[BruceBanner]

Nothing has really changed in the 22 months since this thread was started. There aren't any tricks to saving the ILC industry that haven't been tried multiple times, no niche market that hasn't been targeted from multiple angles and no marketing strategy that has been left untested. Just because a particular manufacturer hasn't come out with a product that checks every single box on our own unique, personal shopping list, doesn't mean that the world is coming to an end. If you include used cameras that are capable of working for another decade or so, there aren't any photographic itches that can't be scratched, as long as one is willing to accept that a few boxes will never be checked off.

I wholeheartedly agree. If you look at the other brand flagship cameras... weow! How can Pentax compete with some of those systems! But often (and I have no idea why...) the pricetag is completely left out of the talking point... The Canon 1Dx III is a Full Frame BEAST with a $10k pricetag attached! It's not an enthusiast camera but a professional tool which I think is an affordable system for those that make $60-100k/yr from being a professional photographer. Pentax K-1 is a $2k camera and suits enthusiast budgets as well as those lesser or p/t professionals. The camera does NOT have to compete with flagship systems in order to turn a profit, it just has to be a good camera marketed to the appropriate audience.

Marketing is Pentax's major weakness imo, not the cameras. Clarity on what the camera can do, its intended purposes and getting the proper respect it deserves. I'm a member of a few photography groups (non brand specific) and when people ask for recommendations for a landscape camera it's saddening to see the lack of recommendations for Pentax when in fact it's one of the most strongest contenders AND best value.
I had a friend recently get into photography and his interest is bird and wildlife. He's gone to Canon and I don't think that's necessarily a bad decision, not that Pentax cameras can't take good bird pictures but fast AF, deep buffer and strong fps has never been Pentax's strong point.

I would also like to see some better indepth Pentax camera reviews, I get depressed watching a video from a popular youtube account and have the user complain over a feature and never know said feature can be turned on or off in the menu... so sad...

[pinholecam]

Most of the "performance" niches for MILC are already covered.
I think if Pentax wants a break out product, it will have to go for the "stylo" way.

Exactly ME super looking, APSC, together with the current DA ltds in silver.
Its a hit or miss, but if it manages to capture the attention of the mass market, it has potential to leap over the current declining enthusiast market.
The Ricoh Theta was exactly the same, people thought it was a waste of time, but in the end, it bypassed the "serious user" market and built a new reputation/niche for Ricoh.


Realistically, I've been using my Sony A7 since Nov-Dec 2013 as my ME super for K-mount lenses (gosh 6+ yrs already)
Looking back, despite its warts (and there are many), I have got to be grateful that it allowed me to use so many of my Pentax and other mount lenses over these years until the K1 came along.
Over this time, Pentax has slowed down its product releases and the market has also declined.
So I have low hopes Pentax will do a MILC (in the next 2 yrs at least)

[Rondec]

We can hash it a lot longer, but to me, unless Ricoh throws a bunch of money at Pentax they are going to continue in the same pattern they have been -- slow release of K mount gear, mostly focusing at this point on a single K mount SLR per year and a couple of full frame lenses.

The negatives for MILC development are pretty clear.

1. MILCs tend to emphasize things that Pentax has not done particularly well -- high frame rates, high end video, EVFs. To change this would take money.

2. Lens development has been very slow. Certainly Pentax could release a MILC with an adapter for K mount lenses, but the idea that their users would still be using that adapter to fill in the gaps in the year 2030 would be disheartening. Once again, this would take quite a bit more money than is currently allocated for R and D.

3. Most of the niches in the MILC market have already been targeted between Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji, Nikon, Canon, and Sony. Canon and Nikon have already discovered that simply releasing new MILCs is not a recipe for re-capturing lost sales.

4. The overall market is declining (both MILC and SLR). The idea of launching a new, expensive project right now could be the final straw that gets Ricoh to shutter things.

Pentax is in the situation of having a little bit of money from Theta and GR sales to work with, but they still need to make sure that each new item they release makes money. I suppose this is true for other brands, but it sure seems like Fuji and Olympus were willing to continue churning out cameras even if they didn't generate much income or even lost it (using Instax and endoscope moneys to make things work).

[redcat]

Dslr is dying slowly and Canon Nikon realize that, they have to jump on the milc ship or they will be the past, with those big players Canikony all promote mirrorless then people will expect "serious" company to have its own milc. Pentax has no choice but to jump on that ship too, new shooters are not gonna look for a dslr in 1-2 years from now. There is no other way around it, really, do or die !

[Serkevan]

Dslr is dying slowly and Canon Nikon realize that, they have to jump on the milc ship or they will be the past, with those big players Canikony all promote mirrorless then people will expect "serious" company to have its own milc. Pentax has no choice but to jump on that ship too, new shooters are not gonna look for a dslr in 1-2 years from now. There is no other way around it, really, do or die !

Except customers are not jumping en masse from DSLR to MILC systems. There are people who do not want EVFs for a number of reasons (I would rather shoot myself in the foot than suffer through 10 minutes of using an A7, for starters).


The main reason manufacturers are pushing them is that it's substantially cheaper to manufacture a MILC, and since it's "cutting edge tech" and other nonsense marketing buzzwords, people will be willing to shell out substantially more money, leading to higher margins for the manufacturers

[Wasp]

Most of the "performance" niches for MILC are already covered.
I think if Pentax wants a break out product, it will have to go for the "stylo" way.

