Ricoh announces company name change - no more Pentax Ricoh Imaging, just Ricoh.

**RKKS08** · 07-02-2013, 01:52 PM

I haven't read every single posting in this thread, so this may have been posted before:
As far as I know, the company name was never Pentax. This was just a trade mark.

And you should not forget, Asahi itself was not always the owner of the name "Pentax".
They bought in the early or mid fifties from an East German optical company.

On German eBay, once or twice a year you can still find camera related optical stuff labeled "Pentax", manufactured in East Germany in 1950-1953.

redimp · 07-02-2013, 02:03 PM

Originally posted by monochrome

... - the K-mount. One can argue the relative value of a 40-ish year old technology...

One can argue that but what actually is the K-mount? It is a bayonet fitting, nothing more and in that respect no different to bayonet fittings used by other manufacturers. Like all bayonets, increased functionality is achieved by adding contacts etc. Again, the K-mount is no less capable of this being done to than any other mount. The only time that a change might be necessay to any SLR mount is for different format cameras and not ever FF as that is what the K is buildt for. it just seems like a nonsense to change it; absolutely no realistic reason to do so and plenty of reasons not to; unless somebody can tell me otherwise.

Cannikin · 07-02-2013, 02:10 PM

I can't help but suspect that many of the people acting up over this corporate, not product, name change (threatening to leave, really?) are some of the same people who derisively dismiss Canon/Nikon users as people buying solely for a brand name...

**RKKS08** · 07-02-2013, 02:12 PM

Originally posted by redimp

unless somebody can tell me otherwise

Well, I cannot really tell you otherwise.

But I know there are people who think the K mount may restrict the design of really fast lenses for some focal lengths.
That is, if a DSRL FF body is combined with the Pentax shake reduction. They think this solution would need a slightly wider mount opening.

Uluru · 07-02-2013, 02:18 PM

PRIC abbreviation of Pentax Ricoh Imaging Corporation never sounded too practical or flattering in English.
Move to change it is welcome, especially in the world begging for smoother and easier communication.
It is also easier from the administration point of view, doesn't complicate formalities around transfer of capital, tax, establishment of partnerships, unilateral brand message, etc.

Uluru · 07-02-2013, 02:23 PM

Originally posted by RKKS08

Well, I cannot really tell you otherwise.

But I know there are people who think the K mount may restrict the design of really fast lenses for some focal lengths.
That is, if a DSRL FF body is combined with the Pentax shake reduction. They think this solution would need a slightly wider mount opening.

With a current flange distance. But when you shorten it for a mirrorless product that has a sensor much closer to mount, no such problems. You can design all new lenses.

Racer X 69 · 07-02-2013, 02:35 PM

Originally posted by RKKS08

As far as I know, the company name was never Pentax.

My K10 was produced by the Pentax Corporation.

Kunzite · 07-02-2013, 02:47 PM

Indeed, there was a "Pentax Corporation" between 2002 and 2008.

Racer X 69 · 07-02-2013, 03:08 PM

Originally posted by Kunzite

Indeed, there was a "Pentax Corporation" between 2002 and 2008.

And a corporation is pretty much the same as a company.

**monochrome** · 07-02-2013, 03:10 PM

Originally posted by redimp

One can argue that but what actually is the K-mount? It is a bayonet fitting, nothing more and in that respect no different to bayonet fittings used by other manufacturers. Like all bayonets, increased functionality is achieved by adding contacts etc. Again, the K-mount is no less capable of this being done to than any other mount. The only time that a change might be necessay to any SLR mount is for different format cameras and not ever FF as that is what the K is buildt for. it just seems like a nonsense to change it; absolutely no realistic reason to do so and plenty of reasons not to; unless somebody can tell me otherwise.

The flange distance is too deep to make a thin mirrorless camera that directly accepts legacy Pentax lenses. Hence the K-01 was a thick mirrorless camera and, though quite capable as an image generator, was universally panned for its form, its radical aesthetic design and for its retention of the "ancient" legacy mount.

Quite a few posters here (and reviewers in that community) have written off Pentax as hopelessly wedded to outmoded tchnology (the 45.46mm K-mount flange distance), preventing themselves from becoming all modern and hip, unable to make a sleek, skiinny shiny, hipster camera that's cool to carry.

Of course if you actually put a lens on one of those hipster cameras it isn't so sleek and skinny any more.

Those posters and reviewers see no problem with Ricoh shipping oodles of capital down to Pentax (in the midst of a global corporate restructuring) to design a completely new mount, cameras, and lenses to fit - at the same time as they design a full range of the best APSc K-mount cameras AND a full complement of FF K-mount cameras and lenses AND extend the 645D.

But they hate the Q mirrorless and its compact sensor even if it is a hit in the home market and a quite capable ILC in its own right.

