[illdefined]

Cue some appropriate Steve Jobs quotes:

"It's really hard to design products by focus groups. A lot of times, people don't know what they want until you show it to them."

"You can't just ask customers what they want and then try to give that to them. By the time you get it built, they'll want something new."

"Innovation has nothing to do with how many R&D dollars you have. ... It's not about money. It's about the people you have, how you're led, and how much you get it."

yes, this was exactly the kind of thinking that got us the K-01 and Q. two cameras the market never knew it wanted. and still doesn't. how little does Pentax "get it" then?

[KungPOW]

The comment that a larger sensor CSC camera would need a new mount, is really interesting.

I expect that part of the K-mount definition is the dimension of the minimum diameter of the projected image circle that a lens must have to be considered a K mount.

I'm really starting to suspect that the problem with a FF camera from Pentax is that their lenses do not have an image circle with a diameter that can support their SR system. I think the sensor movement of the SR system places the sensor corners out of the image circle for some if not all Pentax FF capable lenses.

[Docrwm]

yes, this was exactly the kind of thinking that got us the K-01 and Q. two cameras the market never knew it wanted. and still doesn't. how little does Pentax "get it" then?

The Q actually sells pretty well in the home market of Japan. It garnered fairly positive reviews, other then sensor size discrimination, from a pretty wide range of sources. The K-01, pretty generally panned by photography sources and praised by "fashionista's" but that has not, apparently, translated into meaningful sales. The Q is, by many measures, if not a Home Run a very respectable Double. The K-01.....well.....

[timcatn]

yes, this was exactly the kind of thinking that got us the K-01 and Q. two cameras the market never knew it wanted. and still doesn't. how little does Pentax "get it" then?

I want a Q10. Does that count?

[Barbarosa]

I almost go to k-01 but now I'm on hold.
Do we pantaxians have right on better video?

[illdefined]

both the Q and K-01 were photographic novelties, appealing to a very limited market.

neither come close to the iPhone, a new standard that redefined a tool we all use daily. It's influence is everywhere, even if you don't have one.

[cfraz]

both the Q and K-01 were photographic novelties, appealing to a very limited market.

neither come close to the iPhone, a new standard that redefined a tool we all use daily. It's influence is everywhere, even if you don't have one.

Umm, in contrast to all the ILC's from other manufacturers that have outsold the iPhone?

[illdefined]

Umm, in contrast to all the ILC's from other manufacturers that have outsold the iPhone?

It was a market analogy that wasn't brought up by me. That said, other brands are definitely innovating more (and more successfully) than Pentax right now.

[falconeye]

the problem with a FF camera from Pentax is that their lenses do not have an image circle with a diameter that can support their SR system. I think the sensor movement of the SR system places the sensor corners out of the image circle for some if not all Pentax FF capable lenses.

I am reading it here and elsewhere again and again.

A specification of a four stop improvement over no SR means that the acceptable blur (which s defined to be 30 microns for an FF camera due to conventional DoF definitions) is reached for 2^4 times 30 microns input blur. Which is 480 microns to either side or 1mm overall. 1mm of an 43mm image circle or 2% more. Clearly not enough to create a problem, esp. as it is 3 stops only in reality.

And you can prime rhe sensor movement which means that half a mm is all the extra headroom you need.

[Uluru]

Why don't you extend the range of quotes by Steve Jobs into those in which he openly denied Apple was working, or even thinking seriously, about certain new products and markets .. Only to introduce all new products for exactly those markets a year or two later! Steve was blatantly lying. Not for a good reason?

Thus if Pentax is to follow SJ's and Apple's example as Falconeye suggests, and "learn from them", then either Pentax have taken SJ's *true spirit* to their hearts, or Falconeye and many others here have no mind set to recognise those, and truly understand what it takes to create different new products and technologies. One must do it with eyes open, and with mouth shut. (Here on PF the attitude is opposite)

As for Pentax representative's denials, or unclear answers, from which you try to deduce some "truth" and "clear prognosis", it's better if you give up. We are up and against something we don't quite get. If you have ever visited a good Japanese factory and talked to their people, you'd perhaps notice that they behave quite the opposite of the westerners. Even their sentences are differently constructed, with verbs coming last. When they seemingly underestimate, that often means they are working overtime behind the curtains. If they deny, they almost certainly want to surprise you.

Thus if they say they want to work on K-Mount further, it surely means they are cracking up an all new mount and technologies for the future cameras, which may as well be a mount for the altogether new ultrasmall FF MILC system. Instead of battling with old "enemies" using pikes, flails, clubs, maces and mauls you love, they'd simply do something entirely new. And SJ and Apple would do the same, wouldn't they?

So to all the wisecrackers on PF, I'd strongly suggest to calm down, and stop wasting breath — your "analysis" is, at best, boring. Can't you do any better than that?