Not sure what you mean by the Stylo way, but you made me think of the song by the Gorillaz.

[volley]

... new shooters are not gonna look for a dslr in 1-2 years from now. There is no other way around it, really, do or die !

I'm always impressed that forum posters know so much more about the camera market then reputable camera manufacturers ... I'm reading this since quite a few years already. It wasn't true "then" ... it isn't true "now" IMO

[StiffLegged]

I'm always impressed that forum posters know so much more about the camera market then reputable camera manufacturers ...

This is the interweb – of course forum posters know more than manufacturers. Obviously!

[bobmaxja]

Mass market for DSLR or MILC is dead. Just look around you in the general population. DSLR or MILC will make a come back when phone move to a different format meaning not a multi purposes tools and this will not happen soon.

[redcat]

I'm always impressed that forum posters know so much more about the camera market then reputable camera manufacturers ... I'm reading this since quite a few years already. It wasn't true "then" ... it isn't true "now" IMO

well, because we (forum posters) are the customers, the target of all those companies, Pentax for a long time didn't want to do FF (high cost, niche market, tough competition...) and a zillions of people explain why FF is not needed or why they never want a FF but in the end Pentax has to release the FF because there is no other choice (and everyone's so excited about that FF when it's finally released), same then same now. If Pentax wants to stay in the business then mirrorless is the way, just look around and see which other company hasn't gone down that milc route, none.

[Rondec]

well, because we (forum posters) are the customers, the target of all those companies, Pentax for a long time didn't want to do FF (high cost, niche market, tough competition...) and a zillions of people explain why FF is not needed or why they never want a FF but in the end Pentax has to release the FF because there is no other choice (and everyone's so excited about that FF when it's finally released), same then same now. If Pentax wants to stay in the business then mirrorless is the way, just look around and see which other company hasn't gone down that milc route, none.

Unfortunately, Nikon's results aren't particularly promising. They have sold some MILCs, but fewer than they had hoped and have had to discount things to do that. There is no indication that Ricoh could turn out something that would even compete with a Z6 from a technical standpoint, much less get a lens line up together.

Being the sixth or seven MILC company in the market feels like a recipe for disaster, but I am certainly not a prophet.

Edit: I should add that if there isn't a global recession due to COVID (making all new releases a moot point for awhile) I would be shocked.

[EDstrg87]

Unfortunately, Nikon's results aren't particularly promising. They have sold some MILCs, but fewer than they had hoped and have had to discount things to do that. There is no indication that Ricoh could turn out something that would even compete with a Z6 from a technical standpoint, much less get a lens line up together.

Being the sixth or seven MILC company in the market feels like a recipe for disaster, but I am certainly not a prophet.

Pentax is the third DSLR manufacturer due to the fact that there are only 3 companies left (Sony A mount unfortunately is a dead one)

A Pentax/Ricoh ML hypothetical camera should have an existing mount (Like L, E or M43) or, if they want to keep "all in the family", adapt the Q mount to a bigger sensor (apsc would be fine) and make it OPEN.

Edit: I should add that if there isn't a global recession due to COVID (making all new releases a moot point for awhile) I would be shocked.

maybe could be the time that every manufacturer understand that for the market, the only needed thing is a common shared mount

[Serkevan]

well, because we (forum posters) are the customers, the target of all those companies, Pentax for a long time didn't want to do FF (high cost, niche market, tough competition...) and a zillions of people explain why FF is not needed or why they never want a FF but in the end Pentax has to release the FF because there is no other choice (and everyone's so excited about that FF when it's finally released), same then same now. If Pentax wants to stay in the business then mirrorless is the way, just look around and see which other company hasn't gone down that milc route, none.

Forum posters are decidedly not the average customer, though. Never has been the case whether it's photography or anything else, because the bulk of sales doesn't come from enthusiasts with more than passing knowledge.
Mirrorless is "the way" because it's cheaper to manufacture. Leica is still in business after basically ignoring* the SLR route for decades. There are people who do not want an inferior EVF, no matter what. What exactly would I get out of a mirrorless camera that compensates the insufferable EVF?




*Yes yes, I know, Leica R. Not what the company is known for though, right?

[redcat]

What exactly would I get out of a mirrorless camera that compensates the insufferable EVF?

Milc has many advantages :
- Super fast and accurate AF (no front/back focus)
- Eye AF
- Correct exposure (what you see is what you get)
- Less moving parts (less point of failure)
- Bigger focus area
- Better tracking
- No blackout when shooting multiple frames
- Cheaper to produce (may leads to cheaper price in the long run)
.....

Leica is mirrorless now and has to team up with sigma & panasonic to compete with other players.

[StiffLegged]

Milc has many advantages :
- Super fast and accurate AF (no front/back focus)
- Eye AF
- Correct exposure (what you see is what you get)
- Less moving parts (less point of failure)
- Bigger focus area
- Better tracking
- No blackout when shooting multiple frames
- Cheaper to produce (may leads to cheaper price in the long run)
.....

Leica is mirrorless now and has to team up with sigma & panasonic to compete with other players.

Most of your points are only true IF the manufacturer builds these features into the camera software and the only models that don’t blackout the EVF when shooting multiple frames are the most expensive. The rest blackout like a DSLR.