Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-19-2008, 08:24 AM   #46
Veteran Member
lol101's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Garennes sur Eure France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 900
QuoteOriginally posted by Edvinas Quote
Do you really believe that people will prefer Pentax instead of Canon/Nikon/Sony? No. If Pentax want to sell cameras they must either price them less than competition or their cameras must be much better than competition at the same price.
There's something I don't understand:

How is Pentax supposed to be profitable either way?

01-19-2008, 08:30 AM   #47
Forum Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 60
QuoteOriginally posted by Richard Day Quote
The latter lens hasn't been finalised yet, it will be the 18-55 II. The 17-70 isn't even scheduled to be announced at PMA, probably will happen by Photokina 08.
Is there a new version of 18-55 mm kit lens coming? Have not heard about a version II before, SDM?
/Mats
01-19-2008, 09:28 AM   #48
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,299
QuoteOriginally posted by Edvinas Quote
Do you really believe that people will prefer Pentax instead of Canon/Nikon/Sony? No.
Well, Pentax outsells Sony, at least in Japan.

QuoteQuote:
If Pentax want to sell cameras they must either price them less than competition or their cameras must be much better than competition at the same price.
They only need to price them so that they can sell out their production volume.
Remember that even if Canon/Nikon outsells Pentax 8 to 1 or 9 to 1, Pentax would have mission accomplished.

To be honest, isn't it premature for us to debate about the price when the official pricing is not even known?
01-19-2008, 09:37 AM   #49
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
Look at the thread title.

QuoteOriginally posted by nosnoop Quote
To be honest, isn't it premature for us to debate about the price when the official pricing is not even known?
Not in a thread titled "News and Rumors".

I heard the K20D will release at $899 for the body alone, with rebates expected after September '08.

Which sounds to me like they're trying the Apple thing, where early adopters who are willing to pay a premium contribute to the profits quite a bit (you know who you are;^), and then sales are kept brisk by (relatively) early rebates.


Last edited by jsherman999; 01-19-2008 at 09:49 AM.
01-19-2008, 02:44 PM   #50
Veteran Member
Buschmaster's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 806
Sure, people will pay a premium when they first get it. It sucks being an early adopter because that's how fast technology moves. I don't get why people complain.

When you complain you're either saying "I don't want upgrades/updates/advancements" or you're saying "I don't want price cuts"

How does that make sense?


As far as how legit that price is, it's hard to say, but at that price it'd be out of my ballpark. But I'm sure anything they slap for a price on this will be.
01-19-2008, 03:02 PM   #51
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bangor, Maine
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,382
QuoteOriginally posted by lol101 Quote
There's something I don't understand:

How is Pentax supposed to be profitable either way?
Fortunately both Nikon and Canon make over 20% on their DSLRs. I've read that Hoya would be happy if Pentax could make 10% for the next year or so. By staying out of the big boxes in the states they could pick up another 5 points in the US market because places like Best Buy demand at least an extra 5% discount. If they gear the factory for optimum efficiency rather than volume there might be a couple extra points there. They need to be 10-15% below the big two on competing models and they should be able to squeeze that out.
01-19-2008, 05:53 PM   #52
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 828
QuoteOriginally posted by regken Quote
Fortunately both Nikon and Canon make over 20% on their DSLRs. I've read that Hoya would be happy if Pentax could make 10% for the next year or so. By staying out of the big boxes in the states they could pick up another 5 points in the US market because places like Best Buy demand at least an extra 5% discount. If they gear the factory for optimum efficiency rather than volume there might be a couple extra points there. They need to be 10-15% below the big two on competing models and they should be able to squeeze that out.
Exactly. The goal is not volume, but profitable volume. These things take time and there will always be bumps in the road, but Pentax (with Hoya sponsorship) is definitely getting there. Supply chain management and logistics is never easy.

Big box stores will do great for volume but I'll bet the contribution margin turns uneconomic once you factor in a few things itty bitty things. Like volume discounts, discounts for early payments, penalties for late delivery or stock outs, freight allowances, late payments for receivables (you know, when 30 days magically becomes 60), arbitrary reductions in payments for "damaged" or returned goods, etc etc.
01-19-2008, 11:54 PM   #53
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: LI, NY
Posts: 313
QuoteOriginally posted by nosnoop Quote
you want to make a profit For example, if K20D is as popular as D300, then Pentax would be in big trouble
You would just end up with a lot of angry unsatisfied ex-customers.
If Pentax feels like charging as much as a D300, being without the name, the predictive AF should be at least as good so there's no question of competitiveness in that standard requirement.

