Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-07-2016, 08:50 AM   #526
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 3,045
My point is the following:

- you wrote that "a camera company will have a harder time being competitive / profitable if they don't have products in the lower priced tiers (...) Pentax might have been an exception forty years ago, but they kid themselves if they think they're another Leica or Hassy today."

- I fully agree with the first part of the quote AND Pentax was definitely no exception forty years ago.

10-07-2016, 09:00 AM   #527
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,441
QuoteOriginally posted by Mistral75 Quote
Why did this message from asahi man disappear from this thread?
Not a clue but in the same post he said I was right about what he said earlier about mirrorless and K-mount. Too bad it went...... The mods will know but not tell you

I bet Ricoh is monitoring us 24/7 and his post came a little to close to the truth. (Right @Kenspo ?)
10-07-2016, 09:00 AM - 1 Like   #528
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 157
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
There even less reason to assume that make a "generic" MILC would be a success.

Reusing K-mount, all the existing Pentax K-mount user have a reasons to try/buy one:
- Smaller/Lighter body that play very well with smaller lenses (limited serie, plastic wonder, RE lenses) and work perfectly with the other 2.
- Benefit of having an EVF: see actual exposure and dof. Possibility to provide focus peaking and display many advanced information. Crop modes still take 100% of the viewfinder (contry to K1 were APSC crop project a smaller image than on an APSC body).
- Manufacturing cost: EVF and the associated electronics is something whom cost decrease over time. The removal of dedicated AF sensors, mirror and Pentaprims make a real gain and make it far easier to achieve hight bust rate and 100% continuous AF as the mirror never hide the scene from the AF sensors. This cost reduction is brought to the K-mount echosystem that is the key asset of Pentax.
- Progressive evolution: It is almost impossible to make a perfect product from day1. Product like K70 let you try the water and once you feel confident you can make a mirrorless body. But even if that body isn't perfect, there will be a market for it because for many people this will be their "only choice" to leverage their current investment.

Not reusing K-mount:
- The product MUST be better than the competition from day1 or it will not sell. Counting what Fuji, m4/3 and Sony have this is almost impossible.
- The product will have to come with an extensive echosystem. In practice it will be difficult to have more than 5 lenses dedicated to the mount at the begining while there more than at least 40-50 lenses for K-mount and Sony E, 100+ for m4/3 and 15-20 for Fuji X. Nobody would want to invest in a weak echosystem.
- Existing K-mount user will feel betrayed exactly like milnolta mount user when Sony introduced E mount. There will be a kind of exodus of people from K-mount seeing it death approaching and not necessarily the willingness to go for the next Pentax product: reduced trust and why go to a product that the first years has no way to provide the same as the competition.
- It would work if you have truely unique selling argument. But the mirrorless market is different. What are Pentax strengths? Build quality (Fuji and Olympus sure know how to do it). great OVF (useless on MILC), In body SR: all MILC manufacturers have it except Fuji. WR: could be, but it does exist. Small limited lenses: All MILC have an equivalent except Sony. Pixel shift: mirrorless manufacturers have their own version... Honestly astrotracer and AA filter simulation is far from being enough. Pentax would have to find 2-3 unique selling point the other don't have and put all that together. This look like extremely hard to achieve.

This is the total opposite of a strawman argument. This is the company future, this is speaking of breaking or not the #1 marketing strategy of all camera manufacturer: Make people invest in your own echosystem so once you are invested, it is much easier to stay. Do we want to give reaosns for existing customers to leave? Do we want to make a new product the hard way with no existing echosystem to bring client to it? Is the K-mount the wrong choice and if you do it you may go bankrupt ? Or if choosing a new mount the wrong choice with an exodus of current client that would stop buying the brand?

