[Reed]

Definitely not PLM.

[bigfoxkiB]

Why not the PLM? Is it less reliable than the DC motor?

[D1N0]

DC or SDM probably

---------- Post added 07-04-17 at 11:20 ----------

Why not the PLM? Is it less reliable than the DC motor?

plm is very small and not strong enough to move large glass elements in a large aperture lens.

[Reed]

PLM motor will not generate enough torque to drive heavy lens group or even single heavy lens element. We can fairly assume it will have DC class motor built in.

[bigfoxkiB]

DC or SDM probably

---------- Post added 07-04-17 at 11:20 ----------



plm is very small and not strong enough to move large glass elements in a large aperture lens.

I see...thanks, in this case I wish it will be DC, IIRC SDM has some bad reputation and prone to fail?

---------- Post added 04-07-17 at 02:36 AM ----------

PLM motor will not generate enough torque to drive heavy lens group or even single heavy lens element. We can fairly assume it will have DC class motor built in.

Thank you, too bad because it is so fast

[Kunzite]

There was no new SDM lens since 2008 (bar from 3 rebadged Tamrons, but that wasn't Pentax' SDM).

[JPT]

I would have agreed with that, but I finally don't.

It is now clear that Ricoh Imaging will not increase it's R&D teams or expenses, particularly in the opticial department, where new products are desperately lagging behind schedule and market's expectations.
Q mount : nothing new for about 3 years (wide zoom)
645 mount : idem for about 4 years (DA28-45)
K mount : barely one new optical formula every year
GR : nothing new for about 4 years
Theta : idem for 3 years

Asahi's elder and original "optical" label has obviously and factually become RI's last strategic priority.
And they are heavily loosing ground for this very reason.

Q might be finished. 645 is a mature system, and it seems to be selling well, considering it's always going to be kind of niche.

In K-mount, Ricoh has pretty much cleared the roadmap they had and populated it with new items. I don't think it's fair to peddle the assumption that they won't release many lenses in 2017, when the year is only three months old. What's more, all the recent lenses seem to be meeting expectations. There's a lot to be said for releasing less, but making them good ones.

How is the GR not competitive? It was good enough to see off competition from the inferior Fuji X70. Theta has had two new models that you are not counting, but more importantly a lot of software development.

This way of applying strange criteria to disregard half of what the company is doing is misleading. I could do something similar and say that most of Sony's lenses don't count as lenses because they don't have WR, or apply any other number of weird criteria to paint things the way I want to.

Sorry for the argumentative post. I'm also disappointed by the fact they didn't follow up the K-1 with a ton of lenses. But I don't see the need to exaggerate the situation.

[Reed]

DC can be as fast or even faster than PLM. There is no problem to drive something with big velocity, but to stop it without damaging or wearing out the drive, shafts/slides, or some bearings etc. Problem is in getting it as fast as possible with keeping that motor safe for operations in different conditions at least for warranty peroid(shifting temperature, amount of usage, wear out itd)

[Na Horuk]

I'd be very curious to know why are they moving so slow. The D FA* 70-200 was postponed, and the production process had to be revised, are they cautious about the other D FA*s, perhaps?

Wasn't the problem with that specific optical design? Pentax thought it was a good one, but then, upon field testing it, it showed some problems (don't remember what, but there were some threads about it). They went back to the drawing board because they really needed a top notch lens, without significant flaws. And the DFA 70-200mm seems to be a good product. Would have been a whole fiasco if it was bad! I rather see them postpone than release a poor product. Pentax has to be more careful than Canikon because Pentax' reputation is more vulnerable. Lots of people, even Pentaxians, are just waiting to find flaws
Maybe Sony or Nikon or Canon can release a half-finished product, but not Pentax

[photoptimist]

I would have agreed with that, but I finally don't.

It is now clear that Ricoh Imaging will not increase it's R&D teams or expenses, particularly in the opticial department, where new products are desperately lagging behind schedule and market's expectations.
Q mount : nothing new for about 3 years (wide zoom)
645 mount : idem for about 4 years (DA28-45)
K mount : barely one new optical formula every year
GR : nothing new for about 4 years
Theta : idem for 3 years

Asahi's elder and original "optical" label has obviously and factually become RI's last strategic priority.
And they are heavily loosing ground for this very reason.

