Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-27-2012, 01:10 AM   #451
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,323
Hold your horses. Who said anything about Pentax releasing 7 DSLRs, or going neck and neck with the likes of Nikon in few months? That's strawman. And strawmen are usually built to be ridiculously wrong, because the "opponent's" point of view isn't
monochrome is right, Pentax needs more than 2 bodies, and more lenses for their growth plans - and we'll see them.
Only relying on low prices won't work - been there, done that. The result: there was no market share gains, and Pentax is still fighting with the image of a cheap brand, we can see this when people are suggesting the K-30 should match the price of some lowly junk from the competition

05-27-2012, 04:08 AM   #452
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,216
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Hold your horses. Who said anything about Pentax releasing 7 DSLRs, or going neck and neck with the likes of Nikon in few months? That's strawman. And strawmen are usually built to be ridiculously wrong, because the "opponent's" point of view isn't
monochrome is right, Pentax needs more than 2 bodies, and more lenses for their growth plans - and we'll see them.
Only relying on low prices won't work - been there, done that. The result: there was no market share gains, and Pentax is still fighting with the image of a cheap brand, we can see this when people are suggesting the K-30 should match the price of some lowly junk from the competition
Well, I think Pentax needs a camera body that sells for 500 dollars (like the kx did for most of its life). Put an older sensor in it that still works, cut features to the bone, but have something for the people who want cheap. That doesn't mean that you have to discount lenses a bunch, just need to have a camera body on the low end.
05-27-2012, 04:28 AM   #453
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,323
I wasn't arguing against a "true" entry level, it's just that only by price they can't compete/grow. Properly doing it, with strong, well placed products (hopefully the K-30 will prove to be one), good value but not bargains is IMO the better way.
I agree, there is room below the K-30 and also, there is room above it. Which means at least 3 cameras
05-27-2012, 06:12 AM - 1 Like   #454
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,423
QuoteOriginally posted by mee Quote
A simple view, yes, but not singularly focused. One must fully utilize what they have before they grow. They need to hit different price points but there has to be a point where releasing X number of camera bodies is costing more than generating. I suspect X is <= 4 for Pentax right now.
I won't quote it all.

Suppose Ricoh has a 5-year plan and is willing to spend more money than it generates for quite some time - allocating that overspending as a business investment - to develop their brand.

Suppose Ricoh, accepting and understanding the very points you raise (wherein two larger competitors have intentionally segmented the market so that the third, unlikely to be able to produce enough volume in any one segment, is discouraged from competing) chooses to establish a unique brand identity and market that unique identity in more market segments (thus earning an overall profit).

Suppose Ricoh, understanding a company must take business risk in order to earn business profit, sees a future of opportunity rather than a future of bleak acceptance.

Suppose Ricoh's plan assumes the growth necessary to achieve their goals will happen if capital and hard work are applied to technological resources over time (admittedly a core cultural change at Pentax that skeptics will doubt).

Suppose all Pentax Ricoh Imaging really needs is to get their mojo back. Mojo is an indefineable but very real element of business culture that binds employees to a vision and motivates the corporate will to succeed. Apple found it. Hewlett Packard hasn't.

Suppose Pentax might be the beneficiary of an emerging synergy - that in the future we realize the outputs of Pentax have been larger than the sum of the identifiable inputs. That excess return can only be attributed to mojo.

A static analysis will never take these possibilities into account when projecting the future. A dynamic analysis will not only consider them but will expect them.

These suppositions are basic, undergraduate business management principles. Every student of business knows they exist. Every student of business has read case studies of their successful execution - and spectacular failures. I assume Pentax Ricoh Imaging and Ricoh the larger comapny have competent business managers who know their game.

Everything lies in execution. We won't know the outcome - we can't know the outcome - until we know the outcome.

I will not believe Ricoh bought Pentax because Ricoh had $125,000,000 cash laying around idle, and thought, "What the hell - we always wanted a Pentax, why not buy one?"

I've declared since Ricoh bought Pentax that we should be of good cheer - that Ricoh has a plan and we will be happy - because I am an analyst.


