[cfraz]

if they are not intent on producing the products shown on the map

I don't think Kunzite meant anything like that - in fact precisely the opposite.

[photoptimist]

Until someone invents the perfect crystal ball, an "accurate plan" is an oxymoron. Sure, a company can make a plan with every intention of executing it but then the future happens -- suppliers die, engineers hit a snag, customers change, sales go up or down, competitors rise and fall, etc. Prediction is difficult, especially about the future.

The term "roadmap" is quite appropriate. Every roadmap I've ever seen has documented where the road was with no guarantees that it will be passable in the future.

[Tesla]

I think other plausible reasons would be:

- 'loyalty' to their current brand and long history of current brand ownership
- current brand/camera provides acceptable performance level
- ownership of a number of lenses in their current brand
- interest in mirrorless options
- lack of awareness of the contemporary Pentax brand
- lack of awareness of the current Pentax cameras

I meant it was the one item that if they were interested in Pentax's other features that keeps them from switching. At least the people that I've talked to. I would think that better AF would help convert users.

[jatrax]

Plans change. But if you don't have a plan you simply wander aimlessly. To imply that a published plan is a lie is silly. No matter how positive the publisher of the plan was when the plan was released, things change. And following through on a plan when the underlying data has changed is poor business.

I planned to marry a movie star, win the lottery, retire at 50 and live on the beach in Mexico. I worked hard on that plan but unfortunately things changed. I did visit Mexico once.....

[GlassJunkie]

For the "30 year Pentax owners".....

Going back to the LX/ SP days.... Looking at all of the "lens Family" pics, projections, RoadMaps, and the like, I remember YEARS of delay disappointments (in parts, some lenses were late), disappointments in production quantities (FA*200mm F4 Macro to name a biggy), but I can't remember one instance where Pentax prototyped and developed a lens that didn't come out or wasn't succeeded by an actual production piece...

ME-F was a non starter, as was MZ-D, admitted, but a lens posted as a spec on the map? Can't remember any...

[RonHendriks1966]

For the "30 year Pentax owners".....

Going back to the LX/ SP days.... Looking at all of the "lens Family" pics, projections, RoadMaps, and the like, I remember YEARS of delay disappointments (in parts, some lenses were late), disappointments in production quantities (FA*200mm F4 Macro to name a biggy), but I can't remember one instance where Pentax prototyped and developed a lens that didn't come out or wasn't succeeded by an actual production piece...

ME-F was a non starter, as was MZ-D, admitted, but a lens posted as a spec on the map? Can't remember any...

The Q macro lens then maybe was the first to strand in the prototype stage.

[GlassJunkie]

The Q macro lens then maybe was the first to strand in the prototype stage.

I thought about mentioning that one, but I don't know the platform...

[Rondec]

The road map got pretty iffy with Hoya. There were lenses, like the DA *55 and DA *60-250, that were delayed for two or three years before their release. That sort of thing tends to make users more angry than having new lenses magically appear without prior announcement.

For all of the angst over the DFA primes, it is clear that it is better to be more cautious with dates and road map predictions, rather than being optimistic and missing target release dates.

[Kunzite]

Hoya removed a few lenses from the K-mount roadmap - a "super telephoto" lens and a DA* 30mm IIRC.

[mee]

I believe it is true, it's still a public roadmap and not a 'whateveryoucalledit', and I don't get why you feel to express yourself so strongly.

A roadmap is a plan, we agree on that. The rest of it, you're arguing against the exact opposite of what I'm writing.
What is the purpose of publishing a roadmap? Not to make us wait for future products, instead of buying the current ones; not to create an Osborne effect. Neither is it as a binding contract, followed to the letter, giving away all their plans. As I said, it's to give us confidence in the brands' development.
That, of course, is done by being truthful; I'm amazed how you could think otherwise (is trust gained by lying? I don't think so!).

So, the D FA lens roadmap is meant to tell us they indeed are planning to launch certain much needed lenses (primes, and not only) instead of letting us guess. That's confidence building.

