[derekkite]

Then what or who are they trying to be? If they are going to make DSLRs, they are going to be compared to Canon and Nikon. The only way to avoid competing with Canon and Nikon is to get out of the DSLR business.

Interviewer:
"So do you see Pentax in the next couple of years being a viable competitor to Canon and Nikon?"

Reply by Jim Malcolm:
"No doubt about it. I have no hesitation, in my mind and in my business direction, that in the future—whether it’s three years or five years out—that there will be three dominant imaging companies on a global basis and it will be Canon, Nikon, and Pentax/Ricoh."

Your comments are the exact opposite of public statements made by Pentax USA.

What should we believe?
1. You have better inside information than the head of Pentax USA?
2. Jim Malcolm is a liar. Pentax/Ricoh has no intention of competing with Canon & Nikon.
3. Jim is not a liar. He is just ignorant of Ricoh's real plans which they have shared with you, but not Jim.

The interview is asking about the "next couple of years". Not the 20 year plan. Jim's comments imply a very aggressive near term plan for the Pentax brand.

Marketing is about brand visibility. There is no such thing as invisible marketing. The idea that Ricoh is engaged in marketing, but we can't see it is comical.

No one has anything like the 645z. The K3 does well in a niche abandoned by the other two.

A DSLR with a normal lens is a dying market, being replaced by mirrorless and the same push that dismantled the compact market. I think there are too many players chasing a shrinking market, and it will come down to the last man standing. If Ricoh spent huge amounts of money chasing something that is shrinking and already filled with discounted overproduction, that would be the epitomy of foolishness.

So what have they done? A well appointed aps-c at a nice price point with a stable of compelling lenses. A small attractive lower end aps-c with the advantages of a well done viewfinder. A medium format offering that defines its own market, and is a great base upon which to build a professional service offering. So far. Yes it is a very competitive market and I believe they have needed to rebuild the engineering group from which future offerings will come. I'm certain that everyone in the industry has to revisit and rewrite their plans every month due to new technology and changing market conditions.

I don't quite see the problem. I've got the equipment I want, it works very well. I can see the advantage in full frame, but the dollar amounts make the first mover thrill less palatable. I think that a Pentax offering will oddly enough be what I want to buy, offering the advantages and features that I want for a price I will pay. So far that has been my experience. I suspect that the new body released this coming year will have the same effect on my results that the K5 did when I moved from an Olympus DSLR, and when I bought the da300, and the K3. Each was a substantial improvement over what I had previously at a reasonable price point. Better in that I could get shots I couldn't previously.

[Uluru]

If a company wants to be ranked number 3 in imaging & photography industry, then that company must spend in marketing alone more than number 4 and number 5 together, considering that number 3, 4 and 5 are already close match in an industry dominated by duopoly. So to stick out of rest of bottom feeders, one must spend more than at least two best other players in that small arena.
So does Ricoh spends more on marketing than Sony, Olympus and / or Fuji together?

Number 1 and number 2 could not be there where they are without some great spending on marketing and careful building of a brand. They own more 80% of the market. Number 3, if they want to come into the big boys league, they must spend too. So, whoever wants to claim number 3, must spend a lot, be bold and loud.

But the above claim by RIAC president is inconclusive. He might have said 3rd in photography industry, but inside his head thought DSLRs. So Pentax brand actually needed nothing to do, as they were already number 3.

To me it seems that reality paints a picture already. In the next 5 years, number 3 is clearly going to be Sony. All other manufacturers can try to agree how will they split 10% of the bottom end of market. That does not imply they are bad, but rather that they have realised the seriousness of situation. Instead of feeding their audience with empty promises, they have decided to fill shelves with interesting and different products.

[monochrome]

It is so easy to pick at words, and nuance language to support one's position. I suppose our biases are clouding our interpretations of what seem to be slightly different ways to express the corporate view. They believe they'll be the third camera company in a few years.

I'm optimistic.



But there's nothing for them here.

[Rondec]

From what I can see, Ricoh has really aggressive pricing on their current models. Not necessarily in bodies alone, but in packages. With current pricing, they should sell quite a few K5 II and K3 cameras, as well as lenses to go with them. I feel like they are doing whatever they can to build a base of users to feed the full frame camera they plan to release next year. If that base isn't there, such a release could be a flop.

[Mikesul]

From what I can see, Ricoh has really aggressive pricing on their current models. Not necessarily in bodies alone, but in packages. With current pricing, they should sell quite a few K5 II and K3 cameras, as well as lenses to go with them. I feel like they are doing whatever they can to build a base of users to feed the full frame camera they plan to release next year. If that base isn't there, such a release could be a flop.

This makes a great deal of sense.

[kooks]

Prices are always a good way to attract new costumers, with the latest price drops RICOH will increment their users base + will clear up some inventory at dealers so they can fill it up with new products soon, and they will make some price room for the upcoming bodies..

If we look it like that is a good thinking.. it could be even better if they do some strong online marketing.

