[cali92rs]

Just because Pentax is not one of the big sellers does not make it a bottom dweller. Leica also is not a top seller. Me thinks Pentax and Ricoh are top notch companies as it pertains to cameras. My two cents.

I never said they were bottom dwellers...but I am not going to view the acquision by Ricoh as some sort of panacea either. At least not yet.

[Kunzite]

I agree with what you are saying...but I hope this marriage is greater than the sum of its parts.
Let's be honest, Pentax has not been viewed as a top notch camera company for a couple of decades. And Ricoh, while big in the office machine world, has always been a bit player in the camera world too (interesting, well built products no doubt, but always far from mainstream).

Actually I think Pentax only needs proper funding, and top management caring for more than short term margins.

[ElJamoquio]

It makes perfect sense to differentiate cameras in the line. To answer your question: A good bit. The K-5 takes a grip, the K-30 does not. The K-5 has a top LCD, the K-30 does not. And on.

It makes perfect sense to have some overlap and self-cannibalize a bit, too. The differences between the K-5 and the K-30 aren't very much. That doesn't make the K-30 a bad entry into the marketplace... but it does mean that Pentax will have to release more cameras.

[monochrome]

Actually I think Pentax only needs proper funding, and top management caring for more than short term margins.

IMHO Hoya did significant, irreparable damage to Pentax by stripping it of critical culture, marginal but brand-broadening accessories, and retiring irreplaceable people. Further, by apparently limiting product development to the absolute minimum number of products (while admittedly cramming them with value and neat technology) Hoya allowed Pentax to step off the product development conveyor belt.

Ricoh not only needs to restart product development, they need to leapfrog to the next generation of product - catching up with Nikon today leaves Pentax 1 product behind the day after introduction - which explains the current time-gap in new product introductions.

Risky business sttrategy, but perhaps indicative of the only available path.

[Docrwm]

It makes perfect sense to have some overlap and self-cannibalize a bit, too. The differences between the K-5 and the K-30 aren't very much. That doesn't make the K-30 a bad entry into the marketplace... but it does mean that Pentax will have to release more cameras.

No argument on the releasing more cameras. The K-30 benefits from the K-5 which was released 18+ months before it. There is a lot of difference in them and more between the K-5II and IIs and the K-30 but at the end of the day the K-5 series is a 24+ month old design and the K-30 is a 6 month old design, Pentax would have been stupid not to learn from the K-5 and take advantage of the decreasing cost basis for the components and place them in a lower-level camera. I do not see this product cycle as indicative of Pentax at all but a reflection of the oddities of having to live with Hoya decisions and Ricoh trying to come in and clean up Hoya's obvious stupidity and cost cutting.

[deadwolfbones]

Oh my. Wifi and a hot shoe, and the price is excellent. Gone are the days when Samsung sold rebadged Pentaxes.

It also produces awful JPEGs with godawful oversharpening, though maybe the RAWs are better. I didn't get to test that.

[ElJamoquio]

No argument on the releasing more cameras. The K-30 benefits from the K-5 which was released 18+ months before it. There is a lot of difference in them and more between the K-5II and IIs and the K-30 but at the end of the day the K-5 series is a 24+ month old design and the K-30 is a 6 month old design, Pentax would have been stupid not to learn from the K-5 and take advantage of the decreasing cost basis for the components and place them in a lower-level camera. I do not see this product cycle as indicative of Pentax at all but a reflection of the oddities of having to live with Hoya decisions and Ricoh trying to come in and clean up Hoya's obvious stupidity and cost cutting.

I agree with (I think) all points.

My analogy, lost oh-so-many-posts-ago, was that the MX-1 and the Q operating in roughly the same space isn't such a terrible thing, especially if that's where the enthusiasts are.

[kshapero]

I never said they were bottom dwellers...but I am not going to view the acquision by Ricoh as some sort of panacea either. At least not yet.