Hmm let's see..

Roadmaps, IMO, are not meant to keep up to date with their current plans.

Ok.. so are you saying the lens roadmap is not what Ricoh has in mind for Pentax lens releases? What did you mean by that? Because what I get from reading such a statement is the roadmap is not truthful to the actual products they are working on.

Instead, they should give us confidence in the brand, in its continuous development; they should tell us the corresponding system is developing in a suitable direction.

How so if the lens roadmap is not what Ricoh has in mind for Pentax lens releases? You JUST said

Roadmaps, IMO, are not meant to keep up to date with their current plans.

They're meant to keep us happy and spending, not waiting for future products.

Again, How so if the lens roadmap is not what Ricoh has in mind for Pentax lens releases? Yes, they're meant to keep us happy and spending on Pentax bodies and, perhaps, even other lenses. But (as example) if you know a D-FA 50 f/1.4 is about to be released in the next quarter, WHY if you had the money would you spend money on the outdated D-FA 50 f/1.4 today ? Most people are going to wait for the new lens.. it should be better in every way optically.

The roadmap is showing appeal for what Pentax is releasing.. to say 'hey we are not sitting on our laurels.. were working on these' and they seem to update it quarterly with new info. It seems they are using the roadmap directly as a means to show what products they are actually working on providing in the future. It isn't just a happy feel-good to get people to spend, it is also a direct view into what Ricoh intends to release for a particular lens format.

But you're telling us

Roadmaps, IMO, are not meant to keep up to date with their current plans.

When I disagree -- the roadmaps ARE intended to keep us up to date with their current plans! They've showed us the 50 mockup while discussing it and the 85. They are not concerned with Osborne effect.. if there was they wouldn't have told us specifically of the lenses they're working on (that are on the roadmap) and the estimated time to release.

If you really don't believe a new fast 50, 85, 35, the D-FA telephoto zoom, and anything else specifically listed on the roadmap are in the works, then tell me what is the point of specifically describing them?

[mee]

Plans change. But if you don't have a plan you simply wander aimlessly. To imply that a published plan is a lie is silly. No matter how positive the publisher of the plan was when the plan was released, things change. And following through on a plan when the underlying data has changed is poor business.

I planned to marry a movie star, win the lottery, retire at 50 and live on the beach in Mexico. I worked hard on that plan but unfortunately things changed. I did visit Mexico once.....

Absolutely, plans can change. But it takes a lot for them to change. And Ricoh seem to release what they post. Well outside of that DA wide zoom that has languished on the roadmap. But I think that one has been there since Hoya days.

The roadmap isn't simply a list of what 'we would like to do' as that would be pointless to share with customers who buy real products with real money. So I don't see the connection to you dreaming up some incredibly far fetched story of marrying a movie star, winning the lottery, and so on. One doesn't write those specifically on business plans for life realistically. And these roadmaps are realistic.

What I'm saying is to publish products you knowingly are planning not to release IS a lie. And that is how Kunzite has described it. To him, I understand, the roadmap is just a means to get people to spend money. They can throw up any lens on there if it means you'll buy a K-1. And I disagree. The roadmap is more realistic and honest than that.

If you are buying, say a K-1, with the knowledge (provided by Ricoh themselves) that they are working on particular lenses to go with the K-1, when in fact they are knowingly not, then yes that is entirely a lie. That is what I'm getting at. Backtracking to say 'no no that isnt what I mean' is just that.. back tracking. Because it can't be both ways. One or the other. Either it is a realistic plan of what they are working on or it is an unrealistic plan of hopes and dreams.

[Kunzite]

Hmm let's see..

I recommend reading what I wrote, and nothing more "between the lines". I'm doing my best to express what I want to say, clearly, in writing; I'm not trying to hide what I "actually mean".

Ok.. so are you saying the lens roadmap is not what Ricoh has in mind for Pentax lens releases? What did you mean by that? Because what I get from reading such a statement is the roadmap is not truthful to the actual products they are working on.

