Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-28-2012, 06:53 PM   #46
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,352
QuoteOriginally posted by Ryan Trevisol Quote
If everyone lived the way you believe, we would have a much nicer world to live in.

Unfortunately, that's not the world we do actually live in, and Pentax has to do what it needs to do to survive, because if Pentax adopted a benevolent, not-take-all-the-profit-it-can-get stance, Canon and Nikon would be happy to crush them. The 18-55 WR does cost probably 1-2% more to make than the non-WR one, and Pentax needs to position it, with it's cents worth of parts and assembly at a premium position, it only makes business sense.
As a stand alone item, I couldn't agree more.

As part of a kit, with the primary camera advertising showing it being blasted with water, the WR kit lens should be included.

Frankly, for $200, the kit lens should include a silent AF motor.

06-29-2012, 09:19 AM - 1 Like   #47
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 281
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
+100
Thank you very much, Class A.

QuoteOriginally posted by Ryan Trevisol Quote
If everyone lived the way you believe, we would have a much nicer world to live in. Unfortunately, that's not the world we do actually live in
I know. I'm very well aware of it. I also know there is no changing it. That's why you will often see a demoralized look on my face when I am dwelling on this sort of topic. Regrettably(???), things like this have always mattered to me (I would write all of my comments on Ned Bunnell's blog if I thought there was a chance of changing anything; but I know that would be a lesson in utter futility; nonetheless, it is fun to fantasize that someone at Pentax occasionally comes here to PF to secretly mingle with us peasants in order to gauge our general sentiments; smart corporate leaders would do that, because, for all intents and purposes, we are a cost-free "focus group").

QuoteOriginally posted by Ryan Trevisol Quote
Pentax has to do what it needs to do to survive
And I'm saying people shouldn't automatically assume that Pentax needs to follow this business model in order to survive. I believe it would not only survive, but it might very well thrive, if it were to "give" (please note the quotation marks) consumers a bit more for their money in those instances in which the products it is selling aren't nearly as expensive -- perceptually or factually -- as its execs would have us believe they are. I've seen it done, and I've done it myself, with great success. Customers (and, by that, I don't mean just the usual gaggle of devoted adherents) respond very positively -- on a longterm basis -- to businesses that "give" them "their money's worth" and don't try to fool them by charging them extra for "perceived value."

QuoteOriginally posted by Ryan Trevisol Quote
if Pentax adopted a benevolent, not-take-all-the-profit-it-can-get stance
"Benevolent" is not the same thing as "honorable" or "ethical." I'm not suggesting that Pentax behave benevolently. To do so would truly be naive on my part.

What I write next is 100 percent my personal opinion, although I would like to think it is based on at least three decades of observation, too: I think that "taking all the profit a company can get" -- while it can get it -- is a philosophy that frequently loses out in the long run to the philosophy of treating consumers as valued, respected and intelligent customers, or, in other words, as partners in a symbiotic relationship in a free-market society***, and not just as sources of profit (stong emphasis on "just"). I'm not saying this will definitely happen to Pentax, but I think it is generally true in the business world.

QuoteOriginally posted by Ryan Trevisol Quote
The 18-55 WR does cost probably 1-2% more to make than the non-WR one
Okay.

QuoteOriginally posted by Unsinkable II Quote
As a stand alone item, I couldn't agree more.

As part of a kit [...] the WR kit lens should be included.
I don't agree with you on your first statement (but to each his own, I guess); however, when it is combined with your second statement you make an excellent point. Pentax could have continued to charge "extra" for a standalone 18-55 WR lens, while including it as a kit lens with the K-30. Why? Because very few people would have realized that Pentax was "practically giving away" (sarcasm) the WR lens in that kit.

-----

***With regard to a "free-market society," I am speaking ideally, since very few parts of the world have a true "free-market society" anymore. Nonetheless, businesses still need customers and customers still need businesses. That's what makes it a symbiotic relationship.

[It becomes a coercive relationship when the government forces customers to buy a product from a private corporation, which the U.S. Supreme Court just did yesterday -- completely illegally, I might add.]

Last edited by Welfl; 06-29-2012 at 09:53 AM.
06-29-2012, 09:38 AM   #48
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 281
Original Poster
QuoteQuote:
Ryan Trevisol: "Thank you for saying 'intents and purposes' instead of 'intensive purposes.' Seriously! I see it wrong more than I see it right!"
Thank you in return, and you're welcome! I'm a stickler for things like that myself. Who knows? That may even be one of the many reasons that I majored in English (and history) .

