[wed7]

What buyers want is choice as much as anything else. Few would buy say three expensive new primes anyway - maybe two at most, a wide and a portrait length to go with the zooms. Which is why starting with a 50mm is a little puzzling too. Lack of choice makes Pentax a less attractive system especially for buyers coming new to the brand. Issuing new lenses at a very slow rate of say one per year is just a competition against oneself, seeing whether you get the lenses out first or dwindling demand for your still-incomplete system collapses the whole shebang instead. I doubt there is time to hang around for another three or four years with market share being low to start with. That would be an invitation to look elsewhere. I think everyone would like Pentax to get a move on and I'd guess they will comfortably exceed one new prime per year.

This!

[thibs]

Can you patent a protocol? I don't think you can.
Whatever the case it cannot stop a third-party from making, through reverse engineer, products compatible with your cameras (this is why I don't believe the mount is - still - protected by patents). Sigma was actually infringing on Nikon VR patents, and Nikon reacted.
But if anyone knows more on the subject, I'm listening...

I'm certain you can (but as you said, I could be proven wrong). You can't patent the idea of communicating between a DSLR body and a flash, but the specifics brand YYY did engineered, of course.

And as for Pentax, unless changed, flash protocols are NOT licensed. There's reason why firmware updates are necessary, not for adding but for correcting proper use when using 3rd party flashes.
We (I) sometimes knock on Sigma but Metz flashes are no different.

It doesn't prevent reverse engineering completely though.

[zapp]

Pentax' fiscal year ends in a couple days if I am not mistaken. 1.4/50 should show up very soon. 1.4/85 should follow by the end of 2017 - at least i think we got this promise.

[D1N0]

Tomorrow is Thursday.. Announcement time. 0.00u CET

[ffking]

Pentax' fiscal year ends in a couple days if I am not mistaken. 1.4/50 should show up very soon. 1.4/85 should follow by the end of 2017 - at least i think we got this promise.

There is some dispute on that, but Kenspo call this the Year of the Prime, and maybe one a bit later would be a rather lame year of the prime for sure

[RonHendriks1966]

Pentax' fiscal year ends in a couple days if I am not mistaken. 1.4/50 should show up very soon. 1.4/85 should follow by the end of 2017 - at least i think we got this promise.

Well this is very optimistic. ...

[clackers]

.
Ricoh charges a license for third parties to incorporate their patents, and does make money. If this wasnʻt true, why would Canikony permit third party alternatives to their own lenses? .

I don't think Ricoh, Canon or Nikon have licensed to Sigma or Tamron, Alex.

AFAIK those companies do reverse engineering, like the PC manufacturers did to IBM. Strained relationships.

[pres589]

I think Sigma is a clear reverse-engineering operation as far as mount and communications, et cetera is concerned. Is Tamron? Probably hard to know with certainty from outside either company.

[clackers]

I think Sigma is a clear reverse-engineering operation as far as mount and communications, et cetera is concerned. Is Tamron? Probably hard to know with certainty from outside either company.

I haven't seen evidence Canon or Nikon actually granted a license to Tamron, either, Pres- but happy if anyone out there can show this.

I reckon all those companies see Sigma, Tokina and Tamron as parasites, to be honest, a very different view from us as camera owners.

[pres589]

Kind of a weird issue. Do we have to expect a company like Ricoh to furnish 100% of the lenses we want to use? Or can 3rd parties take the load off here and there?

What are people telling people that want wide primes for the K-1 right now? "Well they aren't out there so just stop looking"? Or "You should have bought a different system, sorry?" Or "Thankfully there are 3rd parties handing us some options, and hopefully this will get better soon"? What would you want to tell them out of those options?

In any case, at this point k-mount land is nearly free of these companies you liken to parasites, so maybe we'll see how this works out in real-time.

[clackers]

Kind of a weird issue. Do we have to expect a company like Ricoh to furnish 100% of the lenses we want to use? Or can 3rd parties take the load off here and there?

What are people telling people that want wide primes for the K-1 right now? "Well they aren't out there so just stop looking"? Or "You should have bought a different system, sorry?" Or "Thankfully there are 3rd parties handing us some options, and hopefully this will get better soon"? What would you want to tell them out of those options?

