[luftfluss]

I also don't understand why everybody believes without question that these lenses are FF capable. How could anyone possibly know this? All we have is an unmarked, unlabeled, and untested (by you) lens in a glass display at a trade show? All anyone can really say is that it "looks like it will be" FF capable.

I don't doubt something is churning at Pentax/Ricoh, but I agree that guys on both sides are saying things that can't possibly be known.

I think when we see the pics, the new lenses "look FF" relative to the size of the other lenses in the pics.

[mecrox]

That's one business model.

It requires lots of capital (Nikon and Canon and Sony have a lot of capital tied up in factories that must be paid for whether revenue declines, stays the same or rises) that has to be serviced by lots of revenue. It requires lots of capital to hold inventory that has to be turned to service the capital. It requires lots of capital to offer Dealers financing, that has to be serviced regardless of revenue. It requires lots of Reps, and distributor support people who have to be paid regardless of revenue - and people are very expensive. It requires lots of capacity to feed the Costco/Target/BestBuy/Walmart revenue-per-cu.ft.-day contract and capacity requires capital - (you don't get paid full value if you don't deliver the volume, and you don't get paid full value if the inventory doesn't turn). Volume turn requires lots of advertising that has to be paid for just to make the revenue.

Clearly, revenue is declining. Apparently, CaNikoNy aren't making profits and apparently, Ricoh is.

It's sort of an old-school business model that everyone else has done. But if the revenue declines permanently and the already-in-place capital can't be serviced - well, what then? Overproduction, fire sales, brand destruction, layoffs, losses, angry shareholders (Nikon - Sony) - nothing good!!

What if Ricoh isn't behind the curve? What if Ricoh is actually ahead of the curve?

What if they don't actually need to compete with CaNikoNy? What if competing with CaNikoNy head-to-head is actually a bad business decision? If one camera maker leaves the market in the next five years what if is ISN'T Ricoh?

Making things that people want to buy, at a price they are prepared to pay and in a way which enables them to obtain the goods is the only business model known to work, I would suggest. Competition has nothing to do with this simple state of affairs. Ricoh are welcome to say they have invented a way of defying gravity and indeed of distilling cameras from moonbeams but I'm likely to be a little sceptical. Their whole posture, or more accurately the posture of their North American arm, sounds like special pleading to me. Just make very good things which people want and sell them well. Like, in fact, all the other successful companies out there. Why has grasping this become so hard?

[Mistral75]

The business model that works is not so much about making things that people want to buy as making people want things that you sell.

[monochrome]

What does Ricoh have to offer that Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Fuji, Panasonic, Samsung...... can't match? All of those companies have the ability to design sensors and all of them but Nikon and Olympus have the ability to manufacture sensors. Can Ricoh design or manufacture sensors?

Ricoh doesn't need to service capital invested in sensor fabs. They can buy what they need, when they need it.

Do they have state of the art AF technology?

First, what is state-of-the-art? For what purpose? IS a fast beep and a high miss rate better than a slightly longer lock time and higher hit? How good does tracking have to be in practice if you aren't building a camera for Action? Second, we don't know what AF technology will be present in the next camera body. Who's to say the next Pentax body won't have the best AF?

Right now they have the SR technology that allows for the select-able AA filter that is unique, but on a 24MP APS-C sensor it of little use since color morie is not a problem.

Did you forget that IBIS allows smaller, lighter, less expensive lenses? Ricoh doesn't need to build ILIS into every single lens they force you to buy.

Under what scenario does Ricoh not need to compete with CaNikoNy, or Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic, or Samsung for camera sales?

Any scenario around which they choose build their business. For instance, The only camera made by the manufacturers you just listed I would even consider buying is made by Fuji.

Tesla doesn't compete with Ford or General Motors. Tesla ignores Ford and General Motors. Ford and General Motors don't even enter Tesla's thought stream when they're designing and selling vehicles. B&M auto stores are a capital-intensive, outmoded, government-protected, market-distorting, high-volume, low margin, sales-oriented, lying, cheating, stealing crappy distribution model that adds unnecessary cost, commission and aggravation to car buying. Modern camera stores learned everything they know from auto stores.