By the way, even though you and I have opposing opinions in this thread, I have really enjoyed your comments in other threads and was very close to chiming in more than once in order to send my compliments, but I figured I would get dragged into debates/arguments that I did not want to get dragged into, so I forced myself to stay out of it.

P.S. I just now discovered the comments section in which you wrote the above comment. I have looked at that page several times, but I just didn't see the comments since they are so small and blend it so well. I'm glad I saw them in a timely manner with regard to this thread. I just wish I could have found a way to reply to it there, but I couldn't see one.

Last edited by Welfl; 06-29-2012 at 09:55 AM.
06-29-2012, 09:53 AM   #49
Veteran Member
lammie200's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,028
QuoteOriginally posted by Ryan Trevisol Quote
...With the 18-55, it's kind of confusing, you have the original DA, the DA II, DA-L version (no quick shift, no hood) that comes with the K-30 (and came with the K-r and K-x before that), which is the DA II, and the DA WR, which is presumably a WR version of the II, but has different exterior plastics than any of the others, which may be to set it apart visually, or it may have something to do with keeping it WR...But maybe Pentax has an eye on the long game, wherein they know that the K-30 will be discounted more deeply and more rapidly than the K-5 was, and they would lose more money in the long run. Who knows?
The WR version is not a WR version of the DA II version. The WR version has 12 elements/9 groups/1 aspherical element. The DA II version has 11 elements/8 groups/no aspherical element(s). Therefore they cannot be compared on retail price, nor (as some like to assume) manufacturing costs, alone. The DA L version is the version that has been bundled with previous bodies, and now, the K-30 body. It is correct that the DA L and the DA II are similar except for a plastic mount and no quick shift. As I stated before, I believe that the DA L version was never meant for retail by itself. If you see one for sale it is likely grey market or used.

I cannot explain why the Pentax Imaging site has the original DA priced higher than either the DA II of the DA WR. It might be that the whole e-commerce section of the site is subcontracted out to someone that has the pricing tied to inventory. Perhaps lower inventory automatically results in higher pricing. It doesn't matter to me because I don't want one.

Addressing no one in particular:

As I stated before, the K-30 is being offered for $50 more than the K-r was offered. If you don't think that the upgraded sensor, upgraded processor, pentaprism, focus peaking, dual control wheels, WR, etc. are worth an additional $50, then I am baffled. The little eyebrow above the AF assist light is probably worth that much.

As it stands you can get the K-30 with the DA L for $50 more than the body alone. You can also order the body separately and get the WR for $200 more. That would be a $150 dollar difference for a lens that is constructed differently and is WR. Not that far a stretch in my mind. Also, keep in mind that you can get the 18-135 WR and save 33% on the lens price. What's the issue?


Last edited by lammie200; 06-29-2012 at 10:21 AM.
06-29-2012, 09:56 AM - 1 Like   #50
Veteran Member
Ryan Trevisol's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: South Florida
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 308
Hehe, yes, I'm a closet Grammar Nazi.

QuoteOriginally posted by Welfl Quote
By the way, even though you and I have opposing opinions in this thread, I have really enjoyed your comments in other threads
I wouldn't say I disagree with how you think things should be, but I work for a company that does things the right way and really treats its customers right. . . we're getting our butts kicked in some areas by our ruthless competitors.

So I guess my sentiment about whether Pentax should go for the money grab on WR lenses is tainted. And it's not aimed at wanting Pentax to be ruthless in its competition with Canikon. I just want Pentax to continue its success and stick around and give us many years of awesome cameras.
06-29-2012, 10:26 AM   #51
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Liverpool, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,869
QuoteOriginally posted by lammie200 Quote
The WR version is not a WR version of the DA II version. The WR version has 12 elements/9 groups/1 aspherical element. The DA II version has 11 elements/8 groups/no aspherical element(s). Therefore they cannot be compared on retail price, nor (as some like to assume) manufacturing costs, alone.
That's just all kind of wrong. The Original DA 18-55 had 12 elements/9 groups. The DA II, the DA WR, and DA L all have 11 elements/8 groups. All have an aspherical element, thus the AL in the name. The WR is the DA II with seals, that's it.
06-29-2012, 10:27 AM   #52
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 281
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Ryan Trevisol Quote
Hehe, yes, I'm a closet Grammar Nazi.
I usually only get to be a Grammar Nazi with members of my family. It doesn't go over very well when I do it to acquaintances and strangers; therefore, I've learned to bite my tongue (pretty darned hard) around them. Well, actually, I worked around English teachers for a few years about a decade ago. I didn't hesitate to correct them when they made unforgivable errors.

