[Aristophanes]

The only real way to evaluate Pentax and Ricoh's performance in digital cameras is to look at the broader market and extrapolate.

[RonHendriks1966]

waxworks exhibition

Well at least a few real new products.

[ogl]

No problem it's an interesting discussion.

Where are new K-mount limited and stars primes and zooms, FF camera, new Pentax APS-C mirrorless system and GXR modules? New flashes?
You are so optimistic - you should know ALL.
Where are all this magiс toys for big boys? Mr. Optimist, tell us - where did they hide all this tasty things?

No toys - nothing to discuss and nothing to talk.

We played the pipe for you,
and you did not dance;
we sang a dirge,
and you did not mourn.

[johnmflores]

It upset me to know nothing about plans of Ricoh and Pentax...
GR is good, but it's really marginal and specific product.

I have no any news about GXR system. It's hard to understand the situation with new Pentax cameras...New lenses...
A lot of talks again, but I don't see any serious results.

Good sales of Q in Japan is neither meat, nor fish for me.
Really outstanding MF 90 macro is nothing for 99.9999% of Pentax users.

Want to see more solid and popular products....
I'm absolutely indifferent to GR, Q, 645D. And I think I'm not alone here.

Dead on, IMO. There hasn't been an exciting Pentax product since the K-5 in October 2010, IMO.

Where are new K-mount limited and stars primes and zooms, FF camera, new Pentax APS-C mirrorless system and GXR modules? New flashes?
You are so optimistic - you should know ALL.
Where are all this magiс toys for big boys? Mr. Optimist, tell us - where did they hide all this tasty things?

No toys - nothing to discuss and nothing to talk.

So just because Pentax hasn't release products that interest you and your individual needs then they are doomed?

If Pentax is really holding you back photographically and disappoint you time and time again, then why don't you just switch? Right now it sounds like you are in abusive relationship.

[ogl]

So just because Pentax hasn't release products that interest you and your individual needs then they are doomed?

If Pentax is really holding you back photographically and disappoint you time and time again, then why don't you just switch? Right now it sounds like you are in abusive relationship.

Very low and strange logic...We are discussing here. We reason and argue here. Don't you?

Nowhere to switch. I've tried to add GXR system, but it's suddenly stopped too After purchase of Pentax...

Pentax DID it before - it's was Pentax WAY. TO PRODUCE VERY INTERESTING CAMERAS. AND VERY INTERESTING LENSES.

Did Pentax change the direction? The cameras are still not bad. But...I've said before many times - I don't see solid conception in camera-making and lens-making. I see the blowing hot and cold. Where is strategy?

Who is this butthead who said that Q is the mainstream direction and serious system?

[monochrome]

Read more on PhotoRumors.com: Pentax working on a new professional APS-C based camera | Photo Rumors

I heard that rumor locally in St. Louis, Missouri, USA in November, 2011. That discussion was the source of my original, "Be of good cheer, Pentaxians......." signature tag (which I removed during the K-01 firestorm, and which I have since restored in a fit of sheer, unfounded hope, the result of accumulated subtle hints).

In the intervening months since 4Q2011 Ricoh the parent company has endured a significant cost-cutting restructuring after the first loss-making Fiscal Year in their public history, has recovered, and is perhaps ready to invest capital in Pentax again. If such a renewal of product development and strategic corporate direction came to Pentax this (NH) summer and fall I would attribute delay in the delivery of the rumored professional market thrust to the restructuring.

My discussion (with members of the Q User Group) with James Malcolm was actually encouraging and positive, addnig to my sense of good things coming.

Ironically, we've all had our hopes raised and dashed so often now that this time, when we are least willing to believe, it might actually be the time.

[ElJamoquio]

Well this did wonder me....
So this not an empty list. A lot off the products probably where from the designstage starting (or almost ended) from Hoya. Offcourse you launch those products, otherwhise the R&D money spend is wasted.

So not yet a K-3 (real K-5 replacement) nor 645D replacement, not even a Full Frame. But to say Pentax does nothing is not true.

