Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-01-2013, 04:54 PM   #1891
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,892
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
They may not want more market share. They may simply want profitability. Those can be mutually exclusive.
Sure, but they've publically stated that they wanted more market share. I also had the chance to speak with Jim Malcolm yesterday and one of his 'good' bullet points that he shared was that they ARE getting more market share.

06-01-2013, 05:33 PM   #1892
Pentaxian
Uluru's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,400
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
Sure, but they've publically stated that they wanted more market share. I also had the chance to speak with Jim Malcolm yesterday and one of his 'good' bullet points that he shared was that they ARE getting more market share.
So far, with zero marketing, the have some market share.

Well, if they add just a little effort in marketing, they may even double the market share.

Even smaller marketing effort is needed for Pentax to go from 3% of market share to 6% (or increase market share by mind-blowing 100%) than it is to Nikon to keep the same market share %-number.

Once you become big, majority of effort an energy is spent just to keeping itself in place.

Last edited by Uluru; 06-01-2013 at 06:12 PM.
06-01-2013, 05:50 PM   #1893
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,932
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
I've used a K-5 and a K-30. I haven't used the K-5II. The K-5IIs makes sense for a certain group, but that doesn't make it a new model to me, either.

I agree - Pentax shouldn't artificially cripple their low end cameras, by, say, reducing their shutter speed, etc.


FYI, amazon sales rank:

42) K-30
54) K-5IIs
59) K-30
61) K-30
63) K-30
81) K-5II
84) K-x
90) K-30
91) K-5II

The K-5II (not-s) is selling but it's not close to the K-30, especially when you consider that some of the less-popular color schemes of the K-30 are likely slightly outside of the top 100. For some people it's worth the extra $200-300... but according to the sales data it's a minority of people.
I think that lower priced items sell better. I doubt the K5, for all its good points, sold a quarter as many cameras as, say, the kx. I bet Nikon sells ten times as many D3200s as they do D7100. There are just a lot more people ready to drop 500-ish on a camera than a thousand-ish, even if you get more features.

As to the comparison, I believe the autofocus module is the same for K5 and K30, but the K5 II has some improvements over either. For what that is worth.

Last edited by Rondec; 06-01-2013 at 06:01 PM.
06-01-2013, 08:10 PM   #1894
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Now, I agree. Except it is the other way round. Legacy is king in the US, read 135 terms.

But with a plethora of sensor sizes nobody is able to keep track with (mobile phones, premium mobile phone, compact, enthusiast compact, pureview, CX, FourThirds, APSC, 135, cropped medium format, true medium format, ...) photographers would really really benefit tremendeously if cameras were labelled in SOME equivalent way (I don't care if it is 135mm or 1" or whatever). Labelling in an equivalent way means relabelling focal length, F-stop and ISO.
Interestingly Thom Hogan at sans mirror doesn't compare FL's to 135 equivalents. He simply states a lens in a broader category (e.g. moderate wide angle, probably drawing on the 40-50ish "normal") and instead uses horizontal coverage in degrees.

Fujifilm 18mm f/2 Lens Review | Sans Mirror ? mirrorless, interchangeable lens cameras | Thom Hogan

Simply stating the degrees in angle of coverage without referring to the 135 equivalence is.... geometry.

There are standards if you ignore the history.

06-01-2013, 10:38 PM   #1895
Pentaxian
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,538
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
I keep saying this for years, but I disagree on time scale.

For one thing, it doesn't make sense to assume lenses to bring their own sensor covering their respective image circle. And at the same time, to ignore the fact that each optical quality has its own sweet spot for sensor size, including full frame and beyond and below.

I would assume that such sweet spot is around the lens' entrance pupil diameter, or maybe half of it, as image circle diamater.

Actually, such a lens would scream for a "retina sensor" with very high resolution in the center (suitable for cropping and exploiting the lens' center resoving power) and lower resolution towards the outer limits of the lens image circle (which can become *very* large for long lenses, but with lower lens resolution). Much like what our eye does.

