Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-07-2014, 06:02 AM   #136
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,921
QuoteOriginally posted by totsmuyco Quote
I am an ex-4/3 user. Olympus killed 4/3 because they so that they weren't gaining grounds with it. The Em1 is a fine camera. However, m4/3 isn't my cup of tea. When I talk with Nikon users, one of their reason with being loyal to Nikon is that the mount has always been alive and is in no danger of being discontinued. Maybe they're right. Pentax should look into making a MILC using the K-mount. Maybe reassessing how to improve the K-01.
That may be true ... but the second smallest MILC (next to the Q) is the Nikon 1, so Nikon and Pentax users are exactly in the same boat, if you want to use the "standard mount" for the company on a MILC, you have to get an adapter. In fact, at another photography web-site, there is a thread running at this very moment talking about Nikon's "failure" in the MILC arena ... sounds exactly like what you would hear here.

12-07-2014, 07:18 AM   #137
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,711
QuoteOriginally posted by totsmuyco Quote
I am an ex-4/3 user. Olympus killed 4/3 because they so that they weren't gaining grounds with it. The Em1 is a fine camera. However, m4/3 isn't my cup of tea. When I talk with Nikon users, one of their reason with being loyal to Nikon is that the mount has always been alive and is in no danger of being discontinued. Maybe they're right. Pentax should look into making a MILC using the K-mount. Maybe reassessing how to improve the K-01.
Its all about market share & $$$. If you have a lot of market share then you have a lot to lose by changing the mount. If you very little market share, then you have very little to lose. I had an E-3 for 3 years. I sold it when I knee that the 4/3 DSLR line was dead. Moving to M4/3 was the best move Olympus could have made. The younger generation and the new buyers have grown up composing pictures with digital displays. Nikon has enough market share that they are pretty safe in the near future. Of course people said the same thing about Kodak a few years ago. 10 years ago the photography industry looked drastically different than it does today. What will it look like 10 years from now?
12-07-2014, 07:25 AM   #138
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,201
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
In fact, at another photography web-site, there is a thread running at this very moment talking about Nikon's "failure" in the MILC arena ... sounds exactly like what you would hear here.
How well is Canon succeeding in the MILC arena?

#1 and #2 - and the company that plans to be #3 - seem to be 'failing' in the MILC arena. Must be pretty dumb companies.

Then again, maybe not.
12-07-2014, 07:33 AM   #139
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,201
QuoteOriginally posted by justin-23 Quote
There is sense in this because the japanese economy is in recession. So if they don't sell enough k-mount cameras then it may put them off for a while. The main issue I see if that a new FF camera regardless of what people say is lacking in a comparable lens lineup to any other manufacturer. Ricoh can't rely on people having a collection of lenses. So they would need to have a program of new FF lenses IMO. Whether they can manage that is the issue and thus the thoughts that the 2 new telephoto zooms will in someway point towards a FF release.
In point of fact the Japanese economy (which has been in a deflationary recession for 15 years) is no longer in recession.

Which may have something to do with Ricoh's immediate FF camera plans.


Last edited by monochrome; 12-07-2014 at 08:16 AM.
12-07-2014, 07:53 AM   #140
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,711
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
In point of fact the Jpanese economy (which has been in a deflationary recession for 15 years) is no longer in recession.

Which may have something to do with Ricoh's immediate FF camera plans.
I don't think that is a point of fact.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/17/business/international/defying-expectation...ther.html?_r=0
"Defying Expectations, Japan’s Economy Falls Into Recession"
Creating a temporary inflationary bubble doesn't fix an economy.
12-07-2014, 09:19 AM   #141
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,201
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
I don't think that is a point of fact.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/17/business/international/defying-expectation...ther.html?_r=0

Creating a temporary inflationary bubble doesn't fix an economy.
November 16th - New York Times

"Defying Expectations, Japan’s Economy Falls Into Recession"


"Rising sales taxes have been blamed for triggering the downturn by deterring consumer spending, and with Japan having now slipped into a technical recession, the chances that Mr. Abe will seek a new mandate from voters to alter the government’s tax program appear to have increased significantly."

Yen Falls Following Japan's Decision to Delay Sales Tax Rise - WSJ

November 19th - Wall Street Journal

"The yen weakened to a fresh seven-year low against major currencies during Asian trading Wednesday following Tuesday’s decision by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to put off an unpopular increase in the sales tax and call a snap election. The Bank of Japan also decided to maintain its policy Wednesday after it surprised markets last month when it fired a fresh round of stimulus. The BOJ maintained the view that a moderate recovery trend has taken hold, suggesting that the downturn sparked by a tax increase earlier in the year will be short-lived."