QuoteOriginally posted by Ryan Trevisol Quote
I wouldn't say I disagree with how you think things should be, but I work for a company that does things the right way and really treats its customers right. . . we're getting our butts kicked in some areas by our ruthless competitors.
I just now read about your business on your "About Me" page. It's gratifying to know that you treat your customers right. But is your "battle" with your ruthless competitors the same type as what Pentax is experiencing with regard to its competitors? I imagine your competitors are undercutting you price wise because they mass produce, and you don't. Not only that, but they mass produce lower-quality products, while you manufacture (by hand?) high quality products. Right?

QuoteOriginally posted by Ryan Trevisol Quote
So I guess my sentiment about whether Pentax should go for the money grab on WR lenses is tainted.
Hey, I can completely identify with that! I have gobs of "tainted sentiments," thanks to life's many negative experiences. Your "confession" puts your opinions on this topic in full context now, and it is a much more understandable context than I was imagining.

QuoteOriginally posted by Ryan Trevisol Quote
I just want Pentax to continue its success and stick around and give us many years of awesome cameras.
I totally agree. I now feel about Pentax the way I felt about Apple in the 1990s and early 2000s. However, I still have philosophical differences with modern corporate mentality. I don't like it when companies I admire make profits in ways that I don't believe in, or behave in other ways that I don't believe in (Apple is starting to do that with regard to its present OS strategy, which reveals their newfound control-freak mentality). But, that's just the inconsequential opinion of anonymous little, old me, sitting way out here "in the middle of nowhere" in far western Nebraska.

Last edited by Welfl; 06-29-2012 at 10:32 AM.
06-29-2012, 10:37 AM   #53
Veteran Member
lammie200's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,028
QuoteOriginally posted by boriscleto Quote
That's just all kind of wrong. The Original DA 18-55 had 12 elements/9 groups. The DA II, the DA WR, and DA L all have 11 elements/8 groups. All have an aspherical element, thus the AL in the name. The WR is the DA II with seals, that's it.
Then I guess the info on DPR is wrong.

06-29-2012, 10:41 AM   #54
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Liverpool, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,869
QuoteOriginally posted by lammie200 Quote
Then I guess the info on DPR is wrong.
Why trust DRP? All the info is right here in the lens database.

All of the correct info is also on Bojidar Dimitrov's Pentax K-Mount Page

Pentax Zoom Lenses with Short Focal Lengths
06-29-2012, 10:51 AM   #55
Veteran Member
lammie200's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,028
QuoteOriginally posted by boriscleto Quote
Why trust DRP? All the info is right here in the lens database.
I guess that I shouldn't. But why trust all the info in the lens database? It is the same as Pentax Imaging. Should I trust Pentax Imaging? I don't have time to look at Pentax Japan, but maybe that will confirm? Internal (and external) construction aside, it will be $150 more for a WR lens with a metal mount, quick shift, and a hood. What do you think would be a fair price for that exchange?

Edit: Must be 11/8 because that is what Pentax Japan has on its site. I stand corrected on that. Curiously enough the Japan site has the focal length for the WR at .5mm longer than the AL II.

Last edited by lammie200; 06-29-2012 at 10:59 AM.
06-29-2012, 11:40 AM   #56
Veteran Member
Ryan Trevisol's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: South Florida
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 308
QuoteOriginally posted by Welfl Quote
I just now read about your business on your "About Me" page. It's gratifying to know that you treat your customers right. But is your "battle" with your ruthless competitors the same type as what Pentax is experiencing with regard to its competitors? I imagine your competitors are undercutting you price wise because they mass produce, and you don't. Not only that, but they mass produce lower-quality products, while you manufacture (by hand?) high quality products. Right?
Oh, yeah, that. I haven't updated that in ages. My dad and I had to close the business due to lack of interest and the bad economy. I was referring to my day job with a computer hardware/software company.

QuoteOriginally posted by Welfl Quote
I totally agree. I now feel about Pentax the way I felt about Apple in the 1990s and early 2000s. However, I still have philosophical differences with modern corporate mentality. I don't like it when companies I admire make profits in ways that I don't believe in, or behave in other ways that I don't believe in (Apple is starting to do that with regard to its present OS strategy, which reveals their newfound control-freak mentality).
I take more umbrage with their recent spate of lawsuits against Android competitors. It's the sue-rather-than-innovate strategy. But oh well, I've tried every alternative to the iPhone, and while it's not perfect, it's still better than the alternatives for me, so I make the moral compromise and still support them.
06-29-2012, 12:21 PM   #57
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 281
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Ryan Trevisol Quote
Oh, yeah, that. I haven't updated that in ages.
I'm guilty of that sort of thing too.

