[PentaxScott]

I think I'd like to see a mid level DSLR that offers something truly different from both the competition in its class and the flagship model. This would mean thinking outside the box -- something that Pentax should be able to do. Why not use existing FF sensor technology and cut it in half (actually a little more) to give us the incredible high ISO performance of the D3/D4 Nikon FF bodies in an APSC. The benefits would be many, I would think. . .

1. More utility for existing "kit lenses". With the lower MP sensors (6-8MP) the lower res lenses would be less challenged, and their slower aperture ranges would be more than compensated for with better IQ at higher ISO -- making fully automated exposure in challenging conditions much easier to achieve with the kit class glass. I use my K-5 IIs and K-3 with a DA 18-250 in Av priority with Auto ISO set to 100-12800 as a family gathering super zoom P&S with great results for the small prints or screen viewing. With another couple of stops higher ISO to work with, this would only become easier. I find this much superior to a super zoom bridge camera that tops out at ISO 800 or 1600 for acceptable IQ.

2. Smaller files. As sensor MP increased, my computer has become increasingly less viable to handle processing, and I've finally had to pop for a new faster CPU to handle the larger files adequately. Most new entry level digital photographers would probably welcome a camera that did not require a computer upgrade in addition to the cost of the camera/lenses to pursue their hobby. There would also be gains in speed -- possibly faster FPS, longer strings using the same buffer memory, faster write times with existing hardware, etc. . .

3. This would also offer the experienced photographer an alternative body that has a truly different character. I truly love the high res and high ISO capabilities of the K-5 and K-3, but I'd also love to have even higher ISO capability, and would gladly trade some of the resolution to get it. Current entry level models offer essentially the same IQ and ISO potential in a lower spec body feature wise. I've had no desire to buy a K30 or K50 in addition to my K-5 and K-3, as they have essentially the same (or a little less) IQ potential, but with an abbreviated feature set, but I'd buy a k60 that allowed me to shoot at two or three stops faster with comparable noise levels -- really a no-brainer.

Pentax seems to be satisfied with a limited number of models, why not make them truly different from each other, with different strengths. The market for DSLRs is shrinking, why not try something new -- start a high ISO race now that the MP race seems to be slowing down. I'd love to see a 6-8 MP APS-C DSLR body that I could shoot at ISO 512000. I'd also add the ultra low Ev rated AF sensor BTW to make it a true low light specialty camera. . .

Scott

I can both agree and disagree with these ideas. Personally, I dont see why we would ever want to go back to a sub-10 MP sensor in a DSLR...especially when the sensor technology has come such a long way since the days of the K-10/100. However, I can understand the need for smaller files, especially in situations where higher resolution isnt going to be critical. For me personally, I always shoot RAW (or RAW + JPEG in situations like family gatherings, where I can plug the SD card into a tablet/laptop and show the JPEGs to family members). While there would still be the limitations imposed of a denser pixeled sensor (if that makes sense) I think the best solution would be for Pentax to start offering more than one size option for RAW files. Being able to take a 16 or 24 MP sensor and shoot it at 8-12 MP would be fantastic IMO.

[aurele]

Some forum folks (not pointing at you, D1N0) need to let it sink in a bit more that D5300 and lower tier camera buyers, from any manufacturer, simply don't purchase many lenses. And the camera is just a tool for most of them after the initial giddiness of purchase has passed. The telling question here is, what do they REALLY want? In the case of Nikon (just to give us a large sample with well-established buying habits), about 1 in 5 such consumers ever buy ONE more optic beyond the kit lens that came with the camera. So, YOU, card carrying Pentaxian, bought an FA77mm Limited AND the DA 35mm macro? For your K50? Well, so...? Anecdotes are not evidence and you are not a statistically valid sample. I didn't make that up. Why should fledgling Pentaxians be any different? I don't see how they can be -- especially those PROSPECTIVE customers the new camera is supposed to attract. Disagree? Then show me your data. Fair enough?

