[kadajawi]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

My impression and prediction:

1. Take a K-5, make it fatter, upgrade it, and wack in a 23 mega pixel sensor which is good, but not too good like the 16mp sensor was - ala the K-3. Take a 24 mega pixel 35mm sensor, jam it in a K-3, and make the 24mp considerably better than the 23mp sensor - ala the Pentax 35mm DSLR (whoops, shouldn't have mentioned it).

2. Get rid of the entry level to mid level cameras, and replace with 20mp sensors. Entry level not WR, but K-50 replacement WR.

The line up looks like this: K-S1 (20mp); K-50 mark ii (K-S5 20mp); K-3 (23mp); K-35mm (24mp); 645Z. (the lens road map fulfilled with a couple of lenses from Tokina)

Thats just my prediction, I had a feeling the new entry level would be 20mp to compete with Nikon 24mp and Canon 20mp. There should be room in a K-3 to fit a 35mm and mirror box, if there isn't, then there is going to be a new chassis. But it will be the path of least resistance and cost and a traditional DSLR arrangement - no mirrorless 35mm. Pentax won't try to step on Nikon or Canons toes, and won't challenge by producing a Pro level 35mm camera, it'll be Advanced/consumer grade (But really it'll be pro). The Pentax K-3 had to be good enough on its own, but not so good that its almost equal to the Pentax 35mm. There might be a surprise in there, but ultimately I do not think that Pentax has the resources to do anything risky.

Pentax Mirrorless
Pentax's biggest risk was mirrorless with the Q, and they chose the path of least resistance with a small camera and tiny lens range - a cost effective model line-up, with no competition, but not a huge market. The Q is a test bed. But what was developed in the Q might be applied to either an APS-C mirrorless, but I doubt that Pentax has the resources to develop a lens range. But this is where Ricoh steps in, the Ricoh GR is also a test bed, and could be turned into a mirrorless CSC, and challenge Sony and Fujifilm. Ricoh/Pentax will be steping on, Sony and Samsungs feet. So no sensors from Sony or Samsung a Toshiba sensor it will be.

Ricoh Mirrorless
Ricoh being a company with a long heritage and tradition is entitled to market share. So I predict an APS-C mirrorless system camera from Ricoh (The sensor can't be Sony or Samsung).

Fujifilm
Fujifilm is stealing business away from Canon, Nikon and Sony, and they'll be in a lot of trouble. But if they just stick with their clunky mirrorless cameras, and super sharp lenses, they might slip under the radar. Because Fujifilm as a corporation has a tradition and history, and they are entitled to a market share.

Canon and Nikon
Pentax is too weak to challenge Canon and Nikon. If Canon perceives that Pentax is challenging Canon's 5Dmarkiii, then that rumor about a Canon Medium Format, might come into fruition to crush the 645Z. But in turn Canon might be trying to take out the other medium format producers. I think its unlikely that Canon will make a medium Format, because Canon is developing its niche in video. But Canon is copying Pentax with a couple of pancake lenses, and the baby Canon D100, and treading on Pentax's toes.

Canon and Nikon are at war, there are rebates from nearly all the brands. The economic downturn means that Canon Nikon and Sony are suffering. Pentax needs to hunker down, and ride out the storm with lower collateral damage.

Canon and Nikon need to relinquish market share, and allow other manufacturers to survive the slower times. Canon and Nikon are far too aggressive and have too much market share, leaving companies like Pentax to slowly inch forward for fear of treading on the big guys toes. Me personally, I boycott Canon and Nikon and let the little companies gain my support.

Conclusion:
So Pentax and Ricoh will inch forward, and play it safe. Pentax has a heritage, and a tradition as a corporation or company, and is entitled to a market share. What I'm trying to say here is, is that companies have to be careful not to steal away customers from larger companies. The larger companies can do a hostile take-over and shut the doors of Pentax if they pleased. Thats the operating environment for Pentax. As an example, I have no doubt that Pentax could develop a top notch sports auto focus system, and lenses. But, they'd be encroaching on a much larger company and stealing its business. Then that would lead to a corporate war.

What Pentax needs to do:
Fix the lens range for K-mount with HD coatings, and restyle some of the lenses.

(Thats my two cents, and that was more than what you asked for ! )

Interesting. Few comments:


1. Pentax doesn't make sensors. Whatever Sony, Toshiba, Samsung etc. produce is what Pentax can use. If they make big advances, and are willing to share them, Pentax will. If not, then not. Also, Sony and Toshiba share resources AFAIK, so a Sony sensor may come out of a Toshiba factory and vice versa.


2. Bad, bad idea. If you mean overall getting rid of them. If you mean getting rid of the K-50 and K-500... still bad idea, why would they? The K-S1 seems to be an addition to those cameras, not a replacement.