I'd really enjoy purchasing my next car completely online and having it delivered to a Delivery Center or to my door (wherever State Law requires delivery in the same state as registered, such as my restrictive, backward state does).

---

Last edited by monochrome; 09-20-2014 at 09:02 AM.

[monochrome]

I also don't understand why everybody believes without question that these lenses are FF capable. How could anyone possibly know this? All we have is an unmarked, unlabeled, and untested (by you) lens in a glass display at a trade show? All anyone can really say is that it "looks like it will be" FF capable.

Well there is the question of why a slow APSc lens would need such a large front element, but that doesn't really indicate anything now, does it?

[monochrome]

I suppose everyone is correct. There's really no point to Ricoh even bothering. They're just a bunch of benighted Japanese oafs who don't have a clue or a Plan - or if they have a Plan it certainly is a bad one - and if it is a good one, it certainly isn't going to make enough people happy for such a hollow, misguided company to ever survive long enough to make it worth anyone's investment. Yeah, ad one time they were pretty good, but those Asahi guys missed the trick and Hoya just twisted the knife. I bet they're still laughing that they got Ricoh to cough up the dough.

Buying a Ricoh product is just throwing money down a rathole. I guess I should just face the music and pay attention to what the other companies have decided for me is the right product to own and the right way to own it.

Poor, poor Ricoh. Too little, too late. Again.

[D1N0]

I suppose everyone is correct. There's really no point to Ricoh even bothering. They're just a bunch of benighted Japanese oafs who don't have a clue or a Plan - or if they have a Plan it certainly is a bad one - and if it is a good one, it certainly isn't going to make enough people happy for such a hollow, misguided company to ever survive long enough to make it worth anyone's investment. Yeah, ad one time they were pretty good, but those Asahi guys missed the trick and Hoya just twisted the knife. I bet they're still laughing that they got Ricoh to cough up the dough.

Buying a Ricoh product is just throwing money down a rathole. I guess I should just face the music and pay attention to what the other companies have decided for me is the right product to own and the right way to own it.

Poor, poor Ricoh. Too little, too late. Again.

Just an elaborate way of saying: Pentax is DOOOOOOMMMEEEED!

[bobdobbs]

The business model that works is not so much about making things that people want to buy as making people want things that you sell.

That's Henry Ford's "if I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said a faster horse." I'm not disagreeing that the philosophy, but it doesn't seem like anybody here is addressing: Who is Ricoh's target customer and what are their needs? Is it pros looking to replace Canikon gear, or maybe have a backup camera? Or is it advanced enthusiasts in different segments, from the dedicated Hipstergrammers, to the photo geeks (e.g., us). Knowing who they're targeting with the "niche(s)" they're trying to create might help make sense of things, but I don't know who that is. Does anybody?

[jcdoss]

Well there is the question of why a slow APSc lens would need such a large front element, but that doesn't really indicate anything now, does it?

I'm no optical engineer, but I always thought the size of the front element was indicator of lens speed, not format.

[monochrome]

Not sure I'm following all this; AFAIK, Canon was profitable in 2013.

You know for a fact Canon's camera division was profitable, without posting revenue transfers from related divisions to the top line? (From another post - you're sure Nikon's camera operations were profitable and that the reported profits didn't come from Nikon Precision?)

Also, I find your use of the term "CaNikoNy" perhaps out of place, since even though Sony's camera-related businesses overlaps Canon & Nikon, they are different in that a) Sony supplies parts to other mfr's and b) Sony has stakes in more camera genres than Canikon. Or am I misinterpreting the term "CaNikoNy"?

Does Sony manufacture dSLR's using various sensors as well as other cameras? Does Sony present itself to be a full-line camera manufacturer? They are all three large, high-volume, low-margin consumer product (with B2B business product divisions) enterprises. That is their business model. Ricoh's consumer product division apparently is intentionally, by design, structured differently.

But to your point about Ricoh "competing", didn't Ricoh reps at some point say something to the effect that they are not looking to exactly duplicate Canon & Nikon, but to sort of forge their own niche?