Theses are very important decision the most important Pentax has to make for the next 10 years. This isn't some trivia, this isn't easy and a wrong move could mean bankrupt.
I agree.
I am a hobbiist enthusiast invested in Pentax APS-C K-mount (K3+K30+over 2500 in DA lenses, including a nice bunch of DA limiteds, 15, 21, 35 macro, 40, and70), and I would be interested by a mirrorless K-mount body, whether APS-C or FF, while keeping my K3 DSLR which I enjoy using.
Why?
Because it would complement my system by all the above mentioned features that can come with mirrorless and a modern built-in EVF. And I could buy just the body alone and use all my lenses, and then choose every day between the DSLR or the mirrorless, the one that will suit me best.
And it could be a perfect match for my tiny DA21 or DA40 XS for instance.
10-07-2016, 09:02 AM   #529
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 3,045
QuoteOriginally posted by D1N0 Quote
Not a clue but in the same post he said I was right about what he said earlier about mirrorless and K-mount. Too bad it went...... The mods will know but not tell you
Indeed he said that you were right (and, implicitly, that I didn't get his point).

10-07-2016, 09:07 AM   #530
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,012
QuoteOriginally posted by Mistral75 Quote
My point is the following:

- you wrote that "a camera company will have a harder time being competitive / profitable if they don't have products in the lower priced tiers (...) Pentax might have been an exception forty years ago, but they kid themselves if they think they're another Leica or Hassy today."

- I fully agree with the first part of the quote AND Pentax was definitely no exception forty years ago.
When I said "Pentax might have been an exception forty years ago" I was reflecting my own experience; I was just getting into SLR forty years ago, and I had a Canon rangefinder camera, but I knew Pentax as a special brand - one that stood above the crowd. Pentax cannot stand on that "special-ness" any more - they need good products in the lower tiers to introduce themselves to others. I bought my first Pentax at Roberts Photo, on the Circle in Indianapolis; Pentax needs to find their way back into that kind of exposure.
10-07-2016, 03:51 PM   #531
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,750
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
You are mistaken.
I'am impressed by the level of the argumentation

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Sorry, but claiming that all the existing Pentax K-mount users have a reason to buy one is wrong. Only those users interested in having a MILC and use their K-mount lenses without adapters would have reasons to buy one (assuming it otherwise fits their needs).
Not all by far. Still if it work well and fully compatible many will in the end buy both to have a lightweight mirrorless for some case, and a full fledged DSLR in some other cases. Like many have an APSC body and an FF but with ever more difference because this would be a very small light FF vs a much bigger/heavier sturdy FF DSLR.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Irrelevant arguments.
- the Canon EOS M was not better than the competition from day 1. Some might say it was worse than the K-01, including in AF speed.
Canon has a much more powerfull distribution, chanel, much more powerful marketing department and a brand that is much more recognised by the photographers and consumers.

Still this is basically a failure, in particular if you think of the Canon market share from DSLR. m4/3 or Sony E are the key players here. Canon and Nikon just managed to take a few crumb. There no reason to expect for Pentax to do better. I would expect that they would get even less.

Your whole argumentation is that a random new player can just do the same as other, likely worse because they have less experience and compete. I think that's hard to compete against Sony, Olympus, Pana and Fuji and the most likely outcome is failure is you don't have a few special things.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
- we have good examples of MILC systems which were launched, grew and are selling in reasonable quantities. Pentax/Ricoh could squeeze one more in. The target here might be not to go all-out, but to have a foothold in the MILC market as well as in the DSLRs - being prepared if, in the distant future, a market shift would occur.
The market shift is occuring. There mirrorless from all sensor size now with products dedicated for pros. AF performance significantly improved. The only thing really missing are the FF pro lenses to really match what exist in their full variety only on Canikon as well as Sony Alpha (not fully FE) and also a bit on Pentax. Pentax took 10 year to be there... Imagine if they have to restart from scratch. 10 more years.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
- last but not least, what you're forgetting is that such a MILC would be able to use K-mount lenses, through adapters, perhaps even with a high degree of automation.
All mirrorless support K-mount lenses without automation already. That's not a selling point for the Pentax. The automation would have to include AF at least and provide great performance; But still that would not be enough. It is bit like Sony FE. You don't buy Sony FE to mount alpha mount lenses on it.


QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
There's one valid point, and that's about existing K-mount users feeling betrayed. I have no doubts that certain people (not necessarily Pentaxians ) would work hard at spreading FUD.
But, that's not good enough to stop Ricoh Imaging from acting; we're not talking about a "stop the D FA line, it's all MILC from now on" but a more Canon-like approach. Are Canon users desperate about the presence of the EOS M?
Your are purely speculating what Ricoh will decide. You are not them. Regarless of our argument, we will see what happen to see if its enough to stop them or not. As to why switch, that's obvious: if you are interrested in K-mount MILC and you learnt it will never happen due to different strategy choice, your investment in K-mount can't satisfy anymore long term objective of smaller/ligher body and you decide to migrate to a system that support that. And at that moment the Pentax one will be the least advanced and the one you'll not want to invest on.
10-07-2016, 04:01 PM   #532
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,750
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
I think this is won't hapen aga in, because models don't run that long. Maybe Canon did with the 7d?. But K1000 was on sale for 22 years, so in reality it sold 90.000 units a year and that is not an impossible number.
There around 10-20 millions ILC sold each year.13 millions in 2015. More than 20 millions in 2012. Likely more like 10 this year. Canon has what ? 30-50% of that market... If we take a release cycle of 3 years, that mean 15-25 millions unit for Canon alone. I can guess a few model crossed the 2 millions bar.
10-07-2016, 04:22 PM   #533
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,762
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
The most recent mirrorless cameras include long lists of amazing specs that Pentax has yet to attain in any of its products. But these specs - 4K, touchscreens, fast focusing, fast frame-rates, focus points all over the sensor, new modern shutters which eliminate shock, focus stacking and other in-camera manoeuvres, etc - are rapidly becoming a minimum baseline.
OK. let's see where Pentax are at with their current mirrorless technology.

4K: No, they make cameras for stills photographers.

Touchscreens: Do you really want to smear grease on your screen so you can't see what's under it?

Fast focusing: As fast as stepper motors will get you there.

Fast frame rates: No, but better the right frame than ten wrong ones.

New modern shutters which eliminate shock: Yes, leaf shutters, which also eliminate jello.

Focus stacking: Irrelevant when you have enough depth of field in the first place.

