[Fontan]

D'oh! I was thinking 645. Why I said 6x7 is likely a simple brain fart exacerbated by single malt.

They have made mock ups of 6x7D. It is just that nobody have seen them.

[Tanzer]

I am surprised there has not been more talk in regards to the lack of Ricoh branding under the LCD.

Well, we haven't seen actual production units yet. We might be surprised, like what happened with the K-3.

[JPT]

Here is a report from one of the talk show events in Japan.

http://m.dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20140421_645238.html

I don't have time to look at the text right now. Use your language mangler of choice!

[Uluru]

Well, we haven't seen actual production units yet. We might be surprised, like what happened with the K-3.

It was indeed clumsiness on Ricoh's side. Albeit some of us have resorted to explanations that may justify such a move, but fundamentally it did not make any sense.
To users of Pentax cameras, Ricoh's name means nothing practical or emotional to their use of camera. It is superfluous.
And it seems they have learned the lesson and in the presentation of the 645Z emphasised Pentax name and badge to the max.
See this image below ...

---

Last edited by Uluru; 04-20-2014 at 08:58 PM.

[Kunzite]

I am surprised there has not been more talk in regards to the lack of Ricoh branding under the LCD. I have two theories why it may have been left off:
1. Too many complaints about the Ricoh name on the K3.
2. Pentax's long and storied history with MF warrants a product with only Pentax branding.

3. Due to the screen being articulated, there wasn't enough room for the inscription.
Possibly a combination of factors.

[JPT]

I can understand why they would want to associate their cameras with the Ricoh name. I've worked for a company that faced the same issue. If you spend significant amounts of money promoting one brand, but you have other brands which don't receive any benefit from the advertising spend, it is essentially inefficient. Think about all the sponsorship and advertising that is done in Ricoh's name. They want Pentax to benefit from that.

Perhaps they didn't expect the amount of antagonism they would get from the Pentaxians. It will be interesting to see whether the next K-mount camera has Ricoh on the back.

[Uluru]

3. Due to the screen being articulated, there wasn't enough room for the inscription.
Possibly a combination of factors.

Yes. Quite right ...



---------- Post added 04-21-2014 at 07:04 PM ----------

The very fact that since the official merger they have issued three types of Pentax cameras, with all three having different inscriptions at the back: first Pentax, then Ricoh, then nothing, suggests they have indeed had some issues.
Or we may think it was all just a "well-defined strategy"

---

Last edited by Uluru; 04-21-2014 at 02:07 AM.

[Kunzite]

It's medium format, so they would only accept medium-sized letters! Not the compact sized letters like on the MX-1!

I'm not worrying about them being apparently undecided whether to write Ricoh or not under the back LCD. The kind of products they're making, that's much, much more important - and they did well with that.

[JPT]

Looking at the link I pasted above, it shows a slide with the new lens, the 28-45mm f4.5. I think this is what will be announced on Thursday.

[Uluru]

Looking at the link I pasted above, it shows a slide with the new lens, the 28-45mm f4.5. I think this is what will be announced on Thursday.

Oh no, not again.
They could not announce it together with the Z a week ago, no? But they *had* to wait two extra weeks?
Like the 645 Z is already available now, and not in late summer (another 4 months of wait).
Spreading too little butter onto too much bread.

I suggest them to postpone the announcement of the cap for that lens another 4 weeks. Then a car battery charger for the Z some 6 week later. Then something else — say a brand new purse for the Z — a week before the camera is actually available.

Brilliant.

[Zygonyx]

+1 with kunzite & uluru : not enough space to write anything

[monochrome]

They could not announce it together with the Z a week ago, no? But they *had* to wait two extra weeks?

Given the half-life of an announcement blurb on a web magazine and Google search tactics a marketer wants to make a succession of small, incremental announcements over time to build more 645z mentions.

[Kunzite]

As for announcing it 2.5 months* before its market availability, I would do the same. Why? Because the price is so shockingly low, that people would gladly wait for it instead of going for the much more expensive competition.

* end of June

[lukulele]

And that mount was retired some time ago, wasn't it?

Anyway, can we move on, accept that PentaxIsDoomed if they're making a K-mount K-mount camera or a 645 mount 645 camera instead of some strange combination, and go back to the 645Z?

Accepted.

[Tanzer]

It was indeed clumsiness on Ricoh's side. Albeit some of us have resorted to explanations that may justify such a move, but fundamentally it did not make any sense.
To users of Pentax cameras, Ricoh's name means nothing practical or emotional to their use of camera. It is superfluous.
And it seems they have learned the lesson and in the presentation of the 645Z emphasised Pentax name and badge to the max.
See this image below ...

But what is on the back of the shirt?