Originally posted by Frogfish That theory totally neglects to consider the very important consideration of average spend per user. The average new Kx / Kr user will not be buying up multiple top of the range lenses and their ave. spend over say a two year period may be in the range of US$1,000 - 1,500 whilst the enthusiast may well in the same time have bought a couple of K5 bodies, a couple of Limited's and a couple of DA* lenses too, totaling more than US$5,000 - 6,000. Which has the greater profit margin for Pentax and positive impact on their corporate health ? The number of new members on the forum could double but if they are off-set by a steady loss of enthusiasts then the general health of Pentax, as dictated by their customer base, is declining.
There are those who will enter the brand with the K-x/r or its equivalent and never upgrade. Probably the largest segment.
There are those who will enter via the K-x/r or newer entry level dSLR and upgrade to the K-5/7 or its equivalent.
There are some who will enter at the K-5/7 level.
Of these the largest group is the first one. They are also the least likely to buy lots of new lenses. However, this is the largest group for all the dSLR brands. Canon and Nikon have loads of fans at this level. You have to have this level of camera, unless you are Leica or HB, to entice new brand followers. But to keep the ones that want to keep learning more, or have to have the newest and best, you have to have an upward path for them. That path also has to have a full line of supports and extras. This is where Pentax has been relying on its old equipment. I have to say that I bought my K-x for two main reasons - its price to performance ratio was better than anything on the market AND its ability to use legacy equipment in the form of lenses and other items. However, those old lenses can only take you so far. There is a huge, IMHO, gap in Pentax's lineup between the 3 kit lenses (18-55, 50-200, 50-300) and the Limiteds with only one lens IMHO in that gap really - the 35/2.4. Canon and Nikon have several lower cost Primes that are modern in that gap. I just bought a 50/1.8 (if I recall correctly) for my sister as a Christmas present for her Nikon D60 and it was around $200 BNIB which is around what the 35/2.4 costs for us.
My hope is that Ricoh will see that they have a skeleton framework with a couple great cameras but that its a framework that needs fleshing out. Start making new Teleconverters, better peripherals, and fill in the gaps in the lenses offered. Add newer cameras at least at the entry and Pro-sumer level and it'll be a great start. Then a FF and other professional equipment will make sense. Just my thoughts, such as they are, on a nasty Wednesday morning.