[vinzer]

...all they have to do is let those crazy developers they have do their job and not let the marketing dept. get too gready, and they will be up in the top three in no time.

The marketing department of Pentax is actually part of the problem why Pentax doesn't have much of a market share, along with other reasons. The engineers are wonderful, but the marketers lag sorely behind the geniuses of the former.

...one of the most humbling lessons pentax has given the industry lately must be the fact that you can use the old lenses (which are excelent, as many of you know) on any dslr, nu fuss, no "induced" limitations (like with nikon)bellow a pricepoint; i am realistic and can understand "it's about the money", but howcome pentax old lenses are harder and harder to find, and tend to sell for higher and higher prices, and still, they can barely keep up with the demand for the new ones? so pentax _can_ make moeny selling new lenses with the old lineup of excelent lenses on the market, no limitations on using them (and officialy advertised backwards compatibility)...

I would think the reason old lenses are all the rage in Pentax world is because, one, the old lenses are fine glass in the first place (good value, as well), and two, Pentax does not offer much in the way of new lenses at this point in time. Even third-party lens support is lagging way behind the big two. Of course, it's a marketshare thing.

I would think that Pentax will not sell as much cameras if they weren't backwards-compatible with old lenses. There's not much variety in new lens options to complete a whole system today.

now why am i tempted to say "this is not about the money, all you others, this is about being an insecure ******* or being bold enough to say: i grew up, i can do better, i can build 1k usd fixed focal length lenses in the 21st century that still make sense, and _sell_, and cheap zooms that you can actually _use_, and...".

It's really all about the money. even Pentax's new management are trying to see how much profit the camera division could generate before deciding what to do with it. Most of the releases done by Pentax after the Hoya buyout are of products that have been in production before the takeover. Some of the products actually seem like it won't even see the light of day anymore (of course, I'm referring to the 645D).

fuji, kodak, canon cmos, panasonic-like cmos (can't remeber the name of that one), hell, go for foveon, it needs some "real" camera to use that sensor-- so it can finally take off -- anyway (and it is the way to go, imho, for future better sensors, bayer ccd is close to a dead end, or i should say "it's peak") , put anything in there, just make it good, either way i will be exilirated to get rid of the last piece of sony-made hardware in my camera: the sensor

If you've seen Chris' recent post about the new Sony sensor performance in high ISO, you might want to reconsider. I have nothing against Sony, in fact, they sold their sensors cheap (I think) that's why Pentax was able to release good-priced DSLRs. Of course, if a better sensor comes along, and if Pentax can make better use of that, I'm all for it, whether it's from Sony, Fuji, Kodak, even Nikon or Canon (though I feel neither would sell to Pentax, especially Canon).

On a semi-related note, the Fuji S-series of pro DSLRs, albeit pricey, are "real" cameras, and see much use by pro photographers wanting better dynamic range (sticking to an established lens mount instead of making a new one also helped Fuji).

just my .02$

Your thoughts are much appreciated in these forums.

[ZaphodB]

nanok... when you say this is not the MP3 player business... well unfortunately, it sort of is. In the sense that digital cameras - yes, even digital SLRS - are consumer goods that are largely sold on the strength of the marketing and brand awareness (where Pentax sadly cannot compete). I too have seen newcomers buy Pentax, but I have seen a lot more - a lot more - buy Canon or Nikon, and express their view that they would only buy Canon or Nikon, a view which they hold despite having no logical reason for doing so. They just heard or read it and swallowed it.

Even beyond marketing, their are genuine faults in the system, like the relative lack of glass. The backwards lens compatibility is great, but doesn't really seem that great compared to the sheer number of Nikon or EF lenses available. Sticking an old M lens on a new K10d is nice but it certainly isn't humbling anyone. Then there's the choice of lenses, which is now relatively low (for example with no glass longer than 200mm and no long and fast glass longer than 135mm)... even the third-party choice is rapidly disappearing, with Tokina no longer an option, and Tamron and Sigma not bothering to make several lenses for Pentax (yet making them for Sony!).

As vinzer says, it looks like Hoya are waiting to see what to do with the system. That means that the end of the Pentax name on cameras is a real possibility - Konica-Minolta was not some kind of bizarre anomaly - and so Pentax don't need to just hold on, they need to prove that they are serious about surviving. Unfortunately, Hoya's wait-and-see approach is not helping at all; if they want the kind of sales that will impress them then they need to invest more in the system, and that means more products and new products. Otherwise we have a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy.

[jeffkrol]

nanok... when you say this is not the MP3 player business... well unfortunately, it sort of is. In the sense that digital cameras - yes, even digital SLRS - are consumer goods that are largely sold on the strength of the marketing and brand awareness (where Pentax sadly cannot compete). I too have seen newcomers buy Pentax, but I have seen a lot more - a lot more - buy Canon or Nikon, and express their view that they would only buy Canon or Nikon, a view which they hold despite having no logical reason for doing so. They just heard or read it and swallowed it.

Even beyond marketing, their are genuine faults in the system, like the relative lack of glass. The backwards lens compatibility is great, but doesn't really seem that great compared to the sheer number of Nikon or EF lenses available. Sticking an old M lens on a new K10d is nice but it certainly isn't humbling anyone. Then there's the choice of lenses, which is now relatively low (for example with no glass longer than 200mm and no long and fast glass longer than 135mm)... even the third-party choice is rapidly disappearing, with Tokina no longer an option, and Tamron and Sigma not bothering to make several lenses for Pentax (yet making them for Sony!).