That's why Nikon do produce some varios kit lens from 18-55 to 18-120 / 140 / 200 / 16-85: to sell lens that are more expensive than the classic 18-55 knowing people won't buy anything else.

With all due respect to them, Ricoh is not truly innovative or forward thinking when it comes to photography. They are more conservatively entrenched than Pentax. And their rationale is weird: in a world when a camera can be panned to make any wide-angle shot — even panoramic — for an already wide-angle camera they deliver an even wider wideangle converter, and not a teleconverter (say, very conservative 40mm or 50mm)?

The GR series is very popular in Japan, where the street photography require a 28mm most of the time. They did the GR21 (a 21mm on a GR body) which sold well, but not well enought. Ricoh is commited to the country they sold the most part of their product. They just focus on their core target client.

[thibs]

That's why Nikon do produce some varios kit lens from 18-55 to 18-120 / 140 / 200 / 16-85: to sell lens that are more expensive than the classic 18-55 knowing people won't buy anything else.




The GR series is very popular in Japan, where the street photography require a 28mm most of the time. They did the GR21 (a 21mm on a GR body) which sold well, but not well enought. Ricoh is commited to the country they sold the most part of their product. They just focus on their core target client.

Uluru, it seems the only thing universal in your posts are the continuous displeasure with whatever Pentax/Rocoh does or does not.
Others have taken that role in the past and aren't there anymore, not that they're missed in any way...

[Uluru]

Uluru, it seems the only thing universal in your posts are the continuous displeasure with whatever Pentax/Rocoh does or does not.
Others have taken that role in the past and aren't there anymore, not that they're missed in any way...

I think you can see a mixture of concern and also praise sometimes. But I became worried as I saw no Pentax people in the last 12-15 months anywhere. Are you not concerned that Ricoh's part of imaging group, people and mindset who are able to design

- niche products for Japan only
- were given green light and money to do products with no future path (GXR),
- wasted future prospects based on ill-prediction and ill-conceived design
- finally given away all the users of that product to other brands
- never communicated in any way to their usergroup

are able to lead in innovation of a brand like Pentax, that has many appeals elsewhere?

Which means, is it ok for a GR to get a 21mm wideconverter immediately after the GR release, and is it also ok that all Pentax cameras and millions of users are put on almost 3 years wait after the acquisition to get a telecoverter?

Please say I am overreacting. That there is a Ricoh's divine plan at play no one can see. But is it my imagination we have been trained as puppies for a slow paced, conservative, arid future? I have been writing here more in forms of casual analysis, sharing ideas and using information at hand and extrapolating it from timeframes, and actions done. Juxtaposing one against another, and if the results are inconvenient, was it my fault?

All I can say is that I am now even more concerned than 3 years ago, and believe Ricoh retracts even further — despite buying Pentax — into a niche inside niche player.

They got the Pentax what they needed it for, but it is not same as we wished it to be. Pentax has never been stronger and deeper in user's imagination than in the last three years, and it will be there in another three years. We’ll get one new and a couple of HD updated lenses this autumn and you will believe it must be a miracle.

Learned to accept anything above mere existence of Pentax brand as a miracle, we'll believe even in same kit lens with a new red ring a miracle.

---

Last edited by Uluru; 07-07-2014 at 05:26 PM.

[JPT]

The GR wide converter only has to work with one camera. It's easy to design and test. The K-mount teleconverter is completely different and much more complicated. It has to work with a large number of cameras - past, present and future. It also has to work with a huge number of lenses - past, present and future. I think it's the lenses-future part that made it difficult to release. If Ricoh has a successor to SDM in the works, they need to make sure they don't start selling a teleconverter that is incompatible with their new pro lenses.

And I don't get this idea that the GR, or even 28mm as an equivalent focal length, is a "Japanese" thing. Hasn't the GR got fantastic reviews from review sites all over the world? If you say that Fuji has a better idea with the X100, isn't that a Japanese camera too? What is certainly true is that wide angle photography is a "Ricoh" thing. They have specialized is that for decades now and it's part of the DNA of their cameras.

