[RobA_Oz]

Are you prepared to pay Leica prices for your Pentax gear? I am not.

But would you pay Leica prices for Leica gear? I possibly would have, once, but probably not now, unless I win the lottery or inherit a fortune.

Seriously, the point was that market share isn't the only measure of success. However, if mere survival is the main measure of success, then Pentax is undoubtedly successful. The question that follows is the one that Ricoh is addressing: how do you move from survival to sustainability? You either become a respected niche player (which Leica is, product price to one side) or you grow your user base. Note that I said "user", not "customer". Customers are necessary for sales and profit, but users ultimately sustain you in the long term, directly through ongoing sales, or indirectly through passive or active promotion to others.

[monochrome]

If they can turn out the 35mm FF equivalent of the 645Z, they've got it made.

Wasn't that the objective from the moment of conception?

Success and respect may be obtained by other means. e.g. Leica.

Leica is already Leica. Pentax doesn't need to be Leica (or Canon or Nikon or Sony). Pentax needs to be Pentax.

K-3II
K-1
645z

[Nicolas06]

But would you pay Leica prices for Leica gear? I possibly would have, once, but probably not now, unless I win the lottery or inherit a fortune.

Seriously, the point was that market share isn't the only measure of success. However, if mere survival is the main measure of success, then Pentax is undoubtedly successful. The question that follows is the one that Ricoh is addressing: how do you move from survival to sustainability? You either become a respected niche player (which Leica is, product price to one side) or you grow your user base. Note that I said "user", not "customer". Customers are necessary for sales and profit, but users ultimately sustain you in the long term, directly through ongoing sales, or indirectly through passive or active promotion to others.

The problem with users instead of customers is that many use old lenses and old camera and are perfectly happy. If you take a bit distance there no much difference between a K5 and K3, current lenses and lenses 5 years ago.

My father for example doesn't plan to change his K30 until it dies and that could be 10 more years. At that time he might be too old to think of it anymore or the market could have so much changed that he would decide to buy something quite different.

Most people I know that have a Pentax have a K30 or a Kx. It fill their box for "great quality camera". One has M lenses in addition to the kit lens, on has brought a tripod but kept the kit lens and a new colleague may decide to buy an used macro lens.

While theses users if happy with their gear might help the brand this is not obvious. My collegue with the Kx was thinking she would need another camera, potentially not Pentax to do a time lapse. I had to show her the thread here that show how to use some software and connect the Kx to the PC to do just that.

Even me I consider myself happy with my lenses and body but I don't see much reason to updgrade in the following years and if somebody ask me what brand is the best I might as well say Nikon if AF is key for them (action/sports) or if they don't care of small/expensive/well constructed lenses like the ltds. If anybody is asking for FF, I couldn't recommend Pentax if not already heavily invested the echosystem is not really here. Only a few very expensive lenses and likely quite expensive body at first. And in general I would advise them to buy an APSC body if they don't plan to sell photos, it is simply not worth it.

[monochrome]

or if they don't care of small/expensive/well constructed lenses like the ltds.

If they DO care about ergonomics and a certain quality of image and elegant lenses, and appreciate fine distinctions in certain professional market segments, then they could become Pentax users. That's the entire point.

CaNiSony have customers. Customers are fickle. Pentax has users. Users are loyal.

[Nicolas06]

If they DO care about ergonomics and a certain quality of image and elegant lenses, and appreciate fine distinctions in certain professional market segments, then they could become Pentax users. That's the entire point.

CaNiSony have customers. Customers are fickle. Pentax has users. Users are loyal.

I don't think CaniSony have less loyal users than Pentax in all honesty.

This is not to say anything bad of Pentax the brand has great strengths but this look like a bit of BS we do here because we are Pentax enthousiasrs rather than just users.

To me the one that promote the brand are the "activist" and enthousiast that are see are expect on the subject by their friends/colleagues etc and are asked to advise when they want to buy a camera. This happen to me and I made 3 persons I knoiw buy a K30, in particular because of the good set of features for the price. And in case of 1 person at least I convinced him a K30 was enough and he didn't need a better camera for its needs.

There a guy I was hearing the other day, he was discussing of a timelapse he made with his camera. This would be another influencer, but I have no idea if he is using Pentax or not.

But if you are a mere user you may not have that much influence and you may not give that money by yourself neither.