We don't ask much, do we.

NitroDC · 07-02-2013, 03:14 PM

I shoot Pentax, I don't shoot Ricoh...

mecrox · 07-02-2013, 03:15 PM - **2 Likes**

128 posts already. Amazing really. If there was ever an Olympic event for paranoiacs - running the 800 metres backwards, for fear of being followed - this place would take Gold every time

I'm going with the reasons Ricoh have given. The compact/DSLR split is sensible and no surprise anyway. And the fact is that nothing lasts forever. Pentax may not make it to 2025, but then neither may Ricoh, Fuji, Olympus, Tamron, Panasonic cameras and plenty of others. If they don't (I hope they all do) then it will have nothing to do with changing a nameplate on someone's door in 2013.

Uluru · 07-02-2013, 03:48 PM - **1 Like**

Geez, this thread is stellar example of ample wit in the Pentax user kingdom. It reminds me of this sketch below (and as a second thought, we must also organise "Pentax Twit of The Year" competition):

You Tube

Parallax · 07-02-2013, 03:52 PM

Originally posted by NitroDC

I shoot Pentax, I don't shoot Ricoh...

Right; and I drive a Dodge, not a Chrysler.

bossa · 07-02-2013, 04:06 PM

If Ricoh are limiting themselves to compacts and Pentax to DSLRs and ILC's then how are Pentax supposed to develop their market? Most people would probably stick to their brand when transitioning wouldn't they? The idea that the name on the camera is what actually makes it a Pentax is absurd because the name is something associated with a philosophy, a heritage and a particular attitude to developing products. If Nikon started putting "Pentax" on their cameras would that actually make them Pentax?

A positive aspect to this rationalization of product streams could well be that Pentax gets to spend more resources and time working on a great DSLR system.

07-02-2013, 02:10 PM	#123
Cannikin Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: SW Washington Posts: 833	I can't help but suspect that many of the people acting up over this corporate, not product, name change (threatening to leave, really?) are some of the same people who derisively dismiss Canon/Nikon users as people buying solely for a brand name... Last edited by Cannikin; 07-02-2013 at 02:16 PM.

07-02-2013, 03:10 PM	#130
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by redimp One can argue that but what actually is the K-mount? It is a bayonet fitting, nothing more and in that respect no different to bayonet fittings used by other manufacturers. Like all bayonets, increased functionality is achieved by adding contacts etc. Again, the K-mount is no less capable of this being done to than any other mount. The only time that a change might be necessay to any SLR mount is for different format cameras and not ever FF as that is what the K is buildt for. it just seems like a nonsense to change it; absolutely no realistic reason to do so and plenty of reasons not to; unless somebody can tell me otherwise. The flange distance is too deep to make a thin mirrorless camera that directly accepts legacy Pentax lenses. Hence the K-01 was a thick mirrorless camera and, though quite capable as an image generator, was universally panned for its form, its radical aesthetic design and for its retention of the "ancient" legacy mount. Quite a few posters here (and reviewers in that community) have written off Pentax as hopelessly wedded to outmoded tchnology (the 45.46mm K-mount flange distance), preventing themselves from becoming all modern and hip, unable to make a sleek, skiinny shiny, hipster camera that's cool to carry. Of course if you actually put a lens on one of those hipster cameras it isn't so sleek and skinny any more. Those posters and reviewers see no problem with Ricoh shipping oodles of capital down to Pentax (in the midst of a global corporate restructuring) to design a completely new mount, cameras, and lenses to fit - at the same time as they design a full range of the best APSc K-mount cameras AND a full complement of FF K-mount cameras and lenses AND extend the 645D. But they hate the Q mirrorless and its compact sensor even if it is a hit in the home market and a quite capable ILC in its own right. We don't ask much, do we. Last edited by monochrome; 07-02-2013 at 03:16 PM.

07-02-2013, 03:15 PM - 2 Likes	#132
mecrox Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Oxford, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,375	128 posts already. Amazing really. If there was ever an Olympic event for paranoiacs - running the 800 metres backwards, for fear of being followed - this place would take Gold every time I'm going with the reasons Ricoh have given. The compact/DSLR split is sensible and no surprise anyway. And the fact is that nothing lasts forever. Pentax may not make it to 2025, but then neither may Ricoh, Fuji, Olympus, Tamron, Panasonic cameras and plenty of others. If they don't (I hope they all do) then it will have nothing to do with changing a nameplate on someone's door in 2013. Last edited by mecrox; 07-02-2013 at 03:28 PM.