2 quarters of negative economic growth is technically the definition of a recession - unless it isn't a recession.

Last edited by monochrome; 12-07-2014 at 10:21 AM.
12-07-2014, 09:52 AM   #142
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,711
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
November 16th - New York Times

"Defying Expectations, Japan’s Economy Falls Into Recession"


"Rising sales taxes have been blamed for triggering the downturn by deterring consumer spending, and with Japan having now slipped into a technical recession, the chances that Mr. Abe will seek a new mandate from voters to alter the government’s tax program appear to have increased significantly."

Yen Falls Following Japan?s Decision to Delay Sales Tax Rise - WSJ

November 19th - Wall Street Journal

"The yen weakened to a fresh seven-year low against major currencies during Asian trading Wednesday following Tuesday’s decision by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to put off an unpopular increase in the sales tax and call a snap election. The Bank of Japan also decided to maintain its policy Wednesday after it surprised markets last month when it fired a fresh round of stimulus. The BOJ maintained the view that a moderate recovery trend has taken hold, suggesting that the downturn sparked by a tax increase earlier in the year will be short-lived."

2 quarters of negative economic growth is technically the definition of a recession - unless it isn't a recession.

You are correct - you don't reverse 15 years of deflationary psychology with a short burst of monetary and fiscal stimulus. By the time we see evidence of renewed economic vitality and some inflation expectations in Japan a durable economic recovery will have already been in place for several years. That's the nature of looking at the past and projecting into the future.
Deflationary prices are normal in a health economy. Let's look at goods like computer, plasma TVs, camera..... How much was a 50" plasma TV 10 years ago? What does one cost today? As the economy advances goods become cheaper in a healthy economy. Japans biggest problem has been the 250% debt to GDP ratio and currently it has a graying population.

If we want to look at the past, we don't find any other country that has successfully done what Japan is trying to do. Japan is not the first to try. I know.... "This time it will be different".....

http://www.cobdencentre.org/2013/01/why-japan-should-not-fight-deflation/
12-07-2014, 10:36 AM   #143
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,921
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
How well is Canon succeeding in the MILC arena?
#1 and #2 - and the company that plans to be #3 - seem to be 'failing' in the MILC arena. Must be pretty dumb companies.
Then again, maybe not.
The companies that have a strong crop-sensor DSLR presence have less of an incentive to pursue MILC products that might compete with those DSLR cameras; part of the question is, what is just around the next bend, and are they agile enough to react if the crop-sensor market were suddenly to lurch from DSLR to MILC.

In the current time, Nikon and Pentax have chosen to develop MILC products with smaller sensors. If I understand correctly, the sensors used in Canon's MILC products are essentially the same as in their crop-sensor DSLR (Rebel) cameras; I have believed that lack of EVF is what has crippled the EOS-M, but I'm guessing that they don't care right now, despite the legions of their fans who desperately want one.

12-07-2014, 12:50 PM   #144
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 2,930
Indeed:
QuoteOriginally posted by Michael Reichmann:
The big two, Canon and Nikon, have been asleep at the wheel when it comes to the so-called mirrorless revolution. Canon's M series was a token effort, and Nikon's 1 series is half-baked at best. Why? Because neither company wants to eat their golden goose – namely profitable DSLR sales. Instead, they're making a classic business school case-study mistake, and allowing erstwhile competitors like Sony, Panasonic, Fujifilm and Olympus to land a beachhead and gain market share in the mirrorless segment, which is where the industry is inevitably heading whether Nikon and Canon want it to or not.
Source: Samsung NX1 First Impressions
12-07-2014, 02:10 PM   #145
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,663
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
Deflationary prices are normal in a health economy.
The biggest decrease in price overall appeared in western countries just because we can leverage low cost developping country works thank to cheap transports. This is quite new and unlikely to continue for ever as they eventually catch up. Already China and Asia is more and more expensive to produce in.

A few products continue to see their price drop it is electronic devices. That's true.

But most products get a little more expensive each year.

