[Poit]

I just love it when a 5 Post User comes on here and makes sweeping statements about Pentax failures without apparently having touched the products.

And I just love it when some self-styled 'authority' with 9000+ posts decrees that someone with 5 posts isn't entitled to an (entirely valid) opinion.

I usually scroll through your long-winded 'authoritative' speculations, but you assumed a new level of arrogance there that has made me quite angry. Is it any wonder that some people with 5 posts disappear forever?

Thankfully the hapless poster had the same view, and stated as much.

Get a life man.

[RobA_Oz]

At the height of their success, Pentax were only slightly ahead of the "bell curve" (I'm not 100% certain of what you mean by that, in this context, but I'm guessing you mean "having distinctive features") with rugged, reliable camera bodies that had good optics and a reasonable price. The SP-F was an early full-aperture metering body, and the ES likewise for electronic control. The M range explored size reduction as a distinguishing feature, but it followed the Olympus OM in that. Until the appearance of the LX, they didn't compete against the Nikon (and later Canon) flagships, although the K2DMD was popular with some professionals and advanced amateurs.

What's changed in the marketplace since then has been the notable decline in the number of SLR manufacturers and the growth of the "vanity" segment. To gain the growth needed for sustainability, Pentax has to neutralise the perceived important features of its competitors and add some more that distinguish it. Every step recently has been to address those issues, and the K-3 is, I believe, recognised as having done just that. The only indication of the "group think" referred to (aside from the fact that many people here exhibit a few, but not all, of the seven (?working from memory) warning signs, such as stereotyping of outsiders) that I see is the impression some might have that Ricoh are going to speed up their rate of intended growth of market share. Personally, I see steady progress with the Pentax range. Sony has been flailing around trying to grow by the sheer numbers of bodies and systems they are throwing out, but I regard that as a risky strategy, even if it has made some fans here (hardly a sign of extensive group think).

[goldenarrow]

I kind of liked what the 5-post guy had to say. Seemed reasonable and realistic to me, especially the part about inferior AF and such. I am sure Ricoh will be attacking problems as they see ways to exploit the weaknesses of competitors and fix some of their own over time.

[eyeswideshut]

SR would be pretty killer in an FF, wouldn't it?

Didn't Sony have that years ago in he Alpha 900 already?

[HawaiianOnline]

I really don't understand what you all are talking about. Does anyone realize that the reason that Leica came back was not because of the camera bodies (which were OK), but because of glass? If Pentax wants to gain market share, a full frame body might help, but having killer glass that is special in some way is key.

"Il nous faut de l'objectif, encore objectif, toujours l'objectif!" to paraphrase Danton...

And I just love it when some self-styled 'authority' with 9000+ posts decrees that someone with 5 posts isn't entitled to an (entirely valid) opinion.

I usually scroll through your long-winded 'authoritative' speculations, but you assumed a new level of arrogance there that has made me quite angry. Is it any wonder that some people with 5 posts disappear forever?

Thankfully the hapless poster had the same view, and stated as much.

Get a life man.

Ad hominems everywhere and on both sides...

[eyeswideshut]

"Il nous faut de l'objectif, encore objectif, toujours l'objectif!" to paraphrase Danton...

Peut-être. Mais un objectif sans appareil photo est comme un coureur sans jambes.

[goubejp]

Err...do you remember how Danton finished his life ?

[Jean Poitiers]

Peut-être. Mais un objectif sans appareil photo est comme un coureur sans jambes.

Excusez-moi ... all French language use is reserved to me here on PF since I am a native (now) ... PS: nice quotes ... Salut et bonnes fêtes, J

[eyeswideshut]

Excusez-moi ... all French language use is reserved to me here on PF since I am a native (now) ... PS: nice quotes ... Salut et bonnes fêtes, J

Ooops. Pardon my french

[monochrome]

And I just love it when some self-styled 'authority' with 9000+ posts decrees that someone with 5 posts isn't entitled to an (entirely valid) opinion.

I usually scroll through your long-winded 'authoritative' speculations, but you assumed a new level of arrogance there that has made me quite angry. Is it any wonder that some people with 5 posts disappear forever?

Thankfully the hapless poster had the same view, and stated as much.

Get a life man.

I concede the point the first line of my response was impolite and unfair.

[eyeswideshut]

Err...do you remember how Danton finished his life ?

Too mainstream for Robespierre :-(

[thibs]

Yes, but the issue is that when you own Canon/Nikon/Sony, you often have some glass that you would have to replace if you came over. This is the reason why it is often easier to stay with a brand than to move back and forth. It isn't like if you buy a Toyota pickup, you have to replace your cell phone, driving gloves, etc. .

Exactly, andthat's why Pentax needs a different proposal.
Nobody in their right mind would ditch either Nikon or Canon to get into Pentax if Pentax offers the same with a different sticker on the stuff.
e.g. I'm not sure they'll go for in lens IS, they'd rather stay wit IBIS IMO this is an important point although Pros will moan bcause theur VF isn't stabilized. This is just an example of the choices Pentax has to make (and they chose already for 645D platform).

[lytrytyr]

Pros will moan bcause theur VF isn't stabilized.

Presumably it wouldn't be too hard to have an option to stabilize Live View,
at the cost of increased battery drain.