Last edited by monochrome; 05-27-2012 at 06:21 AM.
05-27-2012, 07:17 AM   #455
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Posts: 535
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote

I've declared since Ricoh bought Pentax that we should be of good cheer - that Ricoh has a plan and we will be happy - because I am an analyst.
your logic is good, except you forgot one thing. who said the plan was any good? so yes, considering Ricoh and Pentax history in modern photo industry (digital era), I remain skeptical. the recent lens price hike feeds my skepticism
05-27-2012, 08:33 AM   #456
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,423
QuoteOriginally posted by dankoBanana Quote
your logic is good, except you forgot one thing. who said the plan was any good? so yes, considering Ricoh and Pentax history in modern photo industry (digital era), I remain skeptical. the recent lens price hike feeds my skepticism
Well no one knows whether the plan is good until we know whether the plan was good - I wrote that - we can't know until we know. Given Ricoh's historical success in other business units and resources available through their cross-owners I suspect they have some talented managers. We've heard PRI say they are hiring lens engineers -

Regarding Pentax and Ricoh's history - the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome. Contrary to the universal opinion of posters here the lens price hike is an integral and correct element of the plan.

It takes time and hard work. Hard work is the most important element underlying success. They're only in their eighth month, for heaven's sake. If we are all so doubtful of their future why do we even own their products? It appears Pentax wants to emulate Nikon and steal from Canon. Why then don't we just already own Nikon?

Last edited by monochrome; 05-27-2012 at 08:39 AM.
05-27-2012, 09:13 AM   #457
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
I've declared since Ricoh bought Pentax that we should be of good cheer - that Ricoh has a plan and we will be happy - because I am an analyst.
Ricoh has a plan. Hoya had a plan.

I don't think they're the same plan. But both plans involved Pentax eventually making the parent company lots of money. Hopefully, under Ricoh's plan, I will feel like there's enough value for me to give Ricoh money.

So far Ricoh's done (I'm sure I'm missing a lot of things)

1) the lens roadmap (probably a Ricoh decision)
2) the K-30 (kicked off under Hoya), and
3) the UPP.

1) was a good decision.
2) was a no-brainer in my mind, but they seemed to have gotten the pricing right, which was a Ricoh decision.
3) whether you agree with the strategy or not, was completely inept in execution.

You mentioned that execution is key - and I agree. Right now the only major decision that we can see from a consumer's point of view had an execution that I would describe as 'cluster****'. And I'm not talking about the price rise, per se, I'm ONLY talking about the implementation of the price rise.

I still have hopes for Ricoh, but then again (and unlike the Hoya regime!), I'm not really that sure my next camera purchase will be a Pentax.

Last edited by ElJamoquio; 05-27-2012 at 09:30 PM.
05-27-2012, 11:23 AM   #458
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,423
The real problem in the USA is that Pentax Ricoh Imaging USA is just a shell. When they moved to Denver last summer the Denver Post reported 50 employees moved into their 10,000 square foot downtown space from Golden. Fifty direct employees isn't enough critical mass to populate an entire division of a global consumer products company.

I believe that Pentax USA decimated its staff under Hoya and now must act as if the USA division is as deep in professionals as Nikon. Can't be done without significant talent recruitment. I believe Ned, John and one or two national reps cover the retail distribution for the entire country, operating out of their homes in cities away from Denver. I believe PRI USA is currently structured for the BigBox model - and they are asked to immediately act like a full service division of a global camera brand.

I believe Pentax USA can rebuild a proper business model over time. Whether the current staff can be the foundation for the future, whether the current leadership has the will and energy to both implement the first stages of the turnaround and simultaneously recruit and motivate a full team is a serious question to ask.

We need to interpret UPP in the context of the (rumored) Target distribution. It is possible Target accepted the distribution and placed orders for the K30 conditioned on installation of UPP. There might not ahve been time to fully strategize the implementation. If the K30 is distributed at Target and sells significant numbers there then any ham-handedness of implementation will be forgotten.