To me personally the number of MP does not matter at all... the fewer the better. I'd be the happiest at around 12 MP.


Ricoh:
No one is entitled to marketshare. Nokia thought they were, now they are only a part of Microsoft. RIM thought they were, now they are nearly bankrupt. Palm thought they were, now all that is left of Palm is a part of LG that develops the software for the Smart UI part of LG TVs.


Fujifilm:
They are doing well. Basically you are getting Leica cameras for a fraction of the cost. Those two brands are the only ones that can IMHO ignore video. I don't see _ANYTHING_ from _ANY_ competitor that even tries to compete with Fujifilm, so they should be safe. Only Sigma is sort of trying, with extremely weird cameras. Not sure why they even bother.


Canon:
Dying. They haven't had a proper new sensor in 6 years, except for what they are using in the 70D, and that's all focused towards video. They do want to sell their extremely profitable cinema line of cameras (same body, mostly the same internals, but sold at something like 2-4x the price. You can't tell me the camera is so much more expensive to make). Regular DSLRs are thus very limited in terms of video, all they sell on is that people simply have a lot of Canon glass, and that there is a hacked firmware that gives their regular cameras pretty amazing capabilities (showing that it's all in the software...). At some point users will give up though and switch brands, as many already have. The Cine line of cameras start at nearly 5 digit figures (and not really competitive) and are thus not really what normal people would buy.


Nikon:
Offering the bare minimum in terms of video, just like with Canon people are leaving this brand. There is a reason why they are giving massive rebates.


Pentax:
Offering less than the bare minimum in terms of video. Good stills... everyone can do that. Heck, if light is good enough my smartphone takes good enough stills (raw mode). At the moment Pentax only appeals to people without any interest in video, who are interested in outdoor activities, and start fresh (otherwise I don't think what Pentax offers is enough to draw attention).



Much more interesting though are...


Sony:
They are killing it IMHO. Very attractive cameras, and a brand that actually has balls and dares to think outside of the box. Very innovative, and very nice products. They have a professional cinema line of cameras but are yet not too afraid of giving much of their capabilities to their lesser cameras. They have a great codec in their cameras (thanks to the pretty good BIONZ X processor), only heat (and I guess market placement) problems restrict them from giving 4K with a reasonably space saving codec on all their cameras). These days I'm seeing more Sony cameras on the road than Pentax cameras. That should worry Pentax.


Samsung:
If Samsung thinks a market is lucrative, they will own it. Samsung thought... TVs... that's a nice business. They have a huge market share now. Around 5-7 years ago Samsung got serious about phones... now they have like, 80% of the market? 20% goes to Apple, and the rest is split up amongst the rest. (The numbers have changed a bit, but that's more or less it). The NX-1 to me is a sign that they are dead serious. It has a sensor that offers high resolutions without giving up low light capabilities, and it seems to have one of the most advanced processors found in a camera these days (apart from the new Lytro). If I didn't have a Pentax already, I would probably buy a NX-1, if it is anywhere near as good as it seems to be.


Panasonic:
Again, a professional video company that is not afraid to give more than they have to to regular consumers. The GH4 is extremely attractively priced, and it shows. Panasonic can't make them fast enough, they had to double production capacities! And no one is interested in video, yeah, right. The only let down is the smallish sensor.


Olympus:
Until recently they said they are focused on photography, buy Panasonic for video. Well, I guess that's what people have done, and Olympus must have noticed. Sales of their cameras doesn't seem as good as Panasonic's I guess, and so they are reorienting now, handing Olympus cameras with beta firmwares to people working in Hollywood, getting feedback. Maybe the rumored 4K firmware update isn't ready for primetime yet, maybe they can't do it with the hardware they have right now. We'll see. But they are working on it, that much seems clear, they are investing resources and want to produce kick-ass video gear. Because that is what sells cameras these days?


IMHO Sony, Panasonic, Samsung and perhaps Olympus will be owning the camera market down the road, while Canon, Nikon and Pentax will at best be at the position Pentax is now. They are the Nokia, RIM and Palm of the camera world. And Microsoft too, the only reason why Microsoft has survived is because they are that big... Windows Mobile was pretty important, but instead of going with the times they stuck to the past, until it was too late. They think all that people want is stills (well, Canon and Nikon seem to have realized that's not true, but they are unwilling or unable to offer more). Pentax as usual is oblivious to the professional market (the one between amateurs and high end fashion/product etc. photography where you'd hire separate people to handle stills and video), so I guess they are the first to die, especially given their current position.


Hostile takeover? Really? Sony is massive. No one can easily take them over. Canon is relatively big. Samsung is huuuuuuuuge. Ricoh is IIRC almost as big as Canon. Who would be able to take over Ricoh? Pentax can pee all over Canikon... Sony, Samsung though might be a different story because they depend on them for sensors.