Of course I'm not saying that; what I'm saying is: roadmaps, IMO, are not meant to keep us up to date with their current plans. In other words, reporting to us is not their goal.
What is it, then? I already said: building confidence that they're planning to properly develop the brand; the kind of confidence that would keep us happy and spending. So they're sharing with us truthful information which serves achieve this goal, while withholding information that might be damaging, if released early (I mentioned the Osborne effect, Rondec was talking about competition's reaction). No camera roadmap, and a lens roadmap which doesn't necessarily include all lenses.
It's easy to understand (IMHO) if you read Rondec's message, then my (entire) response.

By the way: if your interpretation of what I wrote comes in direct conflict to something else that I wrote, your interpretation is wrong.
And for Pete's sake, let's not reiterate the "you can't understand what Ricoh says" discussion!

[Uluru]

Pentax has too much heritage on their shoulders. And some weird operational behaviour; it is perhaps the only optical company that stopped improving on its (sort of) standard set of lenses after .. late 1980s, perhaps. That means that there is no such thing as v1, v2, v3, etc. of the same lens occupying same FoV and aperture, in the constant part of the lineup that is technologically always up to date. For example, instead of issuing DA*55/1.4, they should do DA*50/1.4 to replace FA50/1.4, and keep that 50mm FoV always up to date. Instead of releasing FA31 or DA21, they should have released new DA*28 in the same quality as the DA*55. Etc. Better be up to date with a dozen lenses, than have a zillion lenses that never reach v2, and become relics of the past.

With Ricoh, things got even weirder, which can mean two things, though.

(1) Instead of standardising and cementing certain segment of the lens lineup and improving on it constantly, so that it is always rock solid and excellent, they seem to listen to Pentax users way too much, and released new lenses with new FoVs that make little lasting sense. (Because Pentax users have never been accustomed to some consistency anyway; last time it was visible in .. 1960s maybe, before zooms started crushing the lawn of consistent FoVs). Therefore you have things such as 16-45 (!), 16-85 (?), 17-70 (?!), 18-135 (?!!), 20-40 (?!?!), 18-270 (!!!?), 28-105 (?!?!?!?) etc. etc. all released before new, modern and long-overdue 50mm, 35mm or 85mm, which are the benchmarks of the system. Such releases are more a spur of the moment, convenient for the time, but with little lasting value because we know those lenses will never reach v2.

(2) On the other hand, if they release those odd zooms for the K-Mount and weird plastic primes for the sake of spur of the moment, but at the same time are aware of the problems of constancy of quality of a certain segment and are serious to do it, then it can only mean that they work on a COMPLETELY NEW system (most likely mirrorless) which will have those consistency problems sorted out from the start.

Because no one in the world can fix the Pentax lens lineup as it is now. They need a new system, with 5-6 six great lenses for starts, and have all these odd things for the current K-mount still being sold until people realise new system is better tended garden.

My hope is on (2), but if they are about (1), then you can wait until doomsday that things are sorted out to your satisfaction; it is impossible. And fruitless talks about lens lineup will never end because there is no logic in the lineup, there is no consistency of quality and performance within it.

[mee]

I recommend reading what I wrote, and nothing more "between the lines". I'm doing my best to express what I want to say, clearly, in writing; I'm not trying to hide what I "actually mean".

I'm simply stating what you said, even quoting your very words. If you mean something differently then I'd suggest you say something different. Because otherwise you are suggesting that I should read between the lines, and I'm not doing that.

Of course I'm not saying that; what I'm saying is: roadmaps, IMO, are not meant to keep us up to date with their current plans. In other words, reporting to us is not their goal.
What is it, then? I already said: building confidence that they're planning to properly develop the brand; the kind of confidence that would keep us happy and spending. So they're sharing with us truthful information which serves achieve this goal, while withholding information that might be damaging, if released early (I mentioned the Osborne effect, Rondec was talking about competition's reaction). No camera roadmap, and a lens roadmap which doesn't necessarily include all lenses.
It's easy to understand (IMHO) if you read Rondec's message, then my (entire) response.

