[Kunzite]

Strange, then - maybe he listened to too much MILC hype? Either that, or he was actually talking about a distant, uncertain future that should not influence our purchase decisions.

[lytrytyr]

despite some awkward English

No kidding.

For example, a potential buyer of the DA 20-40
might be discouraged to see it described as having "a soft rendering effect",
but they do preface that by saying that "it features sharp, detailed imaging".

[monochrome]

Impressive engineering if the article is correct - and a compelling argument for simplified manufacturing processes.

[Uluru]

You're guessing, Uluru, but I think you're guessing accurately.

Ricoh look to be treading warily in an uncertain world, making incremental but real improvements.
.

It is from the Ricoh's investor presentation, April this year.
A long presentation, that shows what is their future aim (albeit very vague in terms of real world products and services).
But from the vague picture it can be drawn that Ricoh is aiming wearables definitely, including future watches (stated in the presentation), innovative cameras, and even some type of integrated software services.

---

Last edited by Uluru; 05-27-2014 at 03:17 PM.

[Clavius]

Olympus is in deep trouble. Sony is bleeding money. Fuji admits to losses in their camera sales.

And the other brands, including the one we cherish, are doing absotely splendid then? They're all in trouble. Some are just putting in more effort at recovery.

Sales are how we determine success.

Go ahead, but speak for yourself. All camera brands are in the water. None of them are safe yet. Far from it. So looking at sales is a poor indicator, in my honest opinion. Such figures can be skewed by all kinds of things. I'm putting my money on the ones that are working their hardest and smartest to keep afloat and to get someplace dry.

Ricoph takes risks. They took one buying Pentax when the entire industry knows that DSLRs are a mature, perhaps low- to no-growth tech.

The copying/printing market is on its way down. Cameras may be changing (I prefer "evolving") but the hardcopy market is disappearing. They're exploring new markets in their own conservative slow way. Buying a past-glory-forgotten-brand for little,and trying to polish it up is about as risky as buying an old Super Takumar for $5 at a garage sale. You can't really go wrong there.

The lack of consistent vision by the Japanese makers is unbelievable right now. They've been totally sideswiped by wi-fi, for example. it's taken 2 products cycles too long for wi-fi to get into $1,000 cameras. Ridiculous.

Spot on. My wife has this €50,- 10x zoom (? maybe more?) Samsung point and shoot with android and wifi. She snaps, does some processing (if she wants) and shares without even thinking. Just a one time setup.

There's more examples like that. My quest for the ultimate photo printing resolution has been a long and hard one. When people come into my house they see a lot of big very high resolution prints on plexi and aluminum. It stuns them how clear and sharp they are, they stand still to look at the tiny details. It takes time to take in a large print with such details. Why do I have to contact very specilistic companies, far away abroad, to print my high resolution pictures from my high resolution camera in a print quality that almost matches that resolution? And why does it cost half a kidney per print? With all Canon's printing history and experience, why is there no printer for the photo enthusiast yet? The new Pentax boss is excused because of the little time since the takeover of course.

[gazonk]

the hardcopy market is disappearing.

Probably, but very s l o w l y (I still get mails with signatures saying that in order to save the environment I shouldn't make hardcopies of my mails ), so they still have a lot of time.

[Iberia]

I think a lot of the mirrorless cameras suffer from the small-body-but-big-lens syndrome when asked to do serious work.

I feel the same about the k-5 with the 50-135 and I have small hands.

R

---

Last edited by Iberia; 05-28-2014 at 03:11 AM. Reason: typos

[Zygonyx]

Take a K-5 silver 1st generation, or a K-3

[Uluru]

PentaxIsDoomed.
JapanIsDoomed.
SonyIsDoomed.
FujifilmIsDoomed.
OlympusIsDoomed.
NikonIsDoomed.
CanonIsDoomed.
and ..tadaa! CasioIsDoomed!
EuropeIsDomed.
LeicaIsDoomed.
HasselbladIsDoomed.
PhaseOneIsDoomed.
and .. tadaa! LomoIsDoomed!
AppleIsDoomed
AmericaIsDoomed
AntartcticaAfricaAustraliaDefinitelyDoomed
WholeEarthIsDoomed
SolarSystemIsDoomed
MilkyWayIsDoomed
ProtonsAreDoomed
NeutronsAreDoomed
and even
DoomIsDoomed

[Iberia]

I use the k-5 with the vertical hand-grip but the handling improvement doesn't make up for the added weight disadvantage…

Hand-grip height is in my view one of the k-5's most notable shortcomings; I haven't tried the k-3 yet but considering the dimensions I presume that it can only be marginally better in this respect.

R

[mecrox]

PentaxIsDoomed.
JapanIsDoomed.
SonyIsDoomed.
FujifilmIsDoomed.
OlympusIsDoomed.
NikonIsDoomed.
CanonIsDoomed.
and ..tadaa! CasioIsDoomed!
EuropeIsDomed.
LeicaIsDoomed.
HasselbladIsDoomed.
PhaseOneIsDoomed.
and .. tadaa! LomoIsDoomed!

Lol, when such a mood strikes may I suggest Sharp's Doom Bar bitter, their "flagship ale"?

[Na Horuk]

might be discouraged to see it described as having "a soft rendering effect", but they do preface that by saying that "it features sharp, detailed imaging".

yeah, but "soft" didn't use to be such a curse word! Soft used to mean a type of rendering - gentle bokeh, gradual contrasts. It had little to do with detail and sharpness. These day, "sharpness" is being hailed as the only important characteristic of a lens, and the word "soft" is being used to say that a lens is not sharp, therefore bad.

[Clavius]

PentaxIsDoomed.
JapanIsDoomed.
SonyIsDoomed.
FujifilmIsDoomed.
OlympusIsDoomed.
NikonIsDoomed.
CanonIsDoomed.
and ..tadaa! CasioIsDoomed!
EuropeIsDomed.
LeicaIsDoomed.
HasselbladIsDoomed.
PhaseOneIsDoomed.
and .. tadaa! LomoIsDoomed!
AppleIsDoomed
AmericaIsDoomed
AntartcticaAfricaAustraliaDefinitelyDoomed
WholeEarthIsDoomed
SolarSystemIsDoomed
MilkyWayIsDoomed
ProtonsAreDoomed
NeutronsAreDoomed
and even
DoomIsDoomed

LOL! Without making this political. One of listed entries is very positive.

Your point is valid. If you look far enough into the future everything is bound to end. Living in the now is always the fix.

[derekkite]

You rant correctly. Fuji, Sony and Olympus have all found their own ways of standing out and they do that well. Ricoh however, is a very conservative company that doesn't like taking risks. They're still stuck on trying to make gear that everybody like, compromising to much to really shine in any area.

Except that none of them offer anything that does what I need it to do. Maybe Sony, but their mounts change all the time; I have no desire to try to keep track of them.

Ricoh's core business is to be the cheapest per page printer/copier. The K-3 is innovative in it's cost. Same with the K50. Same with the 645Z. Solid performing products at a compelling price point. The whole impetus behind mirrorless is to cut production costs, but the problem has been and still is providing a suitable product with mirrorless that satisfies specific market segments. I suspect that will change in time, but for my purposes I would have to spend considerably more than I spent on the K-3 to get equivalent performance with a mirrorless.

Ultimately everyone is desperately fighting over the luxury compact market, which are essentially Iphones with bigger sensors. That is the core of the camera market, where the bulk of purchases are. And also the most vulnerable to the squeeze.

[Aristophanes]

If you look far enough into the future everything is bound to end. Living in the now is always the fix

Entropy photography.