As I recall the statement, they say there is room for a third full-line camera manufacturer in the market - an alternative to Canon and Sony - and it can be Pentax over the intermediate term. I have always maintained the entire business plan of Ricoh is a work currently in progress with a much longer time horizon for measured success than we on this Forum consider for our needs. Our time horizon is something like 'until the next lens'. Ricoh's is 5 - 7 - 10 years, of which really only two have elapsed.

So many are quick to dismiss Ricoh because for twenty years Asahi/Pentax/Hoya has been a slow motion failure in progress. We're extending the past into the future without considering the possibility that Ricoh has a strategy to change the company.

[Winder]

Ricoh doesn't need to service capital invested in sensor fabs. They can buy what they need, when they need it.

And they end up with the same sensors as Nikon, Samsung, and Sony. The have good sensors right now, but will they always have access to premium sensors?

First, what is state-of-the-art? For what purpose? IS a fast beep and a high miss rate better than a slightly longer lock time and higher hit? How good does tracking have to be in practice if you aren't building a camera for Action? Second, we don't know what AF technology will be present in the next camera body. Who's to say the next Pentax body won't have the best AF?Did you forget that IBIS allows smaller, lighter, less expensive lenses? Ricoh doesn't need to build ILIS into every single lens they force you to buy.Any scenario around which they choose build their business. For instance, The only camera made by the manufacturers you just listed I would even consider buying is made by Fuji.

Until the update the lenses we won't know how fast Pentax AF really is. But right now the AF in the K-3 is still a little behind the competition. Its behind AF of mirrorless units from Olympus, Panasonic, & Fuji if you believe the reviews.

Tesla doesn't compete with Ford or General Motors. Tesla ignores Ford and General Motors. Ford and General Motors don't even enter Tesla's thought stream when they're designing and selling vehicles. B&M auto stores are a capital-intensive, outmoded, government-protected, market-distorting, high-volume, low margin, sales-oriented, lying, cheating, stealing crappy distribution model that adds unnecessary cost, commission and aggravation to car buying.

I'd really enjoy purchasing my next car completely online and having it delivered to a Delivery Center or to my door (wherever State Law requires delivery in the same state as registered, such as my restrictive, backward state does).

Give me a business model that has not received $500 million on federal subsidies to survive. Sony and Apple have direct to customer sales, but the cost has not fallen for their products. Does anyone buy from the Sony Store online? Pentax has already pulled out of the B&M stores, and it didn't exactly help the company. I'm all for streamlining the sales channel and selling direct over the internet, but is it viable in the current market? IF people can pick up a K-3 body and hold it in their hands they will never know that the K-3 has the best ergonomics of any APS-C body. They won't know it has the best build quality. If they don't see it sitting on the shelves next to Canon or Nikon, they won't even think about it. If the government was offering a $7,500 tax credit for buying a K-3 like they do for Tesla I'm sure sales of K-3's would skyrocket, but that's not going to happen.

[goubejp]

I'm no optical engineer, but I always thought the size of the front element was indicator of lens speed, not format.

Its is completely true for tele lenses. Divide the focal by the fstop and you have the size of the front element
600f4 = 150 mm
300f2.8 = 112 mm
560f5.6 = 100 mm
300f4 = 77
etc

[monochrome]

I'm no optical engineer, but I always thought the size of the front element was indicator of lens speed, not format.

Since Pentax has always said APSc cameras don't need fast lenses, just clean higher ISO scaled down in mm to permit traditional FoV on APS sensors, why would they suddenly need a fast lens in a traditional mm range?

[monochrome]

Sony and Apple have direct to customer sales, but the cost has not fallen for their products.

I have never paid list for an Apple product. Never bought one in an Apple store. I've bought 23 of them (really) in the past 12 years. Never bought a Sony anything and I intend to maintain that record forever.

[Winder]

I have never paid list for an Apple product. Never bought one in an Apple store. I've bought 23 of them (really) in the past 12 years. Never bought a Sony anything and I intend to maintain that record forever.

So you don't buy direct?