA_Oz]

Pentax is the brand. Cameras are the black (or silver) metal boxes with buttons and dials. A friend of mine has Canon DSLRs, but he has glued a Leica label on the front.

That reminds me of the people who used to graft a Rolls-Royce radiator grille onto a Mini. Those were the days before the (BMW) Mini became a prestige brand, of course.

[tokyoscape]

A fully featured mirrorless system would not only been for existing Pentax users. It would also have been for getting new users to the brand.
It they had come with a mirrorless system that many users wanted, they could have taken a big part of Fujis market share, as Fuji came out with mirrorless after Pentax.

I remember back before K1's days seeing some Pentax users talk about Full Frame DSRL as a (not) possible future of Pentax which is the same as what they are saying about FF mirrorless as a (not) possible future of Pentax today. And what happened after the release of the K1? It was very late to the game because the market already start to change to Mirrorless, but still, the brand made money, get more new users, people also changed their view to support Pentax FF DSLR. And Ricoh even mention the name Pentax in their annual report (which has been absent for a few years now because it doesn't make enough money).

Some people will agree with the brand decision no matter what, if you disagree with the brand, go somewhere else, the brand can survive without you attitude.
Some will focus more on the brand financial survival because they don't want to see the brand die. I think I am in this group.
But after all, does opinions from both side of the argument matter at all?
I am not sure. I am trying not to take it too serious because I don't think they listen to anyone.
But one thing for sure, I think both sides are a lot better than the hater non-users who want to see the brand die, so they will keep on complaining no matter what the brand will do.

[JPT]

Of course, dissecting the past is an interesting pastime, but the thing to remember is that the future is still to be written. Pentax/Hoya/Risoh made their decisions that brought us here for better or worse. I don't want to come across as an amateur Japanologist, but one thing I have noticed in the two decades I've been here is that Japanese people and companies don't give up. I can guarantee you that Ricoh Imaging is not planning to just try to cling on to their existing users for a few more years. They will have a plan to grow - whether it is going to work or not is another matter.

As far as I can see, the plan is:
- Develop DSLRs down a different evolutionary path to mirrorless
- Build on the success of the GR

What is positive about this survey (and there have been other similar surveys in the past) is that they have a lot of goodwill in the Japanese market, so their brand image will not be a hindrance for them.

On the whole Mirrorless vs. DSLR discussion, I have a few opinions, which I know are not shared by most.
- When Ricoh acquired Pentax, they ditched the wrong system. They should have gone with the GXR and developed the system properly. It could have coexisted very well with K-mount.
- Ricoh decided to go forward with Pentax Q (must have been conceived under Hoya). They managed to get pretty good sales in Japan through aggressive (and presumably costly) marketing. The problem was that it is just "buying sales" and then the customers they got were not prepared to pay when they released a more expensive lens (the wide-angle zoom).
- The K-01 was not a big deal. It turned out to be a one-off. They released it. Journalists and commenters overseas laughed. They sold them all anyway. They moved on. If you like DSLRs, you can be grateful that all DSLRs afterwards had much better live view carried over from the K-01.
- In 2016, Ricoh released the (delayed from 2015) K-1. If they had chosen to go into the full frame market with a mirrorless product at that time, they would have been one of the first movers. I think that was a fateful decision for them, but sentimentality drove them top make the camera their users had been asking for. I'm still not sure they made the right decision, but it is what it is.
- I still think they might make a new mirrorless system, but it depends on that second part of the plan above. There are probably only a couple of logical compact models to build on the GR model, so do they decide that an ILC is the way forward? I still think there is a space for a truly compact mirrorless system.