[6BQ5]

Actually, the pricing scheme makes sense. They want to sell the largest number of cameras at the highest prices possible. There is always someone willing to pay more and everybody wants to capture those. Imagine one person at $399, two at $299, three at $249, one at $229, and three at $199. Then imagine all 10 at $199. Sure, one scheme may go slower than the other but cameras don't seem to fly off the shelves like basic necessities such as food anyways. Maybe camera companies can afford to wait a bit.

[GibbyTheMole]

Pentaxians are Pentax' worst enemies.

You nailed that one, alright. If Pentax came out with a 40MP FF pro-grade DSLR for a hundred bucks, people would find a reason to complain about it.

[Class A]

Actually, the pricing scheme makes sense.

I would agree with you if we were talking about a product with a unique selling proposition, i.e., without tough, direct competition.

However, we appear to be talking about a rebrand of a not too exiting product at rather strange price point. PCMag Australia says about the Kodak Pixpro AZ522 "But at its asking price the AZ522 is a tough sell; ..." and Pentax adds another 14% to the price of the AZ522.

What message does this send to customers?

Looks to me that reasonable interpretations are:

• I have to pay $50 extra to get a "Pentax" rather than a "Kodak" label.
• Pentax technology is not really that exciting. There are much better products for pretty much the same price.

Now all this is assuming that Pentax really does not add anything to the AZ522. If there are technological differences, the different price point may be justified.

If Pentax came out with a 40MP FF pro-grade DSLR for a hundred bucks, people would find a reason to complain about it

I'm not sure why you think complaining about "complainers" -- in a rather far fetched manner -- is better than scratching one's head about Ricoh's product and pricing strategy.

[thibs]

I would agree with you if we were talking about a product with a unique selling proposition, i.e., without tough, direct competition.

However, we appear to be talking about a rebrand of a not too exiting product at rather strange price point. PCMag Australia says about the Kodak Pixpro AZ522 "But at its asking price the AZ522 is a tough sell; ..." and Pentax adds another 14% to the price of the AZ522.

What message does this send to customers?

Looks to me that reasonable interpretations are:

• I have to pay $50 extra to get a "Pentax" rather than a "Kodak" label.
• Pentax technology is not really that exciting. There are much better products for pretty much the same price.

Now all this is assuming that Pentax really does not add anything to the AZ522. If there are technological differences, the different price point may be justified.

Yes and no. There're only a couple 'idiots' interpreting things as you (and me and most people here on this forum) and this is.. us.
This camera is aimed at any random people on the street: they don't care a iota about all you said (which doesn't make it less valid).

So in summary one could put things as the following:
* Ricoh/Pentax (and most others btw) rip off Joe on the street with stupid price policy (original isn't it?)
* We feel outraged because Ricoh rips off others (personnaly I prefer Ricoh to rip off others but that's just me).
* We forget that this is what permits Ricoh to offer K-3 and 645Z

Ok the third point tends to cynism, I know but there's some truth in it IMO

[cali92rs]

I'm not sure why you think complaining about "complainers" -- in a rather far fetched manner -- is better than scratching one's head about Ricoh's product and pricing strategy.

Because complaining about complainers removes responsibility from Ricoh...and some people can't wrap their heads around Ricoh making mistakes.

---------- Post added 07-18-14 at 11:01 AM ----------

You nailed that one, alright. If Pentax came out with a 40MP FF pro-grade DSLR for a hundred bucks, people would find a reason to complain about it.

But they didn't...did they.
They released an overpriced turkey.

[H. Sapiens]

I don't know how it works elsewhere, but where I live Ricoh can not advertise a discount of x percent unless the camera have actually been on the market for a period of time at the pre-price. Never mind they didnt sell any cameras at that price.

I do wonder if it bothers Ricoh that certain of their products get so hugely negative feedback on the Net. I would not be surprised if the top hits on a search for "Pentax xg-1" when the camera hits the shelves will be this and similar treads. "Pentax SDM" is forever linked to "fuilure" , "problems" and so on.

[GibbyTheMole]

But they didn't...did they. They released an overpriced turkey.

In all seriousness though, i've heard people bitch and say they wouldn't buy a K-3 because the box said "Ricoh" on it. I mean, that is pretty stupid. And while the XG-1 may be overpriced, I don't know if I'd say it's a turkey. Some of the reviews on it seem to be pretty good for a bridge camera. And I'm sure the price will come down.

Please don't take offense at the photo, either. It's just a little good natured humor.

[MD Optofonik]

The Dude abides.

[6BQ5]

And, another from the movie...

"This is a very complicated case, Maude. You know, a lotta ins, lotta outs, lotta what-have-you's. And, uh, lotta strands to keep in my head, man. Lotta strands in old Duder's head. Luckily I'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug regimen to keep my mind limber."

[RonHendriks1966]

Well the Panasonic got a review, and somehow I hope they scip the XG-1:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz1000/15