10-07-2016, 04:39 PM   #534
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,466
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
I'am impressed by the level of the argumentation
I'm not sure you noticed, but I had arguments following.
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Not all by far. Still if it work well and fully compatible many will in the end buy both to have a lightweight mirrorless for some case, and a full fledged DSLR in some other cases. Like many have an APSC body and an FF but with ever more difference because this would be a very small light FF vs a much bigger/heavier sturdy FF DSLR.
So it's not all of us, after all. Good.
However... is there such a big difference between a K-mount mirrorless and another K-mount mirrorless which happens to be a new-mount mirrorless with a K-mount adapter?
And are the current K-mount users the only market they should target? Think longer term. Later you're claiming the market shift to MILCs is already occurring; what would happen then?
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Canon has a much more powerfull distribution, chanel, much more powerful marketing department and a brand that is much more recognised by the photographers and consumers.
Yes, and...? Pentax is working with the same disadvantage right now.
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Still this is basically a failure, in particular if you think of the Canon market share from DSLR. m4/3 or Sony E are the key players here. Canon and Nikon just managed to take a few crumb. There no reason to expect for Pentax to do better. I would expect that they would get even less.
According to BCNRanking, Canon was on the 3rd place in Japan, in 2015. And they aren't even trying.
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Your whole argumentation is that a random new player can just do the same as other, likely worse because they have less experience and compete. I think that's hard to compete against Sony, Olympus, Pana and Fuji and the most likely outcome is failure is you don't have a few special things.
No. I was responding to your claim that "The product MUST be better than the competition from day1 or it will not sell." by offering the counter-evidence of a player who didn't had a better product from day 1. I can offer evidence of a player who exited the market not long after introducing a better product. Things are not as clear cut.
And FTR, your claim should be applied to the K-mount mirrorless, too - would such a product be perceived as "better"?
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
The market shift is occuring. There mirrorless from all sensor size now with products dedicated for pros. AF performance significantly improved. The only thing really missing are the FF pro lenses to really match what exist in their full variety only on Canikon as well as Sony Alpha (not fully FE) and also a bit on Pentax. Pentax took 10 year to be there... Imagine if they have to restart from scratch. 10 more years.
Nope, it's not occurring - not yet, anyway.
I'm not impressed by made-up numbers; do you have any kind of information about when the FF project was started? Ricoh took over Pentax 5 years ago, by the way; are you saying that Pentax was working hard on the FF all the time they were under Hoya? I find such an idea ridiculous.
They might need 4-5 years to have a first product, but we won't know when they started.
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
All mirrorless support K-mount lenses without automation already. That's not a selling point for the Pentax. The automation would have to include AF at least and provide great performance; But still that would not be enough. It is bit like Sony FE. You don't buy Sony FE to mount alpha mount lenses on it.
And I said "perhaps even with a high degree of automation". Automatic aperture should be a given (unless most lenses would be KAF4 by then), same for AF with in-lens motor. Extra automation, that would be AF with screw drive lenses (targeted at Limiteds).
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Your are purely speculating what Ricoh will decide. You are not them. Regarless of our argument, we will see what happen to see if its enough to stop them or not. As to why switch, that's obvious: if you are interrested in K-mount MILC and you learnt it will never happen due to different strategy choice, your investment in K-mount can't satisfy anymore long term objective of smaller/ligher body and you decide to migrate to a system that support that. And at that moment the Pentax one will be the least advanced and the one you'll not want to invest on.
Pot calling kettle. You decided that a K-mount MILC would work and a new-mount MILC wouldn't. And you're offering the same argumentation some have against the Pentax DSLRs.
I wouldn't dismiss a Pentax large sensor MILC before I'd see it.

---------- Post added 08-10-16 at 02:51 AM ----------

By the way. This (fake) rumor is about two new cameras, presumably with two new line of lenses (unless the dreamer who made it up thought about matching the "vintage" cameras with DA and FA Limiteds only, or worse, with second hand K and M lenses).
10-07-2016, 05:17 PM - 1 Like   #535
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,100
You guy's page-long posts, made me suddendly understand why Twitter was for sale.....
10-08-2016, 02:11 AM   #536
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,750
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Yes, and...? Pentax is working with the same disadvantage right now.
Again the business of camera manufacturer is to trap you into their echosystem by getting you have some noticable investment in lenses so now you'll get body upgrade for your lenses and buy more lenses for that body.

Pentax has that echosystem, even if small. It small because they made many errors over the years (who don't) like being late for a real working AF option for K-mount,, not having a single high end FF camera for the digital area until 2016. (The Canon 1Ds is 2002 and Canon 5D that make digital FF "popular" is 2005). Being late again on AF silent motors for their lenses and being late for a decent AFC implementation.

But Pentax is still there because they still invest on the echosystem. The echosystem shrinked from when they invented the pentaprism because of the many errors (I don't say it was easy) but if there still some Pentax brand inside Ricoh instead of nothing for consummers camera is because still enough people were invested and willing to continue.

A K-mount mirrorless would straighten that echosystem and if done well will for one time give a head start for that toward Canikon where neither dared do that in the fear of not selling that many high end DSLR anymore but only mirrorless bodies.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
No. I was responding to your claim that "The product MUST be better than the competition from day1 or it will not sell." by offering the counter-evidence of a player who didn't had a better product from day 1. I can offer evidence of a player who exited the market not long after introducing a better product. Things are not as clear cut.
And FTR, your claim should be applied to the K-mount mirrorless, too - would such a product be perceived as "better"?
That's the whole point. As long as the product isn't too much worse than the competition overall, it would at least sell to the members of the echosystem because there no alternative. That give you an user base, time to explore and improve.