The technology is there, so there's no need for Pentax to reinvent the wheel. Its just a matter of them wanting to give us that standard level of performance or not wanting to. If Nikon can include it in the D300 and still make a profit, the cost of including it becomes a non-issue. It should just be expected, especially since Pentax doesn't have the same name power.

If the K20D is priced similarly to the 40D or A700, the predictive AF should be at least (hopefully competitively better) than those cameras, but never the usual little bit worse.

01-20-2008, 01:05 AM   #54
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,299
QuoteOriginally posted by mutley Quote
If Pentax feels like charging as much as a D300, being without the name, the predictive AF should be at least as good....
If the K20D is priced similarly to the 40D or A700, the predictive AF should be at least ....
As we all know, you are very obsessed with a few particular aspects of the camera; and you demand nothing less than equal to the competition. But most people don't judge or make purchase decision based on only those aspects you pointed out many times.

The verdict is still out whether K20D has any improved AF, and I hope it does. But each camera has its pros and cons, each camera has its unique characteristics and advantages. For example, K10D can have image stabilization with short primes like 50mm f/1.4, something that no Canon or Nikon could match; or K10D allows direct ISO adjustment using control dial without touching any buttons, again something no other camera can match; and K10D's Auto ISO setting is so flexible and intuitive that you can't imagine why 40D cannot do the same.... etc.

Obviously, predictive AF, VPN, SDM speed... are all very important to you. And that's OK. You can make your purchase decision based on those criteria. But don't think everyone has the same priorities as you do. For example, landscape and studio photography would have zero use for predictive AF.

Whether K20D can match predictive AF with likes from Nikon or Canon would be an interesting point, but it is by no means the make or break for the success of K20D.
01-20-2008, 02:03 AM   #55
Veteran Member
lol101's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Garennes sur Eure France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 900
QuoteOriginally posted by mutley Quote
If Pentax feels like charging as much as a D300, being without the name, the predictive AF should be at least as good so there's no question of competitiveness in that standard requirement.

The technology is there, so there's no need for Pentax to reinvent the wheel. Its just a matter of them wanting to give us that standard level of performance or not wanting to. If Nikon can include it in the D300 and still make a profit, the cost of including it becomes a non-issue. It should just be expected, especially since Pentax doesn't have the same name power.

If the K20D is priced similarly to the 40D or A700, the predictive AF should be at least (hopefully competitively better) than those cameras, but never the usual little bit worse.
100% agreed on the price/feature matching: same price should mean comparable performances.

But what if the K20D is better in some aspects than the competition at the same price point and worse in some other (see cameras like Fuji S5 for instance)?

I guess one would then have to decide if the better aspects are more important to his shooting style than the worse aspects and buy what works for him.

I am all for Pentax delivering a better camera in all aspects than its competition but it is really not reasonable to expect them to outsmart everybody on all fronts for the same price tag.

An that's not making an excuse for them, that's just being fair.
01-20-2008, 02:32 AM   #56
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Verona, Italy
Posts: 202
QuoteOriginally posted by lol101 Quote
100% agreed on the price/feature matching: same price should mean comparable performances.

But what if the K20D is better in some aspects than the competition at the same price point and worse in some other (see cameras like Fuji S5 for instance)?

I guess one would then have to decide if the better aspects are more important to his shooting style than the worse aspects and buy what works for him.

I am all for Pentax delivering a better camera in all aspects than its competition but it is really not reasonable to expect them to outsmart everybody on all fronts for the same price tag.

An that's not making an excuse for them, that's just being fair.
Pentax main focus now seems to establish 3rd position, so in other words do better [much better] than Oly and Sony, rather than fight directly the top two. From this point of view even a K10d could fight an E3 spec wise, and sales seems a bit better than Alphas, even without new models. So it's not an impossible task.
01-20-2008, 02:54 AM   #57
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: LI, NY
Posts: 313
QuoteOriginally posted by lol101 Quote
100% agreed on the price/feature matching: same price should mean comparable performances.