Thanks for the summary. I'd put it in these categories:


Too expensive to matter to most of us on the forum:

• 645D Grand Prix Limited Edition
• D FA 645 25mm F4 Al [IF] (released)
• D FA 645 Macro 90mm/f2.8 (stabalized lens)
• HD 560mm/f5.6 AW
• 645D IR

'Beneath' the target market of most of this forum:

• Optio RZ18
• Optio VS20
• Optio WG-2 and WG-2 GPS
• Pentax X-5 bridgecamera
• Optio WG-10
• Optio WG-3 and WG-3 GPS

Stuff I didn't personally care about, others could/should disagree:

• K-01
• Q-10
• Q mount 06 zoomlens.

Poorly designed stuff, IMO:

• K-01

Re-works of older stuff, rebranding

• DA 40mm/f2.8 xs
• 645D Grand Prix Limited Edition (repeat)
• K-5 Silver Special Edition with Silver 40mm/f2.8 xs lens
• K-30 (really, how much difference is there between this and a K-5)
  
• DA 18-270mm/f3.5-6.3 ED SDM
• K-5 II and K-5 IIs (really, how much difference is there between these and a K-5)

Mildly interesting stuff

• MX-1
• K-5 II and K-5 IIs (really, how much difference is there between these and a K-5)
• K-30 (really, how much difference is there between this and a K-5)
• DA 50mm/f1.8

So, in my parsing of the list, there's 4 things that I could likely care about. In reality only the K-5IIs comes close to the 'I might buy it' level, and in reality it didn't pass that test.

Pentax isn't doomed, and of course I'm only one person; but I think there's lots of other people like me and I think most of them shoot Canon or Nikon.

[monochrome]

How is this butthead who said that Q is the mainstream direction and serious system?

What James Malcolm actually said, and I quote as well as I can from memory of the actual conversation, is "Q is the really exciting area in the intermediate term. It is the newest and has the most potential for real growth." He was speaking to a group of Q Users. He had gathered after an hour of passionate discussion of what we are doing with our little cameras, pushing them, trying to find their limits, treating them as if they can be full-featured substitutes for a big, heavy dSLR in certain scircumstances, that we like the Q and this is what he beleives, but likely what he also thought we'd like to hear.

Q is important to Pentax. It is a market niche. You and Aristophanes and a few others can scoff at the 1/2.3 sensor - and perhaps rightly - but they sell some and plan to sell more. I see nothing wrong with that if they can make it happen, so long as they also continue to support and develop the K-mount and 645, as Jim emphatically stated they do, and would continue so to do.

Misquoting him (actually, misquoting me), then calling him a butthead adds nothing positive to the discussion

[Aristophanes]

Q is important to Pentax. It is a market niche. You and Aristophanes and a few othjers can scoff at the 1/2.3 sensor - and perhaps rightly - but they sell some and plan to sell more.

I scoff at that sensor in an ILC camera at anywhere near the price they are asking.

On a price to value ratio, Pentax's Q is getting absolutely destroyed. That particular product is nowhere near the value the competition is offering in almost exactly the same form factor at even lower prices!

The only way to sell more would be to sell at a loss, but, regardless, the Q is a total non-player in the emerging mirrorless market. It has the real potential to continue to drag down the brand as a maker of over-priced toy cameras that do not match the IQ of competitors at the same price.

[johnmflores]

Very low and strange logic...We are discussing here. We reason and argue here. Don't you?

Nowhere to switch. I've tried to add GXR system, but it's suddenly stopped too After purchase of Pentax...

Pentax DID it before - it's was Pentax WAY. TO PRODUCE VERY INTERESTING CAMERAS. AND VERY INTERESTING LENSES.

Did Pentax change the direction? The cameras are still not bad. But...I've said before many times - I don't see solid conception in camera-making and lens-making. I see the blowing hot and cold. Where is strategy?

How is this butthead who said that Q is the mainstream direction and serious system?