Amother thought is that perhaps the lack of teleconverter for the GR is because a 40mm version is coming. We'll see.

[jatrax]

I think you can see a mixture of concern and also praise sometimes.

I sometimes wonder if 'Uluru' is not two people, one day yelling praises and the next day shouting doom.

is it also ok that all Pentax cameras and millions of users are put on almost 3 years wait after the acquisition to get a telecoverter?

I do not know about millions, but no it was not OK. That was something that should have happened much sooner. On the other hand based on user reports it seems the TC is performing well in the field so maybe something had to happen in order for it to meet the standards required. Possibly they felt they needed HD coating or something else in the factory first. But that is just speculation.

But is it my imagination we have been trained as puppies for a slow paced, conservative, arid future?

Maybe. And maybe it is because Pentax was so far behind, in our minds, that we want miracles now all at once? Can you say that Nikon or Canon have released more new products than Pentax when pro-rated for company size or market share? Maybe I am wrong here, but Pentax has maybe 5-7% market share, have they released less than 5-7% of the new products?

They got the Pentax what they needed it for, but it is not same as we wished it to be.

Probably true, after all it was their $225 million.

We’ll get one new and a couple of HD updated lenses this autumn and you will believe it must be a miracle.

I won't call it a miracle. I will call it measured product releases. Over a time frame that is far slower than what many Pentax enthusiasts might want. But it is Ricoh's time frame, not ours.

All I can say is that I am now even more concerned than 3 years ago, and believe Ricoh retracts even further — despite buying Pentax — into a niche inside niche player.

I'm not. Ricoh has shown steady (if very slow) improvement in almost all aspects of the Pentax business. Most of your complaints center around lost opportunities, delays, slow progress, missteps and reversals. All of which are valid. But even if it is 2 steps forward and 1 back that is still forward progress. Despite all of the issues listed they have continued to improve and release new products. Do you really expect them to surpass Canon or Nikon in 3 years? Or ever? They ARE a niche player at this time. Expecting them to act like a market leader is unrealistic when they have 5% market share in a stagnant or shrinking market.

[Uluru]

The GR wide converter only has to work with one camera. It's easy to design and test.

I have been informed that the registration distance of the K-mount did not change since 1975. And that each Pentax SLR and DSLR released since was designed around that same mount and registration distance.

Was it a rumour though? And Ricoh needed to measure individually every single camera released since 1975 to see if the distance was indeed correct in order to allow for a TC in 2014?

Now compare that sad state of affairs with a brand new lens made for the niche APS-C GR, that requires an all new wideconverter — and lo, no problems releasing it immediately. Why not in 2016?

---

Last edited by Uluru; 07-07-2014 at 07:16 PM.

[thibs]

I have been informed that the registration distance of the K-mount did not change since 1975. And that each Pentax SLR and DSLR released since was designed around that same mount and registration distance.

Was it a rumour though? And Ricoh needed to measure individually every single camera released since 1975 to see if the distance was indeed correct in order to allow for a TC in 2014?

Now compare that sad state of affairs with a brand new lens made for the niche APS-C GR, that requires an all new wideconverter — and lo, no problems releasing it immediately. Why not in 2016?

One more nonsense post.
It is obvious the delay of the TC has nothing to do with registration distance: the simple fact that you try to make us think it might be proves you can be dishonest, at best, when it comes to justify your words.
And what is the link with the GR, exactly? none. At all.

Stop your Calimero game, this is really annoying. And try to make some sense, btw.

[JPT]

It's the different generations of focusing system and the differing focusing characteristics of individual lenses that need to be tested. The flange distance is irrelevant. If the design of the teleconverter is found to be lacking, it has to be redesigned and tested again. The fact remains that the teleconverter was on roadmaps for a long time, but was only delivered after Ricoh took the helm.