But what if the K20D is better in some aspects than the competition
I guess one would then have to decide if the better aspects are more important and buy what works for him.
These other aspects, of course, are what gets people to buy Pentax.

The other features I point out are just performance specs that should be important enough to them to make equivalent. If all the comparably priced cameras are doing 5 frames a sec., then the K20D shouldn't be the loner only able to do 3. But no one judges it to need 8 frames a sec. Predictive Focus, AF speed, Noise, and IQ should be equivalent as well, with no constant IQ displays of design issues like VPN.

There are cameras that can be pushed to show similar effects, but it shouldn't appear as easily as in the K10D. Supposedly VPN has been fixed in the K20D anyway, as expected, but never will be in the K10D. Time to give up on that hope, as Pentax would prefer.

Since the Nikon and Canon cameras of equivalent price will sell largely due to the name, its the other Pentax innovations that should be visible, and unclouded by basic performance issues/quality, so people can choose Pentax based on those great innovations.
01-20-2008, 04:01 AM   #58
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 843
QuoteOriginally posted by mutley Quote
If Pentax feels like charging as much as a D300, being without the name, the predictive AF should be at least as good so there's no question of competitiveness in that standard requirement.
There has been no indication of the new Pentax to be sold for same as the D300.
All indications has pointed towards Canon 40D-level, which is clearly below D300 level.
Your only concern seems to be predictive AF, but neither the Canon 40D nor the Nikon D300 offers a 14Mp CMOS sensor - have you thought about that, that the new Pentax offers higher resolution than the competition. The Canon 40D only has a 10Mp sensor. One could also say, that if Canon and Sony wish to compete with Pentax at the same price level - they need to offer same high resolution otherwise they would need to sell for less.

It is much more to a camera than just predictive AF.
I have no information on the AF speed and functions in the new Pentax, but I feel that the increase in resolution and the new sensor *alone* makes for a very comeptetive offering to Canon 40D, and means a worthwile upgrade from a K10D. If they add a lot of other things to, then they are a bonus.
01-20-2008, 04:06 AM   #59
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 843
QuoteOriginally posted by mutley Quote
If all the comparably priced cameras are doing 5 frames a sec., then the K20D shouldn't be the loner only able to do 3. But no one judges it to need 8 frames a sec. Predictive Focus, AF speed, Noise, and IQ should be equivalent as well, with no constant IQ displays of design issues like VPN.
So you mean that it is better if Pentax makes a 10Mp with 5fps instead of a 14Mp with say 3fps, because Pentax must do the same thing as the competition? If Pentax does the same as the competition, then why buy Pentax at all? Buy a Canon!

Oh, and the Nikon D300 only does 2.5 fps when set to highest resolution and bit depth...
01-20-2008, 04:37 AM   #60
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: LI, NY
Posts: 313
QuoteOriginally posted by RMabo Quote
Pentax must do the same thing as the competition? If Pentax does the same as the competition, then why buy Pentax at all? Buy a Canon!

Pentax should have at least as good performance results as the equivalently priced competition.

If Pentax then adds innovative features to that for that equivalent price, then that is why someone gets into or stays with Pentax. If not, then the Nikon or Canon names alone, along with equipment availability will sell those brands.

As I've said above, the technology is there, and Pentax engineers are able to figure it out. Its more a matter of whether they want to give it to us or not. The other brands include these technologies, and still make huge profits on their cameras, so cost is not an excuse.
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!
euro, pentax news, pentax rumors, price
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K7 on sale for Canadians $1299 with 18-55 lens eccs19 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 1 01-29-2010 12:24 PM
For Sale - Sold: K20D body - 500 Euro! muustuus Sold Items 5 08-06-2009 02:07 AM
Is the K7 really worth spending $1299 for? Reportage Pentax DSLR Discussion 33 05-29-2009 04:11 PM
No FF from Pentax but it is 3000 Euro RaduA Pentax News and Rumors 10 11-14-2008 04:54 PM
Help Planning Euro Trip Mikhail General Talk 17 01-11-2008 04:16 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:38 AM. | 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