Your mistake was to switch from Pentax to Ricoh lol. The K-01, as good as a camera that it is, was a marketing misstep. The Q, as small as it is, has been a surprise. The MX-1 is competitive in its space. And the Ricoh GR is very very competitive. So they are producing interesting cameras. It just so happens that they are not interesting to you. And they are, in fact, living up to their brand tagline, "Be Interesting." Seriously, mainstream DSLRs may become a smaller part of Pentax Ricoh's strategy, so jump to Nikon or Canon before it's too late. They make great cameras too.

[monochrome]

I scoff at that sensor in an ILC camera at anywhere near the price they are asking.

On a price to value ratio, Pentax's Q is getting absolutely destroyed. That particular product is nowhere near the value the competition is offering in almost exactly the same form factor at even lower prices!

The only way to sell more would be to sell at a loss, but, regardless, the Q is a total non-player in the emerging mirrorless market. It has the real potential to continue to drag down the brand as a maker of over-priced toy cameras that do not match the IQ of competitors at the same price.

I have read your extensive posts on the subject. I still haven't read an answer to my question whether the Q mount flange distance (the existing lens designs) could support a 1/1.7 or 1" sensor. Is it design-limited to 1/2.3?

[Aristophanes]

I have read your extensive posts on the subject. I still haven't read an answer to my question whether the Q mount flange distance (the existing lens designs) could support a 1/1.7 or 1" sensor. Is it design-limited to 1/2.3?

I do not know. I would hope they incorporated such a possibility into the mount and flange distance so they could keep the Q-mount and re-do the lenses.

Let's keep in mind Ricoh has an exchangeable sensor system in the GXR. I'm being hopeful, but my assertion is that Pentax management made a serious miscalculation s to where this market was going in relation to sensor size and relative prices. This was pre-Ricoh. Someone didn't check the numbers and do"what if..." scenarios. Too much insular thinking.

[monochrome]

Someone didn't check the numbers and do"what if..." scenarios. Too much insular thinking.

Damned shame because everything else about the camera is first-rate.

A larger mount opening / larger sensor and an insertable adapter like the M42 > K and FW crop might allow PRI to keep the Q line alive but adapt to the market. I don't recall whether James Malcolm specifically said Q-mount or whether he said 'we are commiitted to Q, K-mount, and 645,' but i think the latter. We can only hope.

For now, those of us who have them really like them.

[johnmflores]

Damned shame because everything else about the camera is first-rate.

A larger mount opening / larger sensor and an insertable adapter like the M42 > K and FW crop might allow PRI to keep the Q line alive but adapt to the market. I don't recall whether James Malcolm specifically said Q-mount or whether he said 'we are commiitted to Q, K-mount, and 645,' but i think the latter. We can only hope.

For now, those of us who have them really like them.

Truth told, even the IQ at low ISO (and by that I mean ISO800 or less) is surprisingly good and more than good enough for people looking for a casual camera to take family and vacation snapshots for posting on Facebook, Flickr, etc. If a couple more iterations give us clean ISO1600 and faster AF, then all of a sudden the Q is a serious candidate for casual shooters and those looking for a companion to their larger DSLR kits. There are of course a lot of other players and configurations vying for this space - advanced point-and-shoots like the Panasonic LX7, RX100, the small end of Micro Four-Thirds, Nikon 1, etc... - but as time goes on, image quality will play less of a deciding factor (because it's frankly getting so good AND most viewing will move digital anyway) and other attributes will come to the fore.

[redrockcoulee]

It's a well known fact that it isn't necessarily the best products that get the most buyers. It's the products that get the best marketing that does.

And neither Canon nor Nkon really have to do any marketing on any single model as they have a much bigger presence on store shelves and peoples minds. Even if Pentax comes out with the very best camera in any one class, and provided the very best marketing for that model, it is unlikely to outsell either Nikon or Canon. Unless it was truly revolutionary that it. It might do very well but I do not think it will outsell makes that are more familiar wiith most people.