[JimmyDranox]

Class A and normhead are not the only who heard those rumors. Me too. And more, there was another rumor, when Ricoh purchase Pentax, that they will hire back those engineers.

On another point of view, to design a modern lens, even with a lot of optical simulation programs, it is not a simple job to do, and not for every engineer. Not at all. And it is not only about the cost of a lens. Very good optical engineers a rarer than diamonds.

[Kunzite]

I'm sorry, that doesn't classify as a source. I don't remember hearing anything like that, and I just can't easily accept and speculate on a vague interpretation from memories dating back in 2010. So I'd like to know the details - who said it, is the source reliable, what he actually said (link to the obscure 2010 article, if available), if it's based on an automated translation or not...
You know the telephone game, when cumulative errors would quickly make the message being transmitted completely different than the original.

Ricoh hiring "back" engineers - something I've heard, it originated from Pentax Ricoh Imaging U.K. - is unrelated and can't be used to validate the rumor being discussed.

[JimmyDranox]

Hiring engineers can be unrelated. Hiring ''back'', is clearly related. To look for a source 3 years old? I think you want too much.

[Class A]

Class A and normhead are not the only who heard those rumors.

My post was 100% sarcasm.

I've read a lot of speculation, all unsubstantiated.

[Kunzite]

Hiring engineers can be unrelated. Hiring ''back'', is clearly related. To look for a source 3 years old? I think you want too much.

Please be aware I'm not disputing the fact that Hoya fired people; this discussion it's about the reason they did it - stated to be the refusal to design a certain kind of products. This sounds too much as wild speculation based on conjecture, maybe a word or two stripped out of their context; and to be crystal clear, it's the source - not the three of you.

I know it's much to ask, but this shows something: that you're relying on 3 years-old memories, and can't actually double-check them against the source. Which means I can't do it either, so I can't form an opinion about the source's validity (though Monochrome called it an "obscure internet rumor article" - great for confidence building).

[monochrome]

know it's much to ask, but this shows something: that you're relying on 3 years-old memories,

Well, my three-year-old memory tells me that the young nephew of the President of Hoya, who was briefly assigned to wring some profit out of Pentax before selling it off (before he was withdrawn from that assignment), liked the idea of climbing Himalayan mountains, so he chose K-7 as the moniker for the next new body. Same dude, thinking to compete with Canon and Nikon, noticed the DPR/DXO problem - that Pentax never wins. I read on this very Forum he asked Pentax to design cameras and lenses to win tests and many engineers refused. He then supposedly wanted to just bite the bullet and close Pentax altogether.

IIRC the story correctly, one of those engineers has had a famed and storied career with Pentax and is responible for many of the current Limited lenses of the 24x36 image circle variety. Said optical engineer was reportedly allowed to retire gracefully, given that to actually terminate his employment would dishonor him and his contribution to Pentax over these many years, which was never Hoya's intent, but recognized that at the then-current sales volume Hoya could not continue to properly honor his skill by offering such a fine engineer enough salary and opportunities to design new groundbreaking stellar lenses.

So you see, all actions were taken with the personhood of the engineer in the forefront of the Hoya mind. No one was fired at all. It wan't his failure - it was Pentax's shameful failure to maintain enough business to keep him (which is actually sort of true).

These comments were part and parcel of the Ricoh acquisition gossip - but they were probably just that, gossip.

That's my memory. That's a paraphrase of what I wrote. I'm simply not going to take the time to search through 8,961 posts to find the orginal and the links. It probably isn't completely accurate - but it probably is close to part of the truth.

Add that to what James Malcolm told us about Pentax engineers pushing back against Ricoh's attempt to change their engineering philosophy and I'd say there is at least a grain of accuracy in the basic concept, too.

And just becasue my memory is of something I wrote three years ago, don't assume you should doubt it. Just last night I recalled an event that occured 52 years ago. I described it to a person who had recorded that event in her journal (we've all kept journals) - and my description was absolutely perfectly as the event occured.

[Franc]

that same engineer is now working for Tamron, hopefully we get those lenses as well

[ChristianRock]

Does anyone know what lenses he might have been involved in designing?

[kenyee]

that same engineer is now working for Tamron, hopefully we get those lenses as well

I thought Tamron was no longer making Pentax lenses since they started making their ultrasonic motors or vibration control?

[Zygonyx]

Unfortunate, but right as far as i know...

[Kunzite]

monochrome:
Trust, but verify It's amazing how many inconsistencies/misunderstandings and new "obvious" information one can find this way.

Please don't take it as if I'm doubting you; that's definitely not the case. With the scarcity of information being presented and the apparently low level of confidence in it (the "obscure" thing), what else could I do but ask for more information?
You're now confident in what you're saying, and wrote quite a few details - for which I'm thankful. I see you're not confirming the idea that Hoya fired those engineers because they refused to make Canikon-like lenses but instead you're closer to my understanding of what probably happened.
Yes, I remember the discussions and speculation around Jun Hirakawa's retirement; on the other forum people couldn't agree even about his age.

L.E. OK, I think I've figured it out - it's speculation around Jun Hirakawa's technical report about the 43 amd 77mm Limiteds.

[lytrytyr]

Most people have flat displays and display all images at more or less the same size, regardless of AOV.

Not necessarily.

Look at what @Panoguy does, or how you view Theta images.
Those techniques would work fine with output from a spherical sensor.

[JimmyDranox]

Kunzite, in this world, there are not many 100% reliable sources, on net or elsewhere. So everything, including what I know, is not 100% proof.

That's why I don't participate in long debates. I express my opinion once, and that's all.

[northcoastgreg]

That's what puzzles me too...and do the lenses that were released under Hoya's reign have better DXO test charts than previous lenses? I didn't get the impression they were better than the 31Ltd which is (probably?) the sharpest FA lens.

How lenses score on DXO tests is not really the point at issue. The point was whether scoring high on tests should have be a particularly high priority. Jun Hirakawa argued, essentially, that lenses should be designed primarily to achieve aesthetic, rather than "numerical" test, goals. But this does not mean that a lens designed to produce images that look particularly well to human perception can't also do well on numerical tests. Just as it would be a mistake to assume that there exists a 100% correlation between how well a lens performs and the aesthetic qualities of the images it produces, it would also be a mistake to assume that there's no correlation at all between tests and aesthetic perception. The point is that tests should never be the final arbiter of the performance of a lens, when aesthetic goals, as evaluated by human perception, are primary. The DA* 55 f1.4 was Jun Hirakawa's last Pentax designed lens. Last I checked, that was the highest scoring Pentax lens over at DxO. But Hirakawa didn't design the lens to score high at DxO. That's just something that happened adventiously; it's just sort of the way things fell out. Hirakawa also designed the DA 10-17. That lens scores poorly on numerical tests. Photozone, shocked at its uninspiring scores, gave it only two stars (out of five). But Photozone's review completely misses the point of the lens. Whatever it's optical defects, the DA 10-17 is capable of producing images that look stunning to human perception. And since, last I checked, photography is an aesthetic pursuit where the photographer tries to make images for the purpose of looking at them, how images taken with a specific lens look to human perception has to be more important than how that same lens does on numerical tests.

[Franc]

And since, last I checked, photography is an aesthetic pursuit where the photographer tries to make images for the purpose of looking at them, how images taken with a specific lens look to human perception has to be more important than how that same lens does on numerical tests.

couldn't agree more!