I also believe Pentax USA out-sourced under contract virtually all of its customary infrastructure functions. I think the failure implementing UPP falls to the contract PR company, whether because they're not the best or because their contract doesn't call for such a task is irrelevant. I have posted this year a number of indications suggesting why I believe this - an obvious example is the way Canada, Europe and even China had front-page features of the K-01 the day of announcement and PRI-USA didn't have anything for 6 more weeks. Clearly they had no internal website manager, or made an inept decision not to order any changes from thier outsourced provider.

Lastly I believe Ricoh is watching the execution of Pentax Ricoh Imaging USA and will act, if necessary, to get people who can and will execute their strategy.

Remember, dynamic analysis, not static.

05-27-2012, 11:56 AM   #459
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
The real problem in the USA is that Pentax Ricoh Imaging USA is just a shell.
Thanks, I had forgotten about the several iterations of mistakes website wise.

Personally from what I've seen it looks like the foundation for Pentax USA is beyond the point where repair makes sense - from the outside, it looks like some bulldozing is in order. But that is difficult.
05-27-2012, 11:59 AM   #460
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
So Pentax should change its mount, not to a modern, full-electric one - but retaining the mechanical aperture lever and the in-body AF motor? Just to make it slightly wider?
As Mistral said, that "Leica" is an m4/3 lens. Big difference, because it's the short registration distance that allows for such a low price. Also, it's not ultra fast - being "only" f/1.4. And last but not least, you should compare it with a 50mm f/2 - because you wanted something "equivalent", right? At least, try to be consistent.

If you would take some time and compare lens prices, you would have the answer. How about... a 25mm f/4 for $5000? Is that a competitive price? Is that a fast lens?
It also seems you either don't really know the Pentax K-mount lens range, or you're purposefully ignoring the APS-C lenses. Breaking news: the K-mount can easily accommodate APS-C cameras and lenses, and Pentax have both.

Yeah, you "proved" lots of things, like with the "4/3" lens
I didn't said to make it only a bit wirder, i wrote it down 4 times already how and what so not going to do it again.

About my consistency i said that with a shorter register and wider diamater mount a "real" APS-C "FF equivalent" could be made and that the lenses can become cheaper.
The example was the 24mm f/1.4 4/3th lens compared it with the 25mm f/1.4 FF lens and you saw a real difference there in price.
What i tried to show was that with Pentax we are now using those FF lenses so if pentax will make a 24mm f/1.4 then it would also be $1000+ lens right, but almost the same lens with a mount with a shorter register is only $500.
So it means that the "normal" lenses will become more affordable for APS-C and also wide angle lenses would become cheaper, longer lenses would probably become a bit more expensive.
To make it absolutly clear, a mount specialized for APS-C would mean
- "real" APS-C "FF equivalent" might be possible
- wide and normal lenses for APS-C would be cheaper
- body depth would be smaller, making the K-01 product more attractive

I know the DA range, i've the DA*16-50, DA*50-135 and couple more and i shoot with cannon 5D mkII and have shot a couple of times with a technical camera if that helps... but we aren't discussing my experience.
If we had a shorter register and slightly wider mount the DA*16-50 would have been cheaper and the lenses might be able to hit f/2 (maybe it won't be cheaper then but hey f/2.8 vs f/2)
And about the ASP-C lenses, just look up the test and you will see that many work on FF quite well and you're also still restricted by the FF mount so how much of APS-C lenses are the DA lenses really?
Some are direct clones form FA lenses for example...
I already agreed that if Pentax comes with FF camera they should keep the K-mount for sure but if they decide not to then what's the purpose for keeping the K-mount beside that you can use older lenses without an adapter.
Pentax now is in a position to make a real change with APS-C with a mount designed for APS-C, this will make the system more future proof and make it better marketable for the professional market.
Anyway go ahead and put up some prices then, compare APS-C lenses with the same 4/3 lenses then so lenses with the same focal length and aperture.