If I were in Pentax system camera division development, I'd simply ignore most 'opinions' here, because those of you are exactly the kind of customers 'who just want a faster horse' Henry Ford talked about, and which SJ often quoted.

PS. As for Pentax making cameras for the Japanese first, and especially thinking about those 50% of population (women) well, they have a lot to deliver. It is not by accident that almost all photography related intellectual property today is from Japan. They simply own the meaning of the word photography. Even European Leica sells most of their cameras in to the — well of course — Japanese market.

[mecrox]

Why don't you extend the range of quotes by Steve Jobs into those in which he openly denied Apple was working, or even thinking seriously, about certain new products and markets .. Only to introduce all new products for exactly those markets a year or two later!

Thus if Pentax is to follow SJ's and Apple's example as Falconeye suggests, and "learn from them", then either Pentax have taken SJ's *true spirit* to their hearts, or Falconeye and many others here have no mind set to recognise those, and truly understand what it takes to create different new products and technologies.

As for Pentax representative denials, or unclear answers, from which you try to deduce some "truth" and "clear prognosis", it's better if you give up. I you have ever visited a good Japanese factory and talked to their people, you'd perhaps notice that they behave quite the opposite of the westerners. When they seemingly underestimate, that often means they are working overtime behind the curtains. If they deny, they almost certainly want to surprise you.

Thus if they say they want to work on K-Mount further, it surely means they are cracking up an all new mount and technologies for the future cameras, which may as well be a mount for the altogether new FF MILC system. Instead of battling with old "enemies" using old tools, they'd simply do something entirely new. And SJ and Apple would do the same, wouldn't they?

It is not by accident that almost all photography related intellectual property today is from Japan. They simply own the meaning of the word photography. Even European Leica sells most of their cameras in to the — well of course — Japanese market.

So to all the wisecrackers on PF, I'd strongly suggest to calm down, and stop wasting breath — your "analysis" is, at best, boring. Can'y you do any better than that?

If I were in Pentax system camera division development, I'd simply ignore most 'opinions' here, because those of you are exactly the kind of customers 'who just want a faster horse' Henry Ford talked about, and which SJ often quoted.

Lol. It neatly sums up the whole problem. This may be fine and understandable but it's no way to build a business in the West. Ignoring your customers doesn't seem to have done Pentax much good in recent years. They are welcome to give it another try and really really ignore them this time, but I just don't see it working all that well. If they genuinely don't want to build a business in the West, always a possibility, perhaps they should simply withdraw.

[KungPOW]

I am reading it here and elsewhere again and again.

A specification of a four stop improvement over no SR means that the acceptable blur (which s defined to be 30 microns for an FF camera due to conventional DoF definitions) is reached for 2^4 times 30 microns input blur. Which is 480 microns to either side or 1mm overall. 1mm of an 43mm image circle or 2% more. Clearly not enough to create a problem, esp. as it is 3 stops only in reality.

And you can prime rhe sensor movement which means that half a mm is all the extra headroom you need.

I expect you are correct with regard to the amount of movement the sensor needs at the time of shutter press.

But when I look at the SR mechanism, to me, it looks like the sensor can move in the range of +/- 4mm in all directions.

I think the sensor needs this extra movement to lock in and hold the sensor position while the photographer composes the shot.

Otherwise why allow this motion in the SR mechanism?

[Uluru]

Lol. It neatly sums up the whole problem. This may be fine and understandable but it's no way to build a business in the West. Ignoring your customers doesn't seem to have done Pentax much good in recent years. They are welcome to give it another try and really really ignore them this time, but I just don't see it working all that well. If they genuinely don't want to build a business in the West, always a possibility, perhaps they should simply withdraw.

Smart companies are not ignoring you, but delivering something
- you never thought about, or,
- what others on the market don't deliver, or,
- exceeding your expectations in those areas you can think of right now.

[Winder]

I am reading it here and elsewhere again and again.

A specification of a four stop improvement over no SR means that the acceptable blur (which s defined to be 30 microns for an FF camera due to conventional DoF definitions) is reached for 2^4 times 30 microns input blur. Which is 480 microns to either side or 1mm overall. 1mm of an 43mm image circle or 2% more. Clearly not enough to create a problem, esp. as it is 3 stops only in reality.

And you can prime rhe sensor movement which means that half a mm is all the extra headroom you need.

Sony A900 SR in action. It looks like a good bit more movement than what you are suggesting. That is more than 1mm of movement.

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

[mecrox]

Smart companies are not ignoring you, but delivering something
- you never thought about, or,
- what others on the market don't deliver, or,
- exceeding your expectations in those areas you can think of right now.

That sounds like something from a management manual and it's really not what's been happening, imho. I wish it had been. I wish.