Not doing that, mean you have to start only from the strength of your brand, lot of marketing and better than the competition product to create a new echosystem... All while ensuring you don't weaken what you already have... Think Sony, even if they released a new Alpha mount body recently, they kind of killed they old echosystem.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
I'm not impressed by made-up numbers; do you have any kind of information about when the FF project was started?
You are right, this isn't 10 years, this is 16 years after checking: Pentax announced it in 2000 officially. There wasn't any Hoya lame excuse by then. It didn't work well and they stopped as we all know. that a bit like their first AF attempt. First try was an utter failure and they finally did it really years after. Again that's not criticism, I think doing that sort of stuff is far from easy and many companies comes and go. But for people that were Invested in K-mount in 2005-2006 and that wanted an FF it was buying a Canon or nothing if they wanted an FF, decent high isos etc... The kind of stuff that help significantly for sports/weddings. 2 big area of pro photographers. And everybody had a full FF lens line up back then providing the necessary field of view. Not so much for APSC.

Last edited by Nicolas06; 10-08-2016 at 02:23 AM.
10-08-2016, 02:43 AM   #537
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,466
Sorry, Zygonyx! I'm doing it again...
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Again the business of camera manufacturer is to trap you into their echosystem by getting you have some noticable investment in lenses so now you'll get body upgrade for your lenses and buy more lenses for that body.

Pentax has that echosystem, even if small. It small because they made many errors over the years (who don't) like being late for a real working AF option for K-mount,, not having a single high end FF camera for the digital area until 2016. (The Canon 1Ds is 2002 and Canon 5D that make digital FF "popular" is 2005). Being late again on AF silent motors for their lenses and being late for a decent AFC implementation.

But Pentax is still there because they still invest on the echosystem. The echosystem shrinked from when they invented the pentaprism because of the many errors (I don't say it was easy) but if there still some Pentax brand inside Ricoh instead of nothing for consummers camera is because still enough people were invested and willing to continue.

A K-mount mirrorless would straighten that echosystem and if done well will for one time give a head start for that toward Canikon where neither dared do that in the fear of not selling that many high end DSLR anymore but only mirrorless bodies.
What are you trying to say, more exactly?
Pentax/Ricoh Imaging will continue to develop the K-mount system, that's a given.
A K-mount mirrorless was done before, it failed to "straighten" anything. You're asking them to do it again.
Canon has their own large sensor mirrorless line, which doesn't fit with your "neither dared to do that in fear...".
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
That's the whole point. As long as the product isn't too much worse than the competition overall, it would at least sell to the members of the echosystem because there no alternative. That give you an user base, time to explore and improve.

Not doing that, mean you have to start only from the strength of your brand, lot of marketing and better than the competition product to create a new echosystem... All while ensuring you don't weaken what you already have... Think Sony, even if they released a new Alpha mount body recently, they kind of killed they old echosystem.
No, there is no guarantee that it would sell "to the members of the echosystem"; you're assuming many of us want MILCs, but for some reasons we're specifically waiting for a K-mount one (after rejecting the K-01). You're continuing to make claims which are no more than wishful thinking.

And Sony "kind of killed they old echosystem" by following a particular strategy: they put most of the effort into the F/FE line, and they did weird things with the Alpha DSLR line (in the end transforming it into a SLT line). I repeatedly gave you an example when a camera maker - Canon - entered the MILC market without impacting their DSLR line; you are ignoring that.
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
You are right, this isn't 10 years, this is 16 years after checking: Pentax announced it in 2000 officially. There wasn't any Hoya lame excuse by then. It didn't work well and they stopped as we all know. that a bit like their first AF attempt. First try was an utter failure and they finally did it really years after. Again that's not criticism, I think doing that sort of stuff is far from easy and many companies comes and go. But for people that were Invested in K-mount in 2005-2006 and that wanted an FF it was buying a Canon or nothing if they wanted an FF, decent high isos etc... The kind of stuff that help significantly for sports/weddings. 2 big area of pro photographers. And everybody had a full FF lens line up back then providing the necessary field of view. Not so much for APSC.
Hold your horses.
I was asking you if you have any proof that Pentax worked on the FF for 10 years i.e. all the time they were under Hoya, and then all the time under Ricoh - and instead of responding to that, you're extending the period with another 6?
Why not counting from the beginning of the Universe, then?
10-08-2016, 02:51 AM - 1 Like   #538
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,441
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Why not counting from the beginning of the Universe, then?
The K-1 is 42! That was the question to life the universe and everything.
10-08-2016, 03:04 AM - 1 Like   #539
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,466
Excellent argument, there's no further need to debate.
And, for anyone trying to decipher Ricoh Imaging's strategy - "don't panic!"
10-08-2016, 03:10 AM   #540
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,750
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
A K-mount mirrorless was done before, it failed to "straighten" anything. You're asking them to do it again.
If Pentax always had given up definitely after first try we would not have AF in our bodies neither an FF digital. If they didn't insist at least on AF, there would be no Pentax camera sold today. That's as simple as that.