Before you say that the "real" APS-C "FF equivalent" would be more expensive then the FF lens they mimic, i can only say that you would most likely be correct but look at the price for high end APS-C body and a low end FF and then look how many times you've bought a new DSLR in 10 years time and how many times you've replaced a lens in that time.
Even if an APS-C FF equivalent lens will be $1000 more expensive you will already have that money back when you replace your first camera.
05-27-2012, 12:05 PM   #461
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
You mentioned that execution is key - and I agree. Right now the only major decision that we can see from a consumer's point of view had an execution that I would describe as 'cluster****'. And I'm not talking about the price rise, per se, I'm ONLY talking about the implementation of the price rise.
Then how should they have done it?
Saying it wasn't right is one thing but now try to say how they should have done it, that's a bit harder.

It was now quick and painfull but how do you feel about it now, do you still have the same feelings about this as 2 months ago, changes are you've almost already forgotten most of it when winter comes and some of the "big" new lenses and cameras are released.
05-27-2012, 12:09 PM   #462
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
What i tried to show was that with Pentax we are now using those FF lenses so if pentax will make a 24mm f/1.4 then it would also be $1000+ lens right, but almost the same lens with a mount with a shorter register is only $500.
The primary difference in those lenses is NOT the shorter register distance, though. You're correct, the shorter register helps, but the much smaller field of view helps even more.
05-27-2012, 12:14 PM   #463
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Then how should they have done it?
Saying it wasn't right is one thing but now try to say how they should have done it, that's a bit harder.
It's not very hard at all.

They should've

1) Given a clear indication to retailers what the minimum advertised price is/was going to be (no overshoot with guesswork as to how much to discount later)
2) NOT claimed they did not raise prices
3) for the love of god, not implemented on April fools' day

(and 1 of many bonuses they could've done) Don't raise prices on stuff that was never going to be sold at Target in order to get a contract at Target
05-27-2012, 12:21 PM   #464
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
It was now quick and painfull but how do you feel about it now, do you still have the same feelings about this as 2 months ago, changes are you've almost already forgotten most of it when winter comes and some of the "big" new lenses and cameras are released.
You've asked the right question but to the wrong person. I agree that most consumers have already mostly forgotten and forgiven.

I personally have benefitted in the short term from UPP - my lens value has gone up. All of the lenses that had their purchase price go up were either lenses that I already own or never plan on owning (with the possible exception of the 21 and 70mm lenses... but I pretty much stopped purchasing APS-C lenses).

The only lenses I'm really missing right now are a FF 24-70 or so and a long telephoto. I didn't purchase a sigma k-mount 500mm f/4.5 this winter because of the lens roadmap. I'm waiting for the FF Pentax and the 560, but in the meantime I'm patiently perusing the used-lenses in Nikon. If Pentax has a kick ass camera at Photokina, great. But I'm starting to build up my Nikon lens collection (ok, I'm looking) right now, and that is something that wouldn't have happened before the inept implementation of UPP.
05-27-2012, 12:59 PM   #465
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
The primary difference in those lenses is NOT the shorter register distance, though. You're correct, the shorter register helps, but the much smaller field of view helps even more.
Like for example with the DA40 which is the same as the M40 lens, the DA*200 who is the same as the FA*200, the DA*60-250 which has FF lens design (look up the patent), really what are we talking about?

Beside that where is the real cost saving in the narrower field of view?
It's not really in that you can use lenses with a smaller diameter since that would effect the aperture as well...
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!
dslr, forum, full-frame, k3, k30, k5n, pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why full frame? VoiceOfReason Pentax DSLR Discussion 208 07-28-2012 08:09 AM
K5 vs Full Frame KALAIS Pentax K-5 21 09-24-2011 11:25 AM
Pentax and Full Frame... Shutter-bug Photographic Technique 60 11-03-2010 10:03 AM
Pentax A 50/1.2 on Full Frame aegisphan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 10-28-2010 04:16 PM
Photokina 2010, Pentax and the full frame mystery falconeye Pentax News and Rumors 727 09-03-2010 11:11 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:20 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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