[Kunzite]

What I don't understand is how exactly Ricoh should support/persuade/whatever third-party manufacturers like Sigma. All right, Ricoh should call Sigma and say... what?

[gaddigad]

Where is the K-02 (or k-03), fg sake?

-EVF, built in
-Tilting LCD
-DOF priority view
-Continuous AF in video
-Hardware SR in video
-k100d body

[Zygonyx]

What I don't understand is how exactly Ricoh should support/persuade/whatever third-party manufacturers like Sigma. All right, Ricoh should call Sigma and say... what?

Any third party lens maker should be considered as a commercial partner... Because whatever you want, they adress the same SLR system.
So there's a lot to talk about.
The above related answer from Ricoh just show us how stupidly they think, and how badly they dont act.

[Kunzite]

Please give me an example.

[Uluru]

The above related answer from Ricoh just show us how stupidly they think, and how badly they dont act.

I am not certain they want to talk to anyone. As far as we know and may conclude from limited information, Ricoh is happy Pentax is an obscure, non-competitive collection of little mounts. With fewer players involved with it, more goes to them.
Let's put it in this way: Ricoh does not care about anyone in particular, not even about users of the Pentax brand that ask for this or that. They don't care even about their own (GXR, etc.) users, and have left them in the desert.
They will do only what suits them and when it suits them. If you don't see it now, in 10 years maybe you'll see.

[derekkite]

If they aren't going to answer some questions, why ask? I would ask general questions about market segments, how they see their products used and what their plans are. Ask them what they shoot with, and what.

Ask them what the demographics of Japan means to them when it comes to hiring engineers.

[Zygonyx]

I am not certain they want to talk to anyone. As far as we know and may conclude from limited information, Ricoh is happy Pentax is an obscure, non-competitive collection of little mounts. With fewer players involved with it, more goes to them.
Let's put it in this way: Ricoh does not care about anyone in particular, not even about users of the Pentax brand that ask for this or that. They don't care even about their own (GXR, etc.) users, and have left them in the desert.
They will do only what suits them and when it suits them. If you don't see it now, in 10 years maybe you'll see.

Alas you may be right.
So, don´t ask any question, Adam.
Let them tell the photog community what they want to say...

[Na Horuk]

All right, Ricoh should call Sigma and say... what?

Maybe give them lens mount specifications, so third parties don't have to reverse engineer it? This would also allow them to coordinate lens ID and focal length communication between camera and lens, something that is a little problematic with certain lenses even now. It wouldn't cost Pentax much, Pentax would still stay in control (arguably, even get more control than they have now, because now they have practically no control over third parties except maybe an agreement with Tokina). And wasn't the original idea behind the K-mount to have it as an open standard? But I guess that doesn't make as much money as holding a patent for a crippled KAF2..
Hm what else.. oh, Pentax could tell them a little about their plans. So the third parties known which lenses to release for K-mount. Im not saying Pentax should give away business secrets, but strategic communication could help them out a lot. (with customers, with third parties, with rival companies..)

[Kunzite]

I respectfully disagree: Ricoh Imaging/Pentax definitely care about their source of income faithful customers. The proof is in the products like the K-3 or the 645Z, in the 1.4xRC, in the many instances when our wishes made into real products.
But, information about products is made public via roadmaps and announcements, not decided on the spot in some interview. Requests for products are decided internally, using sales data/studies/etc, not taken in interviews. We're disappointed in those interviews because we have unreasonable questions (and yes, one of my questions made into the CP+ interview... I'm not exempted from making mistakes)
Right now, I would ask them just this: "why Pentax?" - letting them to explain where do they want to take the brand, which USPs, what kind of customers are they targeting.
And, of course, "where is the FF?"