07-02-2013, 04:06 PM	#135
bossa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Adelaide Posts: 4,546	If Ricoh are limiting themselves to compacts and Pentax to DSLRs and ILC's then how are Pentax supposed to develop their market? Most people would probably stick to their brand when transitioning wouldn't they? The idea that the name on the camera is what actually makes it a Pentax is absurd because the name is something associated with a philosophy, a heritage and a particular attitude to developing products. If Nikon started putting "Pentax" on their cameras would that actually make them Pentax? A positive aspect to this rationalization of product streams could well be that Pentax gets to spend more resources and time working on a great DSLR system. Last edited by bossa; 07-02-2013 at 04:54 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ricoh promises some very high-end Ricoh products this year...	JohnBee	Pentax News and Rumors	33	06-28-2012 04:50 AM
For Sale - Sold: Ricoh 55mm f/1.2 (no Ricoh pin!), Voigtlander 40mm f/2 Ultron	feilb	Sold Items	4	11-22-2011 07:47 PM
Who has a camera with "Pentax Ricoh Imaging Company" on the bottom label?	Asahiflex	Pentax DSLR Discussion	2	10-19-2011 04:28 AM
RICOH Establishes PENTAX RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.	Adam	Homepage & Official Pentax News	20	10-13-2011 03:31 AM
Pentax ricoh imaging company, ltd	jeffkrol	Pentax News and Rumors	12	10-05-2011 10:50 AM

07-02-2013, 01:52 PM	#121
RKKS08 Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Frankfurt am Main Posts: 1,241	I haven't read every single posting in this thread, so this may have been posted before: As far as I know, the company name was never Pentax. This was just a trade mark. And you should not forget, Asahi itself was not always the owner of the name "Pentax". They bought in the early or mid fifties from an East German optical company. On German eBay, once or twice a year you can still find camera related optical stuff labeled "Pentax", manufactured in East Germany in 1950-1953.

07-02-2013, 02:03 PM	#122
redimp Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Lincoln Photos: Albums Posts: 106	Originally posted by monochrome ... - the K-mount. One can argue the relative value of a 40-ish year old technology... One can argue that but what actually is the K-mount? It is a bayonet fitting, nothing more and in that respect no different to bayonet fittings used by other manufacturers. Like all bayonets, increased functionality is achieved by adding contacts etc. Again, the K-mount is no less capable of this being done to than any other mount. The only time that a change might be necessay to any SLR mount is for different format cameras and not ever FF as that is what the K is buildt for. it just seems like a nonsense to change it; absolutely no realistic reason to do so and plenty of reasons not to; unless somebody can tell me otherwise.

07-02-2013, 02:12 PM	#124
RKKS08 Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Frankfurt am Main Posts: 1,241	Originally posted by redimp unless somebody can tell me otherwise Well, I cannot really tell you otherwise. But I know there are people who think the K mount may restrict the design of really fast lenses for some focal lengths. That is, if a DSRL FF body is combined with the Pentax shake reduction. They think this solution would need a slightly wider mount opening.

07-02-2013, 02:18 PM	#125
Uluru Banned Join Date: May 2010 Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,535	PRIC abbreviation of Pentax Ricoh Imaging Corporation never sounded too practical or flattering in English. Move to change it is welcome, especially in the world begging for smoother and easier communication. It is also easier from the administration point of view, doesn't complicate formalities around transfer of capital, tax, establishment of partnerships, unilateral brand message, etc.

07-02-2013, 02:23 PM	#126
Uluru Banned Join Date: May 2010 Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,535	Originally posted by RKKS08 Well, I cannot really tell you otherwise. But I know there are people who think the K mount may restrict the design of really fast lenses for some focal lengths. That is, if a DSRL FF body is combined with the Pentax shake reduction. They think this solution would need a slightly wider mount opening. With a current flange distance. But when you shorten it for a mirrorless product that has a sensor much closer to mount, no such problems. You can design all new lenses.

07-02-2013, 02:35 PM	#127
Racer X 69 Moderator Man With A Camera Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: The Great Pacific Northwet, in the Land Between Canada and Mexico Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,073	Originally posted by RKKS08 As far as I know, the company name was never Pentax. My K10 was produced by the Pentax Corporation.

07-02-2013, 02:47 PM	#128
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Indeed, there was a "Pentax Corporation" between 2002 and 2008.

07-02-2013, 03:08 PM	#129
Racer X 69 Moderator Man With A Camera Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: The Great Pacific Northwet, in the Land Between Canada and Mexico Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,073	Originally posted by Kunzite Indeed, there was a "Pentax Corporation" between 2002 and 2008. And a corporation is pretty much the same as a company.

07-02-2013, 03:14 PM	#131
NitroDC Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 342	I shoot Pentax, I don't shoot Ricoh...

07-02-2013, 03:52 PM	#134
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by NitroDC I shoot Pentax, I don't shoot Ricoh... Right; and I drive a Dodge, not a Chrysler.