As if it should be part of healthy economy, this is hard to say... Many central bank have an objective arround 2% inflation rate and that not at all implying decreasing prices. More the contrary. Their justification is that deflating price lead to everybody keeping money in the bank instead of spending it as it get more value just by waiting. it doesn't favor creating new enterprise or buyings things. Again just keeping the money make you richer. Enterprise sell less and less and after some time need to fire their employees. At least that's what they say.
12-07-2014, 02:17 PM   #146
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,921
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
Deflationary prices are normal in a health economy. Let's look at goods like computer, plasma TVs, camera..... How much was a 50" plasma TV 10 years ago? What does one cost today? As the economy advances goods become cheaper in a healthy economy.
Your particular examples have nothing to do with economic health; they have to do with "Moore's Law". Gordon Moore, one of the founders of Intel, noticed a year-after-year trend of modern electronics being able to deliver twice the performance ever 18 months or so.
12-07-2014, 02:31 PM   #147
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,663
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
Your particular examples have nothing to do with economic health; they have to do with "Moore's Law". Gordon Moore, one of the founders of Intel, noticed a year-after-year trend of modern electronics being able to deliver twice the performance ever 18 months or so.
Twice the density of transistor on a chip... It has been for quite some time it doesn't relate anymore to twice the performance unfortunately Moreover, for camera, reducing size of transistor doesn't help that much the sensor design that must keep a chip of some size to gather light.
12-07-2014, 02:40 PM   #148
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,711
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
Your particular examples have nothing to do with economic health; they have to do with "Moore's Law". Gordon Moore, one of the founders of Intel, noticed a year-after-year trend of modern electronics being able to deliver twice the performance ever 18 months or so.
It really doesn't matter what goods or services we use as an example. Technology based goods are a good example because of the rapid rate of evolution makes it easy to see. Technology makes all goods cheaper, from the cotton to gin to Rapier and air-jet weaving machines, to 3D printers. Moore's Law is simply a law the describes the speed of advancement. It doesn't change the economics of. It doesn't matter if the technology/performance doubles over 2 years or 200 years. The economics of goods don't change. Only the time frame.

And for the record Moore's Law is not a true law. At some point the rate of advancement will change, and laws by definition are consistent without exception.
12-07-2014, 02:46 PM   #149
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,921
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
It really doesn't matter what goods or services we use as an example. Technology based goods are a good example because of the rapid rate of evolution makes it easy to see. Technology makes all goods cheaper, from the cotton to gin to Rapier and air-jet weaving machines, to 3D printers. Moore's Law is simply a law the describes the speed of advancement. It doesn't change the economics of. It doesn't matter if the technology/performance doubles over 2 years or 200 years. The economics of goods don't change. Only the time frame.

And for the record Moore's Law is not a true law. At some point the rate of advancement will change, and laws by definition are consistent without exception.
I'm not going to argue with you, but the simple fact of life is that expanding economies tend to have a gradual increase in prices of non-electronic items. The historical record shows that. It is a fact. You may have the last word if you continue to disagree.
12-07-2014, 02:57 PM   #150
Pentaxian
dcshooter's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Washington DC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,474
Exactly correct, and its application was never meant to apply to most kinds of consumer products like TVs, cameras, etc. In fact, TVs have progressed quite slowly in terms of how "powerful" they were; the NTSC color and PAL Color standards lasted over 50 years, with the main advances in Televisions being only a gradual increase in picture tube size and upgrades in the controls. Admittedly cameras have become more "computer-like" in recent years, meaning that advances in processors will transfer somewhat to processing, real-time stabilization, etc., and possibly better AF performance, most of the components of cameras are mature technologies and will progress much more slowly. Lenses, for instance, are a 600 year old technology at this point. Optics are unlikely to get significantly better than they are now; at best, we will see incremental improvements in sharpness, coatings, etc.. Mechanical shutters also are unlikely to get much faster. And as Nicolas stated, the number of photons hitting your sensor is finite: as we get closer and closer to the theoretical maximum density/sensitivity of sensors, we are likely going to see diminishing returns over the next several years in terms of the quality of raw data sensors can deliver.

QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Twice the density of transistor on a chip... It has been for quite some time it doesn't relate anymore to twice the performance unfortunately Moreover, for camera, reducing size of transistor doesn't help that much the sensor design that must keep a chip of some size to gather light.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, ccd, couple, dslr, edition, fa, february, hoya, jim, kodak, leica, lenses, malcolm, march, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, people, plans, pma, price, production, prototype, release, ricoh, rumors, rumors from japan, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Abstract My Website and Photos on Website Scootatheschool1990 Photo Critique 11 05-22-2013 01:13 AM
Some shots from japan (645D) larkis Pentax Medium Format 38 10-19-2012 05:26 PM
Travel Some shots from Japan (Sep, 2010) PacificCanuck Post Your Photos! 4 03-27-2011 01:44 PM
Pentax JAPAN formally apologizes on their website falconeye Pentax News and Rumors 47 01-30-2011 10:46 PM
Bullshit rumors from Italy eurostar Pentax News and Rumors 25 12-23-2008 03:18 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:09 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top