By the way: if your interpretation of what I wrote comes in direct conflict to something else that I wrote, your interpretation is wrong.
And for Pete's sake, let's not reiterate the "you can't understand what Ricoh says" discussion!

I'm glad you added that extra wording this time. Because, without it, you are saying something entirely opposite.

Since "Roadmaps, IMO, are not meant to keep up to date with their current plans" means at face value that the roadmap is not up to date and not Ricoh's current plans. I'm pretty sure the roadmap is updated quarterly to in fact show us Ricoh's plans for Pentax. Certainly not everything, lenses such as the 16-85 WR arrived without even meeting the roadmap. But definitely everything on the roadmap is expressly written on there to show lenses that Pentax fully intends on delivering. It's not a wishlist, I think we can agree to that.

[mee]

Pentax has too much heritage on their shoulders. And some weird operational behaviour; it is perhaps the only optical company that stopped improving on its (sort of) standard set of lenses after .. late 1980s, perhaps. That means that there is no such thing as v1, v2, v3, etc. of the same lens occupying same FoV and aperture, in the constant part of the lineup that is technologically always up to date. For example, instead of issuing DA*55/1.4, they should do DA*50/1.4 to replace FA50/1.4, and keep that 50mm FoV always up to date. Instead of releasing FA31 or DA21, they should have released new DA*28 in the same quality as the DA*55. Etc. Better be up to date with a dozen lenses, than have a zillion lenses that never reach v2, and become relics of the past.

With Ricoh, things got even weirder, which can mean two things, though.

(1) Instead of standardising and cementing certain segment of the lens lineup and improving on it constantly, so that it is always rock solid and excellent, they seem to listen to Pentax users way too much, and released new lenses with new FoVs that make little lasting sense. (Because Pentax users have never been accustomed to some consistency anyway; last time it was visible in .. 1960s maybe, before zooms started crushing the lawn of consistent FoVs). Therefore you have things such as 16-45 (!), 16-85 (?), 17-70 (?!), 18-135 (?!!), 20-40 (?!?!), 18-270 (!!!?), 28-105 (?!?!?!?) etc. etc. all released before new, modern and long-overdue 50mm, 35mm or 85mm, which are the benchmarks of the system. Such releases are more a spur of the moment, convenient for the time, but with little lasting value because we know those lenses will never reach v2.

(2) On the other hand, if they release those odd zooms for the K-Mount and weird plastic primes for the sake of spur of the moment, but at the same time are aware of the problems of constancy of quality of a certain segment and are serious to do it, then it can only mean that they work on a COMPLETELY NEW system (most likely mirrorless) which will have those consistency problems sorted out from the start.

Because no one in the world can fix the Pentax lens lineup as it is now. They need a new system, with 5-6 six great lenses for starts, and have all these odd things for the current K-mount still being sold until people realise new system is better tended garden.

My hope is on (2), but if they are about (1), then you can wait until doomsday that things are sorted out to your satisfaction; it is impossible. And fruitless talks about lens lineup will never end because there is no logic in the lineup, there is no consistency of quality and performance within it.

Hmm but if they launch a new mount what does that mean for retaining their current users? If I have to rebuy all my lenses in a new mount, I might as well look at Nikon or Canon or Sony...

Adapters are nice enough but still a workaround I'd rather not use. They are sort of in a hardspot as a result of the design aspects due to the mirror if they ever wanted to go mirrorless. To redesign a new camera system and lens system when they are so slow on offering D-FAs for their current system tells me not to hold my breath on any new Pentax mirrorless. I think they continue full steam ahead with the K-1 and K mount until it either takes on too much water or runs aground... provided it doesn't end up as smooth sailing. Success for the old K mount, using DSLRs, in the new market is still a possibility.