[normhead]

I kind of liked what the 5-post guy had to say. Seemed reasonable and realistic to me, especially the part about inferior AF and such. I am sure Ricoh will be attacking problems as they see ways to exploit the weaknesses of competitors and fix some of their own over time.

Ok, this is what gets me, recently one of the review magazines posted their numbers, wherein the K-3 had faster AF than the Nikon D7100 and was very close to it in tracking. So, one has to ask, where is this coming from? Like , in what generation of cameras was Pentax AF inferior. In what price range is K-3 AF inferior to Canon or Nikon? Or is it at all? Ricoh/Pentax made a commitment to improving AF on Pentax systems and the first link in that was the K-30. We've now been the through the 3 years of constant AF improvement. On the forum, this has been analyzed to death. We've also seen studies where it was suggested that Pentax had a higher keeper rate than any other maker on stationary objects.

So, even when Pentax was the slowest, it was still better in some ways than it's competition. So the long time posters, with thousands of posts have been through all this. have seen the current numbers, and have been dealing with the "pentax needs to improve it's AF for years." The Nikon/Canon speed was paid for with less accuracy. Yet no one repeats over and over, "Nikon and Canon need to improve their focusing accuracy." So what long time Pentaxians see, in a criticism like "Pentax needs to improve it's AF and SDM" is Canon and Nikon marketing hype. And when someone with 5 posts comes on a dwells on those issues, we are suspicious, one because there are folks who make their living selling Canon and Nikon gear who come on and make exactly that type of post.

We also see someone that isn't familiar enough with Pentax to understand that every camera for 3 years now has had major improvements to it's AF system. And quite simply, those of us with the cameras don't know where we are. We know the camera is a lot better. But we aren't in a position to say where it is compared to Nikon and Canon, except for one test against the D7100 which was pretty much a draw.

But a lot of us, look at that line and see red. We don't know that it's true. I suppose it would be a reasonable assumption to assume the AF system needs work, if you're coming from the Canon or Nikon community and haven't really kept up with the times around Pentax land.

But coming in and repeating the old and being unaware of the process, can cause some of the old timers to feel a little frustration. This AF thing was marketing hype. People bought into for years. We have to inform every newbie that comes on the board. With the advent of the K-3, in APS-c, it's Canon and Nikon that have the work to do, if they intend to keep their lead in AF, because right now it's evaporated.

How good the K-3 AF is compared to FF systems, we're waiting to find out. SDM is a different issue. No one knows if SDM is worse than any other AF system at this point. We've been told that Pentax has the best reliability rate in the industry, with SDM rolled in, but no one has teased out the SDM numbers for us. No one has compared Pentax electric drive motors with anyone else's. As far as we know for sure, the only thing SDM needs is a better warranty and possibly a quicker turnaround time on repairs. That's what we know for sure. ANd see here's the thing, with Pentax being top of the heap, and SDM possibly being the worst, how good are the Pentax screw drives? So here's the thing, saying Pentax needs to fix SDM (which again has probably already been done, as most people who follow the forum already know, give Canon and Nikon a free pass. The overall reliability rate is less than Pentax's, so why aren't you saying, Nikon and Canon over all need to improve their reliability rates, even more than Pentax does.

And the answer is, unless you've been here for a while, you just don't understand that marketing for the most part hinges on lies of omission, and fanboys are fed by marketing. So if you repeat the hype, your number of posts will be noticed.. if you say something that you've discovered from your experience then everyone pays attention. no one cares, because you're doing way more than repeating the hype. You're adding real information.

Tell us what you know, not what you're read and you'll have instant credibility. Especially for small companies like Pentax, what you've read in Canikon land isn't the whole story. And we've heard it, every time someone indoctrinated in the Canoikon universe comes here and starts posting.

Everyone needs to work on their lens reliability, but Pentax leads the pack in that one. And with the new AF system in the K-3, we really don't know where we stand at the moment. We just know it's a lot better. Most of the people on the forum, who found Canikon AF to be superior, were people comparing Pentax's to Canons and Nikons that were 3-5 years newer, or cameras that cost 4 times what the Pentax cost. And most of us realize, a $1200 Pentax doesn't have to compete with $3000 to $7000 competitor. Those camera probably have AF systems that cost more than a whole Pentax k-30.

When you come to Pentax land, the first thing is the "what Pentax users know that the rest of the world doesn't, reality check". It's unavoidable.

[Pete_the_Irish_Guy]

But lets say that they come out with a D800 camera, but 500 dollars cheaper (not likely, but lets go with it). There has to be some killer feature or glass that makes folks decide to come over to Pentax. Maybe that could be in body stabilization. Maybe they could release a 50mm f1.2 auto focus lens. I just don't buy that small size is the killer feature that professional photographers want, even though it is the thing that Pentax has flogged for years on end.

It's a tough market. Canon/Nikon have well filled in line ups that have been fleshed out over the years.

I think pentax does have a competitor for the D800e, it's called the 645D. IMO I think if pentax could come out with a successor with minimal updates (figure a shutter that lasts 100,000 clicks instead of 50k being high on the list) and sell it for a competitive 4-5 grand -and it needs to be that low to compete with the D800/D800e- they could make much more in the development of glass, something Pentax is excellent at. Skip full frame completely and give me an affordable successor to the 645D and I'll sell my canon kit and motorcycle to afford it. Priced over 5 grand and it makes more sense to go with the much more versatile D800.