Agreed

[Medium FormatPro]

IMHO Hoya did significant, irreparable damage to Pentax by stripping it of critical culture, marginal but brand-broadening accessories, and retiring irreplaceable people. Further, by apparently limiting product development to the absolute minimum number of products (while admittedly cramming them with value and neat technology) Hoya allowed Pentax to step off the product development conveyor belt.

Ricoh not only needs to restart product development, they need to leapfrog to the next generation of product - catching up with Nikon today leaves Pentax 1 product behind the day after introduction - which explains the current time-gap in new product introductions.

Risky business sttrategy, but perhaps indicative of the only available path.

Pentax will never break past the number five position in camera sales. Sure their stats and numbers are up on "the books", but this will not keep the company afloat long term. If this keeps up for another year or two Pentax will fall seriously by the wayside - almost like Sony Beta

[Kunzite]

Pentax will never break past the number five position in camera sales.

How would you know that?

[Medium FormatPro]

How would you know that?

Canon and Nikon will always lead above Pentax - there's two.
Sony and now even Sigma are clearly ahead of Pentax - even Sigma has a much clearer plan than Pentax.

As a matter of fact I'd place my chips on the "idea" that Sigma will release two more digital slr's well before Pentax does. Sigma will also clearly release a full frame digital slr before Pentax.

So there's four names that Pentax will never surpass.

…And then there's the Sigma's optics compared to Pentax's "optical abilities". Sure Sigma doesn't have the pancake line, but guess what - they don't need it. Sigma has more optics than Pentax could ever dream of - as well as a clearly impressive full frame line up of lens'

[Quicksand]

As a matter of fact I'd place my chips on the "idea" that Sigma will release two more digital slr's well before Pentax does. Sigma will also clearly release a full frame digital slr before Pentax.

Maybe! But if they release a Foveon full-frame DSLR with their own proprietary not-quite-K-mount and Sigma's, ahem, "ergonomics," at a price level north of $5,000 -- which is broadly consistent with their prior pricing attempts -- then I wouldn't want one.

Nor do I imagine would many customers.

This would be quite a niche item, and probably sell fewer copies than the 645D.

[GeneV]

It also produces awful JPEGs with godawful oversharpening, though maybe the RAWs are better. I didn't get to test that.

It did not fare well in the jpeg comparisons in DPReview.

[John Poirier]

Canon and Nikon will always lead above Pentax - there's two.
Sony and now even Sigma are clearly ahead of Pentax - even Sigma has a much clearer plan than Pentax.

As a matter of fact I'd place my chips on the "idea" that Sigma will release two more digital slr's well before Pentax does. Sigma will also clearly release a full frame digital slr before Pentax.

So there's four names that Pentax will never surpass.

…And then there's the Sigma's optics compared to Pentax's "optical abilities". Sure Sigma doesn't have the pancake line, but guess what - they don't need it. Sigma has more optics than Pentax could ever dream of - as well as a clearly impressive full frame line up of lens'

Never? Always?

I have no idea where Pentax is going. I don't care whether they surpass the sales of other manufacturers or not, as long as they continue to produce bodies that make good use of my lenses. I don't think Ricoh would have bought the company without allocating significant resources and smart people to make Pentax more competitive. As I've said elsewhere, these things take time. I'd bet that even at Canikon the design cycle for major products is at least 3 years. Crash priority with major resources, IMHO, might produce something in 18 to 24 months after the company changed hands.

I do know that the declaration I'm quoting sounds a lot like people who not so many years ago claimed film would always be best, and digital would never be used by pros. There were quite a few of those people; they were very confident, and they were very wrong.

"Probably" sounds better to me!

[Alizarine]

…And then there's the Sigma's optics compared to Pentax's "optical abilities". Sure Sigma doesn't have the pancake line, but guess what - they don't need it. Sigma has more optics than Pentax could ever dream of - as well as a clearly impressive full frame line up of lens'

While I do laud Sigma's passion to still make DSLRs given the lead of Canon, Nikon and Sony over them (hey, even Pentax!), the number of lens varieties produced doesn't necessarily equate to overall optical quality. I'd still take P's 50-135 over S's 50-150 any day (now that we can convert DA*s to screwdrives!)