[gazonk]

The NX-1 to me is a sign that they are dead serious. It has a sensor that offers high resolutions without giving up low light capabilities

Well, that remains to be seen, doesn't it?

[Cynog Ap Brychan]

For me, buying a Samsung camera would be like buying a Volkswagen fridge or a Boeing TV. I just see them as a gadget company, not a proper camera manufacturer. Same way as I view Sony, really. I'm not saying they don't or can't make good cameras: I'm suppose I'm a traditionalist at heart. I just hope that Pentax lives long and prospers.

[kadajawi]

For me, buying a Samsung camera would be like buying a Volkswagen fridge or a Boeing TV. I just see them as a gadget company, not a proper camera manufacturer. Same way as I view Sony, really. I'm not saying they don't or can't make good cameras: I'm suppose I'm a traditionalist at heart. I just hope that Pentax lives long and prospers.

I doubt Pentax will live. Whoever runs the company seems to completely ignore where everything is headed.

Sony is really just Konica Minolta with a new name, proper marketing and great engineers. They are a proper camera maker at heart, and in the video sector they have always been a big deal.

Samsung... it doesn't matter how you see them. Would it be weird to own a Samsung branded camera? Yes. But the result is what counts. Panasonic hasn't traditionally been a camera company, yet they are producing some stunning stuff.

---------- Post added 17-09-14 at 15:36 ----------

Well, that remains to be seen, doesn't it?

Sort of, but it should work. The advantage of BSI sensors is that they can make the most out of the sensor area... no space per pixel is wasted for transporting data etc. All can be used to collect light. That way high resolutions won't mean a lot of space on the sensor is wasted. With some proper processing then the results should be quite decent. You just have to downscale the resolution. Basically you could have an APS-C sensor that at low ISO can give you really sharp photos at 40 MP, and when you raise the ISO you get 12 MP that are not too noisy.

[grispie]

The NX-1 to me is a sign that they are dead serious

I agree, they seem to have done their homework.
If reviews are good, I couldn't care less about the brand, I'd just buy it because of its' video capabilities.

I doubt Pentax will live

imo pentax still has very nice offerings out there compared to others. So i do not share this view. And the K3 is a very decent package alltogether.
I do wish they would spend a bit more work on the video part of things and stop being vague on the FF issue. I know the corporate world is prudent with cash but it is getting annoying and perception is playing against pentax.

[24X36NOW]

After reading this ad:
1981 Pentax 15mm F 3 5 Linear Super Wide Angle Lens Ad | eBay

Even if only 37 photographers will buy their full-frame each year, Pentax needs to make one, otherwise how can they call themselves a serious photographic company?

I kid of course.

Kid? Why? While "37" might be over the top for a camera body (as opposed to a specialist lens), that ad personifies what Pentax should be striving to be again, as opposed to the bottom feeding also-ran it has sadly become in the last few decades, mostly by its own hand. It's long overdue for Pentax to "Be Pentax - Again." There, I just coined a great slogan for their comeback campaign. They should print it in big black letters and hang it in their offices. Now they just need the products, starting with a FF DSLR. No more excuses, no more "planning," no more "developing," no more stringing along what's left of the Pentax user base along. JFDI.

For the record, I own that lens (the "A" version). But these days, I shoot Nikon F-Mount equipment, thanks to Pentax limiting its K-Mount aspirations to "less-than-half-frame."

[kadajawi]

I agree, they seem to have done their homework.
If reviews are good, I couldn't care less about the brand, I'd just buy it because of its' video capabilities.



imo pentax still has very nice offerings out there compared to others. So i do not share this view. And the K3 is a very decent package alltogether.
I do wish they would spend a bit more work on the video part of things and stop being vague on the FF issue. I know the corporate world is prudent with cash but it is getting annoying and perception is playing against pentax.

Hm. I only want to have and maintain one lens mount, and if Pentax doesn't fulfill all my needs... I mostly do stills, but all the brands do that on a level that is good enough for me. I'd rather have a camera that does stills at 90% and video at 90% than one that does stills at 100% and video at 30%. If Pentax doesn't do both well enough, marketshare will go down, because to some such a camera will be unacceptable. And I guess the number of those is going up and up.


I mean, how much better a still camera can Pentax make? I think camera makers have hit a ceiling. Yes, there will be sensor improvements, but all brands can access them, and it's the same with processing improvements. AF can be improved, but isn't it already rather good right now? If they want to differentiate, it's video, and that's the one segment where they seem to have given up, and lack any expertise.


That's a great ad btw., but it wouldn't work for Pentax now.

[bobmaxja]

Sony just announced that their lost will be over $2 billions for this year.
Ricoh is expected to do $700 millions of profit.