[Winder]

Prices are always a good way to attract new costumers, with the latest price drops RICOH will increment their users base + will clear up some inventory at dealers so they can fill it up with new products soon, and they will make some price room for the upcoming bodies..

If we look it like that is a good thinking.. it could be even better if they do some strong online marketing.

If you know that the K-3 successor with drop in value by 50% in the first year, will you buy new or wait for 1 year and save 50%? The K-3 is an excellent body, and unless the successor is ground breaking I see no reason to upgrade and pay a premium in the first year.

Smart people don't buy into systems for the bodies. They buy for the glass which represents a long term commitment.

---------- Post added 11-29-14 at 09:01 PM ----------

A DSLR with a normal lens is a dying market, being replaced by mirrorless and the same push that dismantled the compact market. I think there are too many players chasing a shrinking market, and it will come down to the last man standing. If Ricoh spent huge amounts of money chasing something that is shrinking and already filled with discounted overproduction, that would be the epitomy of foolishness.

IF the DSLR is a dying market, then K-mount doesn't have a future. It is a valid question. Someone starting out with a ILC system would be wise to take a good look at the different MILC systems on the market. Are you investing in dinosaur technology?

[Rondec]

If you know that the K-3 successor with drop in value by 50% in the first year, will you buy new or wait for 1 year and save 50%? The K-3 is an excellent body, and unless the successor is ground breaking I see no reason to upgrade and pay a premium in the first year.

Smart people don't buy into systems for the bodies. They buy for the glass which represents a long term commitment.

---------- Post added 11-29-14 at 09:01 PM ----------



IF the DSLR is a dying market, then K-mount doesn't have a future. It is a valid question. Someone starting out with a ILC system would be wise to take a good look at the different MILC systems on the market. Are you investing in dinosaur technology?

It really depends on whether you want the upgrade and can afford it and don't want to wait. Electronics are particularly prone to decreasing prices over time. The cutting edge computer you buy today, you could put together for half the price in a year. But if you want certain specs today, you end up paying for them. If you can't afford it, then there have been lower end cameras like the K50 and K5 II that offer probably 90 percent of what the K3 does for significantly cheaper.

I don't usually buy cameras on day one -- not so much because of the price gouging that companies do initially, but because there are often kinks that have to be worked out and I would rather let others deal with those and figure them out.

[totsmuyco]

It really depends on whether you want the upgrade and can afford it and don't want to wait. Electronics are particularly prone to decreasing prices over time. The cutting edge computer you buy today, you could put together for half the price in a year. But if you want certain specs today, you end up paying for them. If you can't afford it, then there have been lower end cameras like the K50 and K5 II that offer probably 90 percent of what the K3 does for significantly cheaper.

I don't usually buy cameras on day one -- not so much because of the price gouging that companies do initially, but because there are often kinks that have to be worked out and I would rather let others deal with those and figure them out.

I totally agree with you.

[Mikesul]

I totally agree with you.

The K3 is the only time i have not waited at least 6 months or a year for prices and problems to stabilize. I have not regretted that decision even once.

[monochrome]

This looks to me suspiciously like Pentax is . . . . . . marketing!!!!!!!


Nah. Couldn't possibly be.

[RockvilleBob]

The K3 is the only time i have not waited at least 6 months or a year for prices and problems to stabilize. I have not regretted that decision even once.

I feel the same about buying my K-3 on day one.

[derekkite]

It depends what you shoot. The added resolution and the improved focus got me shots that I wasn't even trying for with the k5. Other features I have grown to really appreciate as well.

A stop or two less noise and another jump in focus improvement would probably move me to upgrade early.

[Rondec]

It depends what you shoot. The added resolution and the improved focus got me shots that I wasn't even trying for with the k5. Other features I have grown to really appreciate as well.

A stop or two less noise and another jump in focus improvement would probably move me to upgrade early.

I used to be someone who waited till camera bodies were being cleared out for the next model before I would buy a new camera, but I pay much less attention to the price at this point and more to what I need/want. The reality is that if I wait six months and get a body for 300 dollars cheaper, there is no way to get that six months of shooting back.

People focus a lot on sensors and maybe not enough on other features a camera offers. The K3's sensor isn't much better than the K5 sensor (basically the same, but with more resolution at low iso), but there are a lot of other things that can help you get the shot you want in tough situations.

[mecrox]

A good quote I came across from the head of a very successful company said you need four things to be a good exporter (which all the camera companies are): efficient production systems, quality, innovation and brand awareness. Without those you have nothing to sell on but price and that is a mug's game.

How many of those do Ricoh have where you live?

The K3 looks as if it will make a fine next camera for me at a good price now too, but without investment in a mirrorless line to take over from the old K mount and more brand awareness through marketing, it's quite hard to see there will be a next time with Ricoh in three years or so, at least on APS-C. The DSLR on that format is looking very much like toast. Sales are declining and all the forecasts are for the decline to continue. Mirrorless looks to have pretty well won there already. Time for Rioch to move to something else or give up the format perhaps? There's nothing unusual or apocalyptic about this: it is simply called change. Time have changed, so out with the old and in with the new.