And for another thing, it assumes sensor cost to be marginalized. Which will happen but hasn't happened yet and won't happen over the next 10 years either. The GXR is too early.
Yes, I can see a sensor that is curved and attached to the rear element of the lens and which, in fact, is actually part of the lens. A *insect* style composite lens/sensor combo would be ideal where each pixel has it's own lens. Someone laughed at that suggestion a year or so ago on these forums citing that 'nature had moved on' from composite eyes and yet only a few weeks ago scientists have released info about this very same technology and raved about its FOV and DOF. At the time, I didn't have any trouble pointing out that trillions of insects would beg to differ if they gave a composhit.
06-01-2013, 11:26 PM   #1896
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Manila, Philippines
Posts: 1,008
What wouldyou feel if another K-5 came out? Alongside with a K-3? :-) :-)
06-02-2013, 12:02 AM   #1897
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,406
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
I am the sole arbiter of what I think is a different model. I don't know why you've been trying to convince me otherwise, but you haven't succeeded.

I am a big fan of Pentax and hope that they become everything they want to become. They might be on track to that right now - in fact, overall, I think they are - but releasing the K-5XXI won't help them gain market share, IMO.
Indeed, you can chose to believe pigs fly (they're pretty similar to birds, right?)
I disagree with what you say because it can fuel the ever-present anti-Pentax negativity too often seen on Pentax forums; and it's factually incorrect. Otherwise I couldn't care less about your counting. I'm afraid though you'll eventually start hating Pentax when, after several new models being launched, you'll still be stuck counting one.

The K-5 II is a stop gap product, which it won't be repeated. No more 16MP + Prime II, as they're no longer adequate for a flagship product.
OTOH, the K-30 is a very competitive product even though it will eventually be replaced with a higher resolution model. By the way, it's not a firmware-restricted K-5, it has different - less expensive - hardware.

Last edited by Kunzite; 06-02-2013 at 12:27 AM.
06-02-2013, 01:58 AM   #1898
Junior Member




Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Trondheim
Posts: 27
QuoteOriginally posted by wed7 Quote
What wouldyou feel if another K-5 came out? Alongside with a K-3? :-) :-)
Actually I would love a K5 iii, let us say with better AF (promised),better flash system, tethering, the option to force the use of the screwdrive (really an investment for the future) - and whatever goodies they are ready to put in. For me it makes sense to reserve the K3 name for a model with a different target, not just a newer version of the same class of camera (like K10, K20, K7, K5 - different cameras but same target). I like the naming style of the higher end Canons (version numbers added to the model). Even the sensor can change for the same basic model, as long as the concept/target is rather similar. The VW beetle changed even the engine (I believe), but it was always a Beetle. Thereafter VW has followed the same strategy with the Golf; the first version was somewhat faulty, but it is now a top selling car here, and remarkably good. Making a good product, continue to refine it, fixing the weak points, and always keeping it at the top of the segment, may be a way to create legends.
And then I would want a K3 (APS-C) - if it is possible for Pentax to come out with a higher-class camera. If it is light, tough, with a built-in GPS, it is made for me. A "K1" full frame is more of a luxury item (I salivate for it, but I know I shall not be using it enough to justify buying it - although I shall look for excuses).