These are corporate mumber but you can be sure somewhere money talk.

[D1N0]

Sony just announced that their lost will be over $2 billions for this year.
Ricoh is expected to do $700 millions of profit.

These are corporate mumber but you can be sure somewhere money talk.

Maybe they can Buy Sony and put Pentax on the A7. Problem solved.

[monochrome]

Maybe they can Buy Sony and put Pentax on the A7. Problem solved.

There's an order of magnitude difference in scale there.

[grispie]

Sony just announced that their lost will be over $2 billions for this year.

I believe sony is making huge losses on overall electronics and therefor are selling out.
Not sure things are comparable here.
But you have a point. Sony is being very innovative and aggressive with their imaging division right now. I hope the return of that choice is there.
No matter whether we agree with pentax/ricoh strategy, the right strategy is determined by corporate numbers. Time will tell.

I do agree with Kadajawi, not focusing on video might not be such a wise decision. especially when they want to target young newcomers. Not to mention professionals..
And they need to fill the gap between K3 and 645z. People may argue about apsc delivering more than enough. But imo that is missing the point.
FF sensors become less expensive, people want it & will buy it. Staying behind because the adagium is "apsc delivers the goods" will mean losing customers.
And I understood from the interview they want to broaden their customer base.

But i also understood from the interview there is 'the' product. Think corporate decisions are playing here on when & how.

[Funsize]

I've only had my k30 for a year, and I'm still very new here, but I've been pondering this question ever since the EM1 and XT1 were released. What do I want with my next camera?

The first thing I'd like to see is a retooled jpeg engine. I shoot raw because for the life of me, I've not been able to get good jpegs. I've seen a lot of people say that raw is better, that jpegs arent for serious photographers anyways, etc, but I think its time to acknowledge the jpegs coming out of these cameras are sub par. There are times I want to just take snapshots and not have to worry about post processing, but I can't because reds and blues are way to oversaturated and shifted. When I take pictures of people, it looks like everyone is wearing lipstick, and deep red and blue fabrics lose all detail at mid ISOs. Its not just me, though, DPReview and Imaging Resource both notice that Pentax seems to have trouble with reds. It's kind of ironic, because my k30 is crystal red in color.

I'd love to see pentax challenge Fuji and Olympus with a compact mirrorless system centered on image quality. Fuji is pulling the rug out from under Pentax with their small rugged XT1 and fantastic lens lineup. I'd like a mirrorless camera that used an entirely new mount. That's right, start from scratch. There's so much redundancy in the current lens lineup that it's kind of confusing (ei everyone confused about the new 16-85). Fuji has built up a fantastic lineup in only a few years, and Pentax can do the same. But what about all that legacy glass? Pentax just came out with its new teleconverter, so it knows how to make an adaptor with autofocus and auto aperture. It could easily make an adapter for old Pentax lenses and they'd work just as well as on current bodies. The M lenses would actually work better, because you'd now have more accurate focus through the EVF, and you wouldn't have to stop down meter each shot. While Pentax is building its new lineup of mirrorless optimized lenses, the adaptor would let you use all the current Pentax lenses, making the transition much easier.
Oh, and make that new mirrorless camera come in pretty colors.

[kadajawi]

IMHO it's too late at this point. Samsung is able to take their Exynos (?) processors (which are state of the art smartphone processors) and modify them for camera use (which is what they did), something Fujitsu and thus Pentax can't really do. And they have a whole lot of resources and things they can draw from.


As for JPEG processing... to do proper denoising you need quite a bit of processing power. Also, raw has the advantage of being able to fine tune depending on what the photo needs, something you lack with JPEG. I'm happy with editing raw files to be honest, because it isn't much work and gives me what _I_ want. If I shot JPEG I would have to edit too, and that without all the latitude that raw gives me. I've even moved on to raw for my smartphone photos.

[monochrome]

Just thinking out loud . . . . . don't put it past Ricoh to buy what they lack or need if a distress opportunity arises.

[bobmaxja]

monochrome, you understand my point. Sony loose money in TV, LCD, PC,consumer electronic and SmartPhone.. Sony make money with studio, film, music and component.
Their first restructuring goal for 2014 was to grown Mobile, 9 months later they drop that.
Sony Imaging business in 2013 had sales of $6 billions but profit of less than $18 millions down from $200 millions the years before. They make money with the professional equipment(That do not include DSLR)
This is about 1% of the rofit of Sony in 2013. Sony profit is mainly from music and film , almost 65% and if you add the component business (image sensor and others) they accoubt for 90% of the profit.
Sony is bold about new products but one day , the axe will come down.
Accelerate execution of updated strategies in the three core businesses
By the way , Sony in the 4 years lost about $7 billions!!!