[monochrome]

But FF isn't only about a camera body, but a long term commitment to a format. That is a tremendous step. You need a dependable and competitive source of sensors, a complete lens line-up, preferably a camera line-up as well, and a competitive update path for the cameras, and lastly and most importantly, you need customers.

Absolutely - and earlier on the thread I commented that Ricoh would need to be prepared to LOSE MONEY in DigiCams for many quarters (actually years) building a presence in the FF market. My statement is that it isn't whether Ricoh will make the choice to do it, but only when. And I suggested they would start thier investment when the other companies are pulling back, during the next global recession.

I cannot imagine another scenario wherein Ricoh can achieve the stated goal to occupy the "room for a third camera company" space over the intermediate term.

[Aristophanes]

The 135 format film market has gone to APS

The 135 format first went to small sensor digicams for almost a decade, then to DSLR's at APS-C for over 95% of the market, and now is largely a smartphone market with a receding dedicated smaller sensor digicam market.

135 is now a tiny, tiny fraction of its dominance as a "format". APS-C is by far the dominant large sensor with m43 next. FF follows and the media format sensors are far, far behind. Hard to place the CX/1" sensors as I'd say they are not large, so have redefined what it means to be a small sensor camera.

[Clavius]

Absolutely - and earlier on the thread I commented that Ricoh would need to be prepared to LOSE MONEY in DigiCams for many quarters (actually years) building a presence in the FF market.

In their latest review they were already disappointed that Pentax didn't meet the expected profit levels. So I doubt they are even slightly prepared to lose money on this.

[Kunzite]

No, they weren't; they didn't say what you claim. Hoya did, some time ago - but not Ricoh.

I don't think losing money for years would be necessary, by the way. Pentax is quite good at working with smaller volumes.

[Uluru]

Absolutely - and earlier on the thread I commented that Ricoh would need to be prepared to LOSE MONEY in DigiCams for many quarters (actually years) building a presence in the FF market. My statement is that it isn't whether Ricoh will make the choice to do it, but only when. And I suggested they would start thier investment when the other companies are pulling back, during the next global recession.
I cannot imagine another scenario wherein Ricoh can achieve the stated goal to occupy the "room for a third camera company" space over the intermediate term.

Problems are only a matter of perspective.

Do they lose money on GR?
There are so many ways FF can be explored that our gloomy prophecies mean in fact nothing.
I think the basic problem is our way of looking at things. I'm saying this by observing the GR, and the latest K50 and K500, and how they've been designed. Then MX-1 — by using a third party supplier.
Well, boys, not a single soul here ever predicted these products will be delivered in that fashion, and that lineup will be economised in such a way. Then the GR — they can't make enough of them.

FF problem isn't Pentax's problem — it's is ours.

[Clavius]

No, they weren't; they didn't say what you claim. Hoya did, some time ago - but not Ricoh.

Why on earth would Hoya comment on Pentax not living up to PRIC's expected profit?! Profits were up, but not as far up as they expected. (link) Whatever the interpretation, it clearly shows they're not planning on giving anything away at a loss, like it was suggested earlier in this thread.

FF problem isn't Pentax's problem — it's is ours.

This is so very true! And for any of us that really wants/needs FF it's also not a problem. It's only a problem for the people that want it, but only under certain very specific conditions and almost for free.

[Kunzite]

What part of "some time ago" you did not understand? Obviously, Hoya said that about Pentax Imaging Business, then a Hoya division.
I see nothing in that document which says Ricoh "were already disappointed that Pentax didn't meet the expected profit levels".
OTOH, it should be obvious they would want to make a profit, thus I don't buy the idea of bleeding red for years, just to give us FF. A loss-leader product line is not impossible, but only if they foresee significant benefits down the road.

[monochrome]

In their latest review they were already disappointed that Pentax didn't meet the expected profit levels. So I doubt they are even slightly prepared to lose money on this.

That's just so wrong it can't even be taken with a grain of salt.

[Rondec]

Absolutely - and earlier on the thread I commented that Ricoh would need to be prepared to LOSE MONEY in DigiCams for many quarters (actually years) building a presence in the FF market. My statement is that it isn't whether Ricoh will make the choice to do it, but only when. And I suggested they would start thier investment when the other companies are pulling back, during the next global recession.

I cannot imagine another scenario wherein Ricoh can achieve the stated goal to occupy the "room for a third camera company" space over the intermediate term.

It feels to me like Canon and Nikon are both locked into their current full frame camera bodies for the next two to three years. This is the time where Pentax/Ricoh have the ability to target certain areas of that market that they feel are not being exploited fully. Certainly they have a lot more leeway than their competitors to pick features, body size and bring out a camera that is somewhere between a D600 and D800 that doesn't skimp on features, but is also a good value. Not sure if it will happen, but it could...

[reeftool]

Give me a ring when you see an FA 31mm at pre-hike prices.

A big AMEN! I'm not interested in a bundle deal. I'm quite happy with my K5 for now.

Come on Pentax, throw your long time loyal customers a deal on some lenses.

[monochrome]

Certainly they have a lot more leeway than their competitors to pick features, body size and bring out a camera that is somewhere between a D600 and D800 that doesn't skimp on features, but is also a good value. Not sure if it will happen, but it could...

Well wouldn't that be . . . Interesting!~

[woodywesty]

A big AMEN! I'm not interested in a bundle deal. I'm quite happy with my K5 for now.

Come on Pentax, throw your long time loyal customers a deal on some lenses.

YES!! come on Pentax... give us dome lens deals AND some new glass!

[awo425]

These pricing trends are good for us but I feel not so good for Pentax. Models are only lasting <1 year before heavy discounting. Nikon and Canon models original pricing seem to last longer so again not a good profit trend. For example, Canon 7D is over 3 years old; how many Pentax models last that long?

Dale

Pentax marketing works differently, for example the latest K5IIs is never ending slow moving upgrade to K7, that was introduced like 4 years ago. I know quite a few people who bought K7, K5 and K5IIs cameras upgrading pretty much every year and a half. Each time Pentax pocketed some profit.

[Docrwm]

Pentax marketing works differently, for example the latest K5IIs is never ending slow moving upgrade to K7, that was introduced like 4 years ago. I know quite a few people who bought K7, K5 and K5IIs cameras upgrading pretty much every year and a half. Each time Pentax pocketed some profit.

It made it much easier that each used the same Grip and other accessories too.