The problem to me look more that after a failure they need so many years to start again than giving up not early enougth. if they tried again their FF in 2003-2005, we would be much more likely to be in a position of strength with 15-25% market share than the 3-5% we have today. All the additionnal money would have allowed many more investments and the company would be much different today and among other things could try many more things.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
No, there is no guarantee that it would sell "to the members of the echosystem"; you're assuming many of us want MILCs, but for some reasons we're specifically waiting for a K-mount one (after rejecting the K-01). You're continuing to make claims which are no more than wishful thinking.
I am assuming it yes. I was there for K01, didn't brought it because of AF and lack of OVF. There isn't a single reason to failure, but many. K01 had some questionnable design, no OVF, soso AF and Pentax was asking for a too high price at the begining. They also made too many of them. But now despite all the flaws it is doing well on the used market...

I don't think all people want MILC but again people buy what exist. It can be argued that even if it improve and eat DSLR market share each year a bit more that MILC don't offer level of echosystem than DSLR. This isn"t a technical problem but a pure strategic decision of Canon, Nikon, Sony but this is moving with Sony moving on FE mount. In 2-3 years, you find MILC echosystem that have it all, in particular for an extensive lens line up on top of all the rest: great AF, nice feature, lot of FPS, great reactivity. By then the DSLR market share would have shrinked again.

There no way to target a new echosystem and get everything in 2-3 years. It more 5-10 years to build a full lens lineup. But that only if you intentionnally decide to destroy previous one. If you keep the lens line up, you only have to get the body right. Not easy, but much easier.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Hold your horses.
I was asking you if you have any proof that Pentax worked on the FF for 10 years i.e. all the time they were under Hoya, and then all the time under Ricoh - and instead of responding to that, you're extending the period with another 6?
Why not counting from the beginning of the Universe, then?
Let's only pick part of the history that match our point, in particular when other part of show the opposite. What is important is that from 2002 to 2015 there was no FF digital for Pentax while Canon had some and later on, Sony, Nikon and Leica. If you wanted one you could buy it from many others, not Pentax. Why it is like that is kind of a mount point from a consomuer perspective, you can only buy what exist and many left over the year the market shared shrinked signfiicantly.

Last edited by Nicolas06; 10-08-2016 at 03:23 AM.
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!
adapter, aps-c, bunch, camera, comment, company, doubt, evf, fa, ff, ff and apsc, flange, fuji, k1, lens, lenses, line, mirrorless, money, nx, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, ricoh, rumors, samsung, sensor, sensors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Day New Rumor FF Slide (no rice) D1N0 Pentax News and Rumors 129 10-18-2015 06:15 AM
Rumor: Pentax FF new Limited lenses coming soon? Stavri Pentax News and Rumors 253 09-27-2015 10:40 AM
Top 5 lens pick for a Pentax APSC and FF shooter AtitG Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 36 03-02-2015 12:20 PM
Pentax FF Mirrorless Rumor Winder Pentax Full Frame 37 05-04-2013 11:01 PM
After Nikon D600 rumor, Canon entry level FF camera rumor ... LFLee Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 17 05-16-2012 08:41 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:58 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