06-02-2013, 03:42 AM   #1899
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
QuoteOriginally posted by bossa Quote
Someone laughed at that suggestion a year or so ago on these forums citing that 'nature had moved on'.
Maybe at the time, you should have tried to understand WHY nature has moved on. Composite eyes (much like plenoptics) severely suffer from diffraction or put in a more fundamental, quantum mechanical way, the Heisenberg principle prevents them from resolving well. Not all scientists understand quantum mechanics though ...
06-02-2013, 03:48 AM   #1900
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
Interestingly Thom Hogan [...] instead uses horizontal coverage in degrees.
By pure coincidence, a fellow photographer and blogger who writes for Luminous Landscape and others just sent me a notice that now both DPReview and photozone specify lenses by their 35mm-equivalent properties, both focal and fstop. This whole discussion may soon be history.
06-02-2013, 04:41 AM   #1901
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 72
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
By pure coincidence, a fellow photographer and blogger who writes for Luminous Landscape and others just sent me a notice that now both DPReview and photozone specify lenses by their 35mm-equivalent properties, both focal and fstop. This whole discussion may soon be history.
What about the sensitivities of the sensors (ISO)? If the focal length and aperture are "translated" to the equivalent values for 35 mm, it would make sense to do the same with the sensitivity. The ISO number specifies the sensitivity per unit area, and that makes direct comparisons between different sensor sizes impossible without correcting for the size. Dividing the ISO value with the sensor area and then multiplying by the area of a 35-mm sensor would give a "35-mm equivalent ISO". This could also be called the (total) sensitivity of the sensor instead of speaking in terms of equivalency (and in that case, maybe it would be more suitable with an SI unit, but that is just a matter of a simple conversion factor). Doing this simple calculation, one finds, for example, that ISO 200 in a 35-mm camera is equivalent to ISO 100 in an APS-C camera. At those settings, both sensors yield the same signal given the same amount of light (number of photons), but since those photons are spread over twice the area in the 35-mm sensor, the ISO needs to be twice as high, since it is defined per unit area of the sensor.

Edit: the question I meant to ask was if you heard anything from your friend about the sensitivity -- are there any plans on introducing a measure of the sensor's total sensitivity as opposed to its sensitivity per unit area?

Last edited by hjb981; 06-02-2013 at 04:43 AM. Reason: Clarifying my question
06-02-2013, 04:48 AM   #1902
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 8,934
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
I also had the chance to speak with Jim Malcolm yesterday and one of his 'good' bullet points that he shared was that they ARE getting more market share.
Was this discussion part of a "second round" of conversations in the "Pentaxians, let's chat" initiative?

It would be great to hear more about what you were discussing with Jim. Maybe you could add to the respective thread?
06-02-2013, 05:05 AM   #1903
Pentaxian
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,538
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Maybe at the time, you should have tried to understand WHY nature has moved on. Composite eyes (much like plenoptics) severely suffer from diffraction or put in a more fundamental, quantum mechanical way, the Heisenberg principle prevents them from resolving well. Not all scientists understand quantum mechanics though ...
But nature has not moved on as there are trillions of insects that live on this planet quite successfully. Projecting your values onto the world isn't an answer, or even a perception, it's a psychological disease.

PS. Nobody understands quantum mechanics as it's just a model for describing a limited range perceived behaviours. Perhaps you can explain exactly the mechanics of Gravity, Magnetism and Quantum Entanglement at their most fundamental levels, or elevate our understanding of Matter and Space without resorting to BS like String Theory while you're at it.

Last edited by bossa; 06-02-2013 at 05:19 AM.
06-02-2013, 06:29 AM   #1904
Pentaxian
Uluru's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,400
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
Was this discussion part of a "second round" of conversations in the "Pentaxians, let's chat" initiative?

It would be great to hear more about what you were discussing with Jim. Maybe you could add to the respective thread?
Maybe they all are under the NDA now.
06-02-2013, 06:36 AM   #1905
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,406
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
By pure coincidence, a fellow photographer and blogger who writes for Luminous Landscape and others just sent me a notice that now both DPReview and photozone specify lenses by their 35mm-equivalent properties, both focal and fstop. This whole discussion may soon be history.
Photography as a craft is doomed, replaced by pseudo-science - because people who should know better are helping with this nonsense.
But so far, these sites only mention the BS focal and BS aperture, fortunately the lenses being appropriately named.
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!
aps-c, body, k-5, k-7, k-7/k-5, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, reason, sensor, sony
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Speculation: What if Pentax did not go FF but rather a 1.3x? brecklundin Pentax DSLR Discussion 36 08-13-2013 10:36 PM
Any speculation on how long... Tom S. Pentax K-5 10 12-16-2010 09:19 PM
K-x price speculation SylBer Pentax DSLR Discussion 18 10-13-2010 12:29 PM
Small rant + speculation ilya80 Pentax News and Rumors 35 04-20-2010 11:42 PM
speculation about FA lenses on FF DSLR lpfonseca Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 11-05-2009 10:34 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:00 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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