As vinzer says, it looks like Hoya are waiting to see what to do with the system. That means that the end of the Pentax name on cameras is a real possibility - Konica-Minolta was not some kind of bizarre anomaly - and so Pentax don't need to just hold on, they need to prove that they are serious about surviving. Unfortunately, Hoya's wait-and-see approach is not helping at all; if they want the kind of sales that will impress them then they need to invest more in the system, and that means more products and new products. Otherwise we have a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy.

As one of my usual posts on dpreview for the Hoya cheerleaders shows:
You can make products (best yet, don't make any new products) that's aren't actually made very well or creative if all you want to do is 1)squeeze every ounce of profit out 2)plan on dumping the brand before the proverbial "stuff" hits the fan (substandard parts suppliers)... IF you have no dedication to keeping the product what makes you worry about long term quality(or new products)? Seems that would throw your money away. The bad point is Pentax is now ALL (yes you need profit, note ALL) about profit w/ a parent company that is/has expressed no "dedication" to the product and therefore their long term outlook is non-existant..... That to me is the catch.

All the gloom and doom really comes from HOYA, who has never said that they would stand behind the camera division, boost it up and carry it as a product for as long as they could, just "well we will see what this orphan does, make sure we take no risks to make it successful, milk it for what we can get out of it, decide what we can dismantle, and then chuck it to the highest bidder". Pentax had the history and soul to "keep trying". Can you say the same for HOYA??? Me no think so..

Sorry to say I see no positive spin on this till HOYA speaks w/ dedication not bean counters....

[thibs]

And there's nothing (yet) pointing toward Hoya selling or doing anything bad with Pentax as well but I suppose crying about end of the world is so much easier and trendy, everybody has to cry together?

Pfff we will know soon enough, what's the deal?

[jeffkrol]

And there's nothing (yet) pointing toward Hoya selling or doing anything bad with Pentax as well but I suppose crying about end of the world is so much easier and trendy, everybody has to cry together?

Pfff we will know soon enough, what's the deal?

From the gloom and doom sayer I think your right but food for thought:
Historically HOYA has not said one positive thing about cameras, SPARX had said Pentax should exit the market completely (if this included ALL cameras was debateable). HOYA want Pentax to compete in areas w/ lower competition-higher margin areas (would imply NOT DSLR's). The roadmap is destroyed (including the 645 which may have helped get some market respect to Pentax, the bean counters fail to see the potental "marketing and goodwill" that could be built from releasing this if it was even marginally successful ie 1-2% profit) and the only new optical product recently was a spotting scope. K100super doesn't count. The 21 page Bloomberg report(what was publically released) is more of a threat than "path" for the camera division. As "infered" from this:
Two phases lined up for Pentax turn-around:

> We see two phases to Pentax’s contribution. The first will be in the initial one to two years, where profit growth is driven by an operational review of existing businesses that brings Pentax products up to their rightful levels of profitability. The second will come in the third and fourth years, when we expect sales and profits to grow in the healthcare business, centering on endoscopes, as well as in optical components.
I see no mention of cameras in this and it actually sticks to HOYA's initial feelings of the merger.
At Pentax's "economy of scale" it is almost impossible to realize the gains HOYA wants without a large investment in the "now". The Pentax momentum that looked to be building has now throttled back by not only FUD but the merger itself and the "lag time" as the new handlers decide what to do w/ their new ward...
Now I do NOT see the "name" Pentax and cameras disappearring , but I see another "transfer" of this to someone else in the NEAR future (2 years tops), starting the FUD and "reorganizing" to start all over again......OLD Pentax camera is dead, HOYA WILL NOT improve the situation, only nurse it at best (which will not include innovation nor bang for the buck in my mind) to increase sale value for future transfer NOT improve it to a major market player in the DSLR market. They already probably assumed this is a "unprofitable" venture and the recent past (though a bit nearsighted) only strenghtens this position....
Though "old Pentax" may have been hurting in a classic business sense ie low ROI/profit margins, they had their past to build on. The past is now HOYA's and not likely to be built on.
In the near term ENJOY their products, just don't expect too much...
Maybe I'm just sad "the little engine that could" Pentax is gone.
And yes HOYA never said anything bad (would you if you planned on selling BUT needed as much profit from existing products? Want to instantly make it impossible to ever sell another camera again and just eat your current inventory or dispose at a loss???.) Hoya is now doing whats best for hoya NOT Pentax. There eye is glued to the medical and "component" markets, what more really needs to be said.. and this was from day 1. Nothings changed...
Oh and I think we are already seeing the results...nothing

[ZaphodB]

And there's nothing (yet) pointing toward Hoya selling or doing anything bad with Pentax as well but I suppose crying about end of the world is so much easier and trendy, everybody has to cry together?

Who said we all had to cry together? Anyway, do we all have to sing and dance together in joy instead?

Pfff we will know soon enough, what's the deal?

Hmm... well, the deal is that if our "crying" is proved accurate, then we may be left with either...
1) A dead system.
or
2) A system picked up by another company who produces products which have nothing to do with Pentax as we know it, and possibly of inferior quality.

In either case, it would be unfortunate. One might quite reasonably want to sell and move to a different system in order to have a decent upgrade path for both bodies and lenses. Except you would have to practically give your equipment away, since everyone else would be jumping ship too. So the "deal" is my not insignificant investment in this system. The end of Pentax as we know it is a fairly depressing thought itself, as is the concept of having to pick between overrated Canon and Nikon or overpriced Sony if it happens. So that's the deal.

[thibs]

Sure, but then nothing has changed for now, and we will know soon enough.

Keep taking pictures, I think it would be far more productive.