Originally posted by Aristophanes ... [snip] ...
Cameras are a consumer item with only brand loyalty and lens investments. Ricoh's camera biz is an intensely Japanese production effort. Hard to say what they think of the rest of the world.
Yes, I've always thought that the Japan angle was the key to what goes on with Ricoh and photography. It doesn't seem to be a multinational effort in the way that, say, Canon and Nikon are (for example, the majority of Nikon's employees are not Japanese nationals and they do not live in Japan). if Ricoh ever announced some bold new hires in their photography marketing and sales divisions then we'd know that their focus is changing but until then, not really. The purchase of Pentax has enabled Ricoh to transform their camera operations in a way that could have been much harder otherwise, so in that regard the purchase price of Pentax looks as if it may have been an absolute bargain and has started to pay off (in terms of visibility and public perception, at least) pretty darn quickly. In just over two years, Ricoh have gone from a moribund and barely visible GXR, which was hardly obtainable in many parts of the world, to headline-makers like the GR, the K3 and the 645z. If you want to find them online at least, "Ricoh" far more than "Pentax" is the search term which will get you there. It was a canny deal, at least looking in from the outside which is all we can do. We'll never know how the financial figures add up.
Unlike many perhaps, I don't think the next big hurdle is going to be APS-C versus FF but OVF versus EVF and all that goes with it. The industry is driven by technology and as more and more aspects of a camera can be put into the sensor and a circuit board with its controller rather than bolted on and connected Heath Robinson style, so the economic/production advantages of pursuing that route will increase. It will be interesting to see whether Ricoh see a core role for Pentax in that transition or whether Pentax was the means by which Ricoh got to it. I'm not suggesting that's about to happen next week but it will happen to the industry eventually. APS-C versus FF is simply a change of format, one that can even use nearly the same body shell and the same production methods. But OVF versus EVF and camera-on-a-chip changes the whole way something is designed and fabricated. Maybe those idle production lines at Nikon and co referred to in another post are about as useful today as rusting old farm machinery in a yard.
I saw a post on another forum pointing out that Sony's imaging operations - including video, conferencing stuff and the like as well as conventional cameras - now turn over more $$$ than do Nikon's. Nikon has no presence at all in stand-alone video, I think (could be wrong). The industry is likely not what we all think it is anyway. We only look at still cameras. But a chunk of the tech in them and the R&D behind it wouldn't be possible without all the other things.