---------- Post added 16-08-14 at 03:23 PM ----------

Maybe give them lens mount specifications, so third parties don't have to reverse engineer it? This would also allow them to coordinate lens ID and focal length communication between camera and lens, something that is a little problematic with certain lenses even now. It wouldn't cost Pentax much, Pentax would still stay in control (arguably, even get more control than they have now, because now they have practically no control over third parties except maybe an agreement with Tokina). And wasn't the original idea behind the K-mount to have it as an open standard? But I guess that doesn't make as much money as holding a patent for a crippled KAF2..
Hm what else.. oh, Pentax could tell them a little about their plans. So the third parties known which lenses to release for K-mount. Im not saying Pentax should give away business secrets, but strategic communication could help them out a lot. (with customers, with third parties, with rival companies..)

Sorry, but...
#1 - Sigma decided long ago not to license mounts, but to use reverse engineering. They did that on their own accord, while mounts were available for licensing - K-mount included.
The mount is not what's keeping Sigma from releasing more K-mount lenses. Sigma already have a working K-mount.
#2 - What kind of information could be shared with a competitor, important enough so it would convince Sigma to launch more products - despite what their bean counters are saying?

I'm afraid we're putting our hopes in something which can't realistically work, ignoring the obvious solution: Sigma will launch products if they're sure they would sell. If for example we don't buy their expensive long lenses, they won't plan even more expensive, longer lenses for Pentax K. If we'll start buying their fast primes we might see more of their fast primes in K-mount.

[JimmyDranox]

One of the problem, is that K mount has those aperture mechanical levers, wile most of the modern lenses Sigma is making has electrical control of aperture. This can be a problem for some lenses, if the mechanical lever can came in the way of internal design. So, the fabrication can be more difficult for K mount, and maybe that why it is possible to never see some new lenses in K mount, like 50mm F1.4 Art.

[Mistral75]

There are aperture mechanical levers in Nikon F mount and Sony Alpha mount too.

[JimmyDranox]

I didn't knew that. So, in this case, only the numbers matters. Which is not good, both for Ricoh and us.

[mee]

Alas you may be right.
So, don´t ask any question, Adam.
Let them tell the photog community what they want to say...

It is how the forums here are run, it makes sense that would be how the actual company is run too.

But I'm not sure it benefits them either way.. I mean, if this is true, then they forget it is a very competitive market.. There is Canon, Nikon, and Sony with FF digital SLR bodies and lenses with a thriving 3rd party lens market..

why would they essentially say 'my way or the highway, deal with it' ? Their actions and reactions have effects to them.. financial effects.

---------- Post added 08-16-14 at 08:13 AM ----------

Sorry, but...
#1 - Sigma decided long ago not to license mounts, but to use reverse engineering. They did that on their own accord, while mounts were available for licensing - K-mount included.
The mount is not what's keeping Sigma from releasing more K-mount lenses. Sigma already have a working K-mount.
#2 - What kind of information could be shared with a competitor, important enough so it would convince Sigma to launch more products - despite what their bean counters are saying?

I'm afraid we're putting our hopes in something which can't realistically work, ignoring the obvious solution: Sigma will launch products if they're sure they would sell. If for example we don't buy their expensive long lenses, they won't plan even more expensive, longer lenses for Pentax K. If we'll start buying their fast primes we might see more of their fast primes in K-mount.

Then it is a Catch 22 scenario... We're not buying because they're not available, but they're not available because we're not buying?

[RonHendriks1966]

Maybe it is time to upgrade the current K-mount to a full electronic mount called KAF4 (still backward compatible with old lenses). So new lenses don't use the lever for aperture but also do that electronic.

On the topic of teaming up with Sigma (or others like Tokina and Tamron).
Sharing information and maybe the KAF4 mount would make the K-mount more profatable to work with. On certain lenses have the lenscorrection information of those lenses (Sigma 120-300, and some others) inside the camera to do lenscorrections on them for jpg.

What would be the difference then for buying Pentax or another brand? Well maybe not the world of difference. But priority #1 would be to grow towards a much larger marketshare for the K-mount then currently. With a growing marketshare there is also more te sell.

Edit: I mean KAF4 mount....

[monochrome]

What I don't understand is how exactly Ricoh should support/persuade/whatever third-party manufacturers like Sigma. All right, Ricoh should call Sigma and say... what?

Here's $100,000 for 'development' of the K-mount version.