QuoteOriginally posted by Ryan Trevisol Quote
My dad and I had to close the business due to lack of interest and the bad economy.
That's too bad. I wish companies like yours had an environment in which they could thrive, but do-gooder bureaucrats and other tax feeders have permanently killed that dream for most people. Giant corporate competition hasn't helped either.

Regrettably, the economy is only going to get worse, too. I can't make up my mind if I should save my money for future food needs or spend it very, very, very foolishly and frivolously on a very expensive camera (IMO) before said money devalues even more. The adult in me knows that I no longer have any real need for a camera, but the nostalgic little kid in me doesn't want to admit it yet. Besides, a nice camera would give me an excuse to do things and go places that I would otherwise not go. But, dang, that's a lot of money to spend just to snap some generic pictures of vast stretches of prairie and a few scenic buttes.

QuoteOriginally posted by Ryan Trevisol Quote
But oh well, I've tried every alternative to the iPhone
I've been a Mac technician since the 1990s (and just as "un-busy" as the old Maytag repairman in the TV commercials), but I am completely turned off by modern cell phones (actually, I'm not very fond of phones in general). I'm still using my first cell phone, which I bought in early 2002, and I don't plan on replacing it until I have no choice, and maybe not even then.

Last edited by Welfl; 06-29-2012 at 05:22 PM.
06-30-2012, 10:25 AM   #58
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,423
My bet is Pentax has a boatload of unsold kitlenses in a warehouse that they want to bundle with whatever hot new camera they can bundle them with. Once inventory is gone the next kitlens will be weathersealed.
07-01-2012, 08:31 AM   #59
Veteran Member
lammie200's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,028
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
My bet is Pentax has a boatload of unsold kitlenses in a warehouse that they want to bundle with whatever hot new camera they can bundle them with. Once inventory is gone the next kitlens will be weathersealed.
Since they may only be offering WR dSLR bodies you might be correct. I guess one question will be if they will be giving up on plastic lens mounts unless they can be made WR. My guess is that we will still see lenses with plastic mounts.

AFAIK the upcharge for the DAL 18-55 w/ the K-30 is that same as it was w/ the K-r ($50.) To me that indicates that PRICL wants to offer a lower priced option for people that are introducing themselves to Pentax and dSLR's. Given the cache that PRICL is positioning itself with WR, I question whether they will dilute it and swallow a lower margin with an introductory WR lens kit. That said, as the street price for the K-30 body drops those that are irritated by the lack of introductory WR kit lens offering should be satisfied with the overall pricing. But, hey, some people will never be satisfied. If the past is an indicator it should drop somewhat quickly. However, if the K-30 is a hot seller discounts might take longer.

Last edited by lammie200; 07-01-2012 at 09:34 AM.
07-02-2012, 03:30 PM   #60
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 132
QuoteOriginally posted by lammie200 Quote
Since they may only be offering WR dSLR bodies you might be correct. I guess one question will be if they will be giving up on plastic lens mounts unless they can be made WR. My guess is that we will still see lenses with plastic mounts.
How does the lens mount material affect whether it can be weather sealed? (genuine question, not an expert on camera tech!) I was under the impression that the weather sealing at the mount was done by a rubber gasket 'outside' the mount so to speak.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-30, k-50, pc magazine, pentax k30, pentax k50
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Don't say Pentax "Q" in French ... "Q" = "cul" = "A--" Jean Poitiers Pentax Q 52 11-10-2013 06:25 AM
French Magazine "Réponses Photo" 2011 Gear Guide - Pentax very well positioned Flickeroo Pentax News and Rumors 8 01-04-2011 09:13 AM
Night VIDEO: Bag Raiders Performing Their "Shooting Stars" Christopher M.W.T Post Your Photos! 2 11-20-2010 04:24 AM
Beauty Shoot for "Citizen K" Magazine "How Did I Do It?" benjikan Photographic Technique 25 12-05-2009 05:33 AM
"Sail To The Stars" @ Milang South Australia (Star Trails with the DA 14mm f2.8) Adrian Owerko Post Your Photos! 15 04-07-2008 06:11 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:38 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top