I don't think you're looking at the situation objectively if you think that the GR has robbed resources from Pentax products, especially one that was released anyway.

If you take a bigger view, it's clear that Ricoh's enthusiast lineup has been reduced from several models to just that one model. In fact it is a significant consolidation. I think long term Ricoh users have a lot more to complain about.

[Kunzite]

I think you can see a mixture of concern and also praise sometimes. But I became worried as I saw no Pentax people in the last 12-15 months anywhere. Are you not concerned that Ricoh's part of imaging group [...] are able to lead in innovation of a brand like Pentax, that has many appeals elsewhere?

No.

Which means, is it ok for a GR to get a 21mm wideconverter immediately after the GR release, and is it also ok that all Pentax cameras and millions of users are put on almost 3 years wait after the acquisition to get a telecoverter?

2 years and 4 months. Perhaps it wasn't ready when Ricoh took over?
And... million of users waiting for this RC? Remind me again, with a total DSLR market of about 10 million units per year (est. 2014) and only a fraction of those buying rear converters, what is their market share: 200%, 500%, more than that?
The initial production volume of only 1000 units per month was obviously insufficient, but it's a better indicator than making up millions of people.

Please say I am overreacting.

You are always overreacting.

All I can say is that I am now even more concerned than 3 years ago, and believe Ricoh retracts even further — despite buying Pentax — into a niche inside niche player.

Then why are they investing in more production capacity?

[aurele]

And I don't get this idea that the GR, or even 28mm as an equivalent focal length, is a "Japanese" thing. Hasn't the GR got fantastic reviews from review sites all over the world? If you say that Fuji has a better idea with the X100, isn't that a Japanese camera too? What is certainly true is that wide angle photography is a "Ricoh" thing. They have specialized is that for decades now and it's part of the DNA of their cameras

If you look backward at the trend of japan popular photography since the 60's-70's, you'll see that Japan is quite interested / obsessed about the fact that's is a fast-changing nation : a lots of tradition, but in the meantime a top-tech country too (look at walk-man, smartphone, screens and display, audio/video industry, optical company, photo-company, and so on...).
The japanese photography reflect that trend : a lot of street photography to show / catch this duality between tradition and novelty in city that regroup traditional area (market, little housing, craft shop, traditional restaurant) and novelty (big skycrapper, huge mall), but in the people dressing too (you can see women dressed like 1900's Geisha, just near a all leather dressed teenage girl, with pink eyeliner), etc ...
The trend was from the 38-40mm rangefinder to something wider in the 70-80's that went slowly to 28mm in form of Leica, or half frame olympus Pen EE or small point and shoot like the first ricoh GR.
The 28mm thing is more related to the inner core of japanese photography, that is focused on people. It's a market where they still do prints quite a lot. In smaller format, but it's still prints.

Considering that, the fact that Ricoh focus on the GR with a 28mm lens, and with a 21mm converter, just mean they focus on the biggest business for them in the consummer market (they also do rugged camera for a long time for the industry of construction, for example).

[Aristophanes]

I think you can see a mixture of concern and also praise sometimes. But I became worried as I saw no Pentax people in the last 12-15 months anywhere. Are you not concerned that Ricoh's part of imaging group, people and mindset who are able to design

- niche products for Japan only
- were given green light and money to do products with no future path (GXR),
- wasted future prospects based on ill-prediction and ill-conceived design
- finally given away all the users of that product to other brands
- never communicated in any way to their usergroup

are able to lead in innovation of a brand like Pentax, that has many appeals elsewhere?

Which means, is it ok for a GR to get a 21mm wideconverter immediately after the GR release, and is it also ok that all Pentax cameras and millions of users are put on almost 3 years wait after the acquisition to get a telecoverter?

Please say I am overreacting. That there is a Ricoh's divine plan at play no one can see. But is it my imagination we have been trained as puppies for a slow paced, conservative, arid future? I have been writing here more in forms of casual analysis, sharing ideas and using information at hand and extrapolating it from timeframes, and actions done. Juxtaposing one against another, and if the results are inconvenient, was it my fault?