[RobA_Oz]

The problem with users instead of customers is that many use old lenses and old camera and are perfectly happy. If you take a bit distance there no much difference between a K5 and K3, current lenses and lenses 5 years ago.

It's only a problem if non-users don't see others using their Pentax gear, and if that doesn't translate into sales to those non-users. There are many more Nikon and Canon users who never progress beyond the kit lens, but they are seen by others who read the brand name on their neck straps and absorb the marketing message there. Years ago, the best advertising the Japanese automotive brands had were their names plastered all over the backs of their vehicles in bold type - visible users bring sales because they give comfort to buyers.

[bxf]

Are you prepared to pay Leica prices for your Pentax gear? I am not.

Nor am I. Not by a long shot.

I was merely stating that one doesn't have to be No. 1 or a huge seller to be respected and successful.

[Deimos]

More from AM:

Are you able to give a sense of whether there will be much of an improvement in high ISO? Thank you in advance?


"Look to the Nikon D 810 and we all know what Pentax is doing with good Sony sensors
Best regards"

[Mistral75]

Nor am I. Not by a long shot.

I was merely stating that one doesn't have to be No. 1 or a huge seller to be respected and successful.

Indeed but allow me a syllogism:

- We want Pentax to be respected and successful
- Success and respect may be obtained by being either a huge seller or some kind of Leica
- We are not prepared to pay Leica prices for our Pentax gear
- Therefore we want Pentax to become a huge seller.

[Nicolas06]

More from AM:

Are you able to give a sense of whether there will be much of an improvement in high ISO? Thank you in advance?


"Look to the Nikon D 810 and we all know what Pentax is doing with good Sony sensors
Best regards"

Pentax didn't got out more from K3 than Nikon on D7200... We should be around D810 levels sure and that would be a noticable improvement from K3-II due to sensor format alone but that was to be expected. After all the D810 has the high iso performance of a D7200 multiplied by the factor change in surface area (x2.3).

We could expect better performance if the sensor was to be BSI. That would be at least 0.3EV more I guess. Maybe 0.5 EV if played well.

Let's not forget that performance gain in high iso due to sensor format naturally come with the tradof of getting less deph of field too. While high iso gain due to improvement from sensor technology are 100% applicable in all conditions.

[rawr]

D810 high-ISO is good. But I don't see great high-ISO performance as the design priority for D810 class cameras. Not many sports shooters, where high-ISO is often critical, use the D810.

And re "what Pentax is doing with good Sony sensors" - I agree with Nicolas06. The K-5 earned Pentax that reputation, but to be frank I am not sure Pentax is really capable anymore of doing any better with Sony sensors than Nikon or Sony, as the K-3's sensor performance reveals.

[Deimos]

Pentax didn't got out more from K3 than Nikon on D7200...

They didn't use the same sensor. Pentax used Sony, Nikon another maybe Toshiba

[RobA_Oz]

They didn't use the same sensor. Pentax used Sony, Nikon another maybe Toshiba

Thom Hogan says it's a Toshiba 5105. I imagine he's well-placed to know.

[beholder3]

And re "what Pentax is doing with good Sony sensors" - I agree with Nicolas06. The K-5 earned Pentax that reputation, but to be frank I am not sure Pentax is really capable anymore of doing any better with Sony sensors than Nikon or Sony, as the K-3's sensor performance reveals.

Sony and Toshiba sensor development of five years K-5 versus D7200 has been absolutely stagnant at a ridiculous +0,2 EV "improvement". That's not even worth mentioning, let alone that anyone in real world can see it.

Then we have the failed 42Mpx sensor which is buggy / noisy crap for long time exposures and for dynamic range at the all important low ISO it is 0,86 EV worse than the leading D810 sensor.
Actually so bad at it that it delivers no (that is 0,1) dynamic range improvement over a K-3 APSC sensor where it should deliver at least 1,3 EV.
When did somebody dare bring out a sensor that was so much of a step backwards? Un-Innovation.

Sony can be happy about Canon's neverending sluggishness, but after some more years that will be gone. Then Sony are in deep trouble.

Their sensor's are lame minor upgrades the last years, far from the level of improvement the 16 Mpx APSC sensor brought.

We can be happy that we seem to get the currently world's best FF sensor from the D810.

[Zygonyx]

I Sony's A7rii 42 Mpix sensor that crap compared to D810's sensor ?