[Blue]

Did Hoya make any moola out of selling Pentax?

I have seen several estimates of the original purchase price from $800m to over $900M. The sale price of the photography and optics unit has been reported/estimated at about $137M. I guess whether or not they are making money off of it depends on the value and profit of the medical unit.

[Raffwal]

...I guess whether or not they are making money off of it depends on the value and profit of the medical unit.

Which has been said to be the business that Hoya wanted to begin with. Photography business was more like the bastard child.

[johnmflores]

I remember that interview and I bought into this part highlighted in blue because it came from Ned. Well, Ned was wrong and Ricoh is buying the camera and optical unit from Hoya once they strip it out into the temporary company. The rest of it corroborates what I have been saying, Hoya pushed products already under development prior to the merger.

Ned's a company man and parses his words carefully, like anyone in that position. Under no circumstance could he say, "Yes, Hoya's put Pentax on the market." as it would adversely affect sales.

When asked about the Hoya relationship, he's got to say something nice of course. He can lie outright or he can find a kernal of truth and expand upon it. I suspect that he found a kernal. How much truth is in that kernal? We'll never know. So all we can go by are facts. And the fact is that Pentax released a number of great cameras under Hoya's watch.

[sjwaldron]

Ned's a company man and parses his words carefully, like anyone in that position. Under no circumstance could he say, "Yes, Hoya's put Pentax on the market." as it would adversely affect sales.

When asked about the Hoya relationship, he's got to say something nice of course. He can lie outright or he can find a kernal of truth and expand upon it. I suspect that he found a kernal. How much truth is in that kernal? We'll never know. So all we can go by are facts. And the fact is that Pentax released a number of great cameras under Hoya's watch.

I agree. Even though Pentax will be sold off, they are technically partnering to make the Pentax brand name stronger (or however they put it in the press releases). It's just that Ricoh is a lot more interested in cameras than Hoya ever was. When opportunity knocks after putting the word out.

[Blue]

Which has been said to be the business that Hoya wanted to begin with. Photography business was more like the bastard child.

Yes, and the top guys were rather upset that they paid as much as they did.

[Fontan]

Which has been said to be the business that Hoya wanted to begin with. Photography business was more like the bastard child.

I have tried out Pentax Bronchoscopy for a while last year. They came to visit us and loaned us few scopes for several weeks. We were not impressed with the support system that they did not have in place. In comparison to Olympus, it was night and day, really. We ended up buying Olympus set up even though in the end it cost a bit more.

Pentax also had intubation aid with articulated screen. I kept telling the sales rep that they need to incorporate to that to DSLR and 645D. I kept asking if they could give me a discount on 645D if we bought their set up and of course they said no. That was the end of it. :ugh:

[Winder]

A friend of mine has a company that rebuilds and services scopes and he says Olympus is by far the top manufacturer.

[Clarkey]

Having used Oly phase contrast microscopes, I have to agree. Service was excellent, even in NZ,.

[traderdrew]

Sony is rumored to be releasing a 24MP A77 this Summer/Fall with a new sensor that will take another step in high ISO performance.

I just checked out the new Sony cameras in DxOmark.com. The 24 megapixel A77 and their other new camera do not score high in the low light category. It seems to be an impressive camera for outdoor use. Unless they come out with an improved sensor next year, it seems likely it will fall short of the low light capabilites of the K-5. I will just buy another K-5 when the price falls again.

[Winder]

I just checked out the new Sony cameras in DxOmark.com. The 24 megapixel A77 and their other new camera do not score high in the low light category. It seems to be an impressive camera for outdoor use. Unless they come out with an improved sensor next year, it seems likely it will fall short of the low light capabilites of the K-5. I will just buy another K-5 when the price falls again.

The A77 loses 1/2 stop of light because of the mirror. That pretty much accounts for the difference in the DXO tests. Sony is also known to use a heavier color filter which gives it better color depth at the cost of higher ISO. I think we will see that the 24MP performs just as well as the 16MP in raw testing, and produces visually better looking images.

If the 16MP and 24MP sensor produce the exact same S/N ratio then the 24MP will look better and process out better. To use the term "pixel" loosely think of each pixel and film grain. The smaller the pixels the finer the grain. Noise will appear as a finer grain in the image.

Sony only provides the sensor. All the support architecture is supplied by Pentax or Nikon. The AA filter, RGB filter, IR filter, & image processor ALL play a big role in how clean the image looks.

Compare the Sony A55 to the K-5 and you will see a significant difference even though the use the same sensor. You can't judge how well the 24MP sensor will perform in a K-3 by using the A77 as a guide.

[v5planet]

If the 16MP and 24MP sensor produce the exact same S/N ratio then the 24MP will look better and process out better. To use the term "pixel" loosely think of each pixel and film grain. The smaller the pixels the finer the grain. Noise will appear as a finer grain in the image.

This is a point that doesn't get brought up much, but is obvious when one stops to think about it. Thank you for talking about it. All else being equal in terms of DR and S/N ratio at the per pixel level, a sensor with a higher pixel density will have a finer grained noise, and that in itself may be a desirable image characteristic.

Now, whether it's worth pouring effort into THAT as opposed to continuing to expand DR and S/N ratio in a sensor where the pixel density is not increased is something else altogether.

[Winder]

This is a point that doesn't get brought up much, but is obvious when one stops to think about it. Thank you for talking about it. All else being equal in terms of DR and S/N ratio at the per pixel level, a sensor with a higher pixel density will have a finer grained noise, and that in itself may be a desirable image characteristic.

Now, whether it's worth pouring effort into THAT as opposed to continuing to expand DR and S/N ratio in a sensor where the pixel density is not increased is something else altogether.

A second consideration is RAW processing. Image processors like DxO and ACR take advantage of more "pixels" and higher pixel density to make better "decisions" on what is random noise, pattern noise or hot pixels. You are giving the converter more information to work with which leads to better images. RAW converters have come a long way.

One reason DxO is so slow is that it examines every "pixel" and compares it to the surrounding "pixels" in a given radius. In an overly simplistic statement..... The more "pixels" in that radius the easier it is for the processor to determine what is random noise, pattern noise, hot pixels, or what is an actual pattern or texture in the image. I assume ACR does something very similar.

Future RAW processors will be able to do more with a 24MP image than a 16MP image, and Sony is looking at the next 3 years with this sensor.

[gazonk]

Regarding the A77 sensor: imaging resource now has test shots from the nex-7 - IMHO they look better than the a77 shots.

[traderdrew]

Compare the Sony A55 to the K-5 and you will see a significant difference even though the use the same sensor. You can't judge how well the 24MP sensor will perform in a K-3 by using the A77 as a guide.

You are right and I stand corrected. I'm a little surprised about this disparity.

[Rorschach]

A friend of mine has a company that rebuilds and services scopes and he says Olympus is by far the top manufacturer.

I've worked with stereomicroscopes and light microscopes for more than 20 years and would not say anything of the like. At best, Olympus is on par with the rest of the good ones: Zeiss, Leica and Nikon. One could also argue that Meiji has a similar price per quality ratio as the top ones - not quite as good, but cheaper.