In any case, at this point k-mount land is nearly free of these companies you liken to parasites, so maybe we'll see how this works out in real-time.

Yeah, I think the percentage of market Pentax has puts them into the same category as Fuji, Sony, Olympus and Panny - don't expect third party manufacturer support!

The herd - Canikon owners - have always had this differently, Pres.

The K-1's a new product, the Fuji MF will launch with just three lenses, their owners will like it or lump it. Whether they should forget it and buy a 645Z instead for the bigger range of existing lenses is a moot point.

Myself, I love wide angles, they're important to me for portraits and general shooting, not just landscapes.

I have the 14mm and 24mm f2.8 Samyangs and the 20mm Voigtlander f3.5 pancake UWA primes, and the Sigma 24mm f1.8 and FA31 wide primes. More recently, the Irix and Laowa ultrawides have become available (11mm f4!).

If I could afford it, I'd get the 15-30 f2.8 zoom, but I make do with the FA20-35.

[rawr]

I reckon all those companies see Sigma, Tokina and Tamron as parasites, to be honest,

I think its more complicated than that. It's just normal business [amongst companies that often have the same big Japanese banks as majority shareholders ...]. Tamron and Tokina design and makes lenses for a lot of Japanese companies, obviously Pentax, but also others (including Sony and speculatively Nikon). And Pentax and Tokina have worked together designing lenses like the 50-135 f2.8 and others which have come out in a number of mounts. Not really parasite and host.

Sigma perhaps merits the 'parasite' tag more than others. It seems more of an outsider than Tamron and Tokina, since it rarely seems to partner with anyone. Plus it has gotten in legal trouble with firms like Nikon for it's too-blatant reverse engineering of Nikon's vibration reduction patents. Normally these disputes, I believe, are handled away from the public gaze, but I guess the Japanese photo industry 'club' thought Sigma needed to be taught a lesson.

[clackers]

I think its more complicated than that. It's just normal business [amongst companies that often have the same big Japanese banks as majority shareholders ...]. Tamron and Tokina design and makes lenses for a lot of Japanese companies, obviously Pentax, but also others (including Sony and speculatively Nikon). And Pentax and Tokina have worked together designing lenses like the 50-135 f2.8 and others which have come out in a number of mounts. Not really parasite and host.

Sigma perhaps merits the 'parasite' tag more than others. It seems more of an outsider than Tamron and Tokina, since it rarely seems to partner with anyone. Plus it has gotten in legal trouble with firms like Nikon for it's too-blatant reverse engineering of Nikon's vibration reduction patents. Normally these disputes, I believe, are handled away from the public gaze, but I guess the Japanese photo industry 'club' thought Sigma needed to be taught a lesson.

Yep, but I think the big difference is that companies like Zeiss pay for Cosina to make their lenses, or Pentax will contract Tamron to make K-mount versions of their lenses, but that's not true, say of the products those companies bring to market themselves, Rawr.

The Tamron 24-70 in the case of Nikon is a competitor.

So I think almost no royalties come from lens, AF or flash protocols. The third party has a bored guy with an oscilloscope and a D810 working out what happens when you change this dial or press that button.

[Alex645]

So I think almost no royalties come from lens, AF or flash protocols. The third party has a bored guy with an oscilloscope and a D810 working out what happens when you change this dial or press that button.

You could be right, but I think weʻre all just speculating here and would love to know the truth from an insider how patents are protected or disregarded within the industry.

In Japan, for example, I do know that for example one ad agency like Dentsu, can rep competing manufacturers in the same field such as automotive or electronics, pharma, etc. In the US, that is considered conflict of interest and is not legal; not done.

The Japanese, however, have less control over Korean or Chinese infringement, so I could imagine reverse engineering from outside their borders.

[clackers]

You could be right, but I think weʻre all just speculating here and would love to know the truth from an insider how patents are protected or disregarded within the industry.

I think Chuck Westfall from Canon has said in the past they've never granted licences to anyone.

Yet Yongnuo make clone flashes and even a copy of the venerable 50mm f1.4! (I nearly bought one, but went with a genuine nifty fifty Canon f1.8)