All I can say is that I am now even more concerned than 3 years ago, and believe Ricoh retracts even further — despite buying Pentax — into a niche inside niche player.

They got the Pentax what they needed it for, but it is not same as we wished it to be. Pentax has never been stronger and deeper in user's imagination than in the last three years, and it will be there in another three years. We’ll get one new and a couple of HD updated lenses this autumn and you will believe it must be a miracle.

Learned to accept anything above mere existence of Pentax brand as a miracle, we'll believe even in same kit lens with a new red ring a miracle.

Frankly the entire P&S category looks to be a waste of design and production unless you are making a ruggedized model or some low-end, low-revenue low-margin, junk.

TCs are funny beasts, especially AF ones. They require extensive testing on multiple lenses and have a very, very small market.

I doubt they have a grand design. Pentax is and really always will be K-mount SLR.

[IchabodCrane]

....

I'm not. Ricoh has shown steady (if very slow) improvement in almost all aspects of the Pentax business. Most of your complaints center around lost opportunities, delays, slow progress, missteps and reversals. All of which are valid. But even if it is 2 steps forward and 1 back that is still forward progress. Despite all of the issues listed they have continued to improve and release new products. Do you really expect them to surpass Canon or Nikon in 3 years? Or ever? They ARE a niche player at this time. Expecting them to act like a market leader is unrealistic when they have 5% market share in a stagnant or shrinking market.

The real question, IMHO, is whether Pentax/Ricoh are catching up to or falling further behind the competition. If it's perceived they are falling further behind, eventually they won't attract new customers to replace the ones they naturally lose.

[monochrome]

There's this point I'm having a hard time getting across in the forums. I can't skirt over the business perspective when it comes to discerning the future of a consumer gadget, even in a thread like this. I try to cool down too much rhetoric from the enthusiast's perspective, because the latter is mostly a given here, and it's predictable enough. AS an enthusiast, I take the ultimate in a humble position -- they are not listening to me! Enthusiasts need to understand their niche group position.

Good luck with that.

So my two cents is, you can't NOT take the long view. Other competitors (smartphones, and whatever's on the way next) have proven much quicker to respond to, and LEAD with promotion, what consumers really want and will want in the way of lifestyle gadgets. I think the big picture is what counts. The major camera manufacturers have plainly painted themselves into a corner. I understand that this is a minority (yep, very)... "alternative" perspective among Pentax enthusiasts on the Forum. Your humble, enthusiastic servant, F.

It isn't only promotion. They're adding capability, too. Of several hundred images taken with a Q, a Q7 and the 01, 02, 03 and 06 over the holiday week my wife's best photo was taken with an iPhone 4s. I asked her what she used to take that one photo - she said, "I think that one was with my phone." Mine weren't much better.

P.S.- Here's an example to consider. The K-01 got roundly criticized for being too fat and having a vestigial mirror box... when there's no mirror! O.K., not to defend that, but how many people simply missed grasping the fact that the K-01 is much easier to stow, and pull in and out of a compact bag, than is a K-30/K-50? Why not just get the DSLR? Well, there's one reason, for some folks (to whom I expect the 4 or 5 ounce weight savings is not a trivial matter, either).

Especially with a DA40 Limited or DA40XS mounted. But you have to get people to Hold a K-01 before they figure it out and the 'Mister Limpet' negative horn blast against the K-01 was just too strong for it to have any chance at eventual acceptance.

If the industry is doomed it will be because the current traditional users are benighted and stubbornly clinging to their (whatevers).

[stevebrot]

I have been informed that the registration distance of the K-mount did not change since 1975. And that each Pentax SLR and DSLR released since was designed around that same mount and registration distance.

...and the K-mount registration distance is the same as the Praktica/Pentax M42 mount that dates back to the time of the dinosaurs.

What a cool factoid!!!! And your point is?


Steve