The challenge with R&D is that throwing more money at it is extremely inefficient and even counterproductive, especially in the short-run. If a product development effort falls behind schedule, there's no magic wand that will get it back on track (read about the mythical man month if you don't believe me). Hiring more engineers and getting them on board and up to speed actually delays the project even more.

The larger issue is that standalone cameras DSLR, MILC, P&S, etc. are a stagnant or declining market. Sure, there's a core of enthusiast and pro photographers that still buy cameras and lenses but within the broader consumer electronics market, they are a mere niche. Camera makers can't count on growth to pay for a lot of R&D and marketing. Moreover, Pentax is a niche player in that niche market. There's no way Pentax can suddenly replicate the billions in accumulated R&D spending by Canon or Nikon. And Pentax would be foolish to try because the entire market is not large enough to support another would be high-volume camera maker.

But that does not mean that Pentax can't survive and even thrive. A steady, if slow, stream of new products can feed the steady, if slow, rate of sales in a market like cameras. I'm sure Ricoh has set Pentax R&D spending at a level commensurate with long-term expected sales. Ditto with Sigma's and Tamron's decisions about what mounts they invest in.

Market expectations be damned because expectations don't pay for salaries or new capital equipment. It's only when the markets put their money where their mouth is that companies in a mature or stagnant market are likely to increase their investment. So Na Horuk is right. If Pentaxians really want Pentax to spend more on R&D and increase the rate of new product introduction (and attract Sigma back to K-mount), they'll have to buy more stuff now and convince their friends to buy more stuff, too.

[Kunzite]

Wasn't the problem with that specific optical design? Pentax thought it was a good one, but then, upon field testing it, it showed some problems (don't remember what, but there were some threads about it). They went back to the drawing board because they really needed a top notch lens, without significant flaws. And the DFA 70-200mm seems to be a good product. Would have been a whole fiasco if it was bad! I rather see them postpone than release a poor product. Pentax has to be more careful than Canikon because Pentax' reputation is more vulnerable. Lots of people, even Pentaxians, are just waiting to find flaws
Maybe Sony or Nikon or Canon can release a half-finished product, but not Pentax

It was a problem they discovered through that optical design; and I fully agree, they made the correct decision to postpone the product.
But maybe making the D FA* primes means more such problems to be solved. Likewise, I'd rather have them do a proper job than rushing this; my post was not an accusation.

The challenge with R&D is that throwing more money at it is extremely inefficient and even counterproductive, especially in the short-run. If a product development effort falls behind schedule, there's no magic wand that will get it back on track (read about the mythical man month if you don't believe me). Hiring more engineers and getting them on board and up to speed actually delays the project even more.

Thumbs up for "The Mythical Man-Month" reference.

[CarlJF]

Market expectations be damned because expectations don't pay for salaries or new capital equipment. It's only when the markets put their money where their mouth is that companies in a mature or stagnant market are likely to increase their investment. So Na Horuk is right. If Pentaxians really want Pentax to spend more on R&D and increase the rate of new product introduction (and attract Sigma back to K-mount), they'll have to buy more stuff now and convince their friends to buy more stuff, too.

But, at the same time, people can't buy things that doesn't exist. I'm sure many people would buy more stuff given the opportunity. Just take the DA* lenses, most of them being there for about ten years. Many owners would certainly be happy to buy a newer version of these lenses. But it doesn't make much sense to ask them to buy the exact same lens they already bought a long time ago to finance the development of a new version... And new users may not find it extremely convincing to spend a lot of money on old lenses with notorious motor problems. And it's the same situation for many lenses. It's not Pentaxians' fault if Pentax doesn't provide them a convincing reason to buy a lot of new stuff. Particularly if the new stuff isn't there in the first place...

[Winder]

This could be true under Ricoh's normal lens roadmap plan/pace. Pentax lens department is very busy just like Sony (with is too many lens mounts). I hope they can deliver in time and people can still wait. They waited for 10 years after all and I can only imagine if they will have to wait for more.

Sony is busy, but they are pushing 5 new lenses per-year and when you figure in Zeiss adding 3 new lenses per-year they have built up a pretty nice lens line-up in a short time. Sony FE bodies still have a long way to go, but the lens line-up is no longer the problem. They just added the 50mm F/1.8 and 85mm F/1.8 which are both very good lenses for the money.

[Na Horuk]

Sony is busy, but they are pushing 5 new lenses per-year and when you figure in Zeiss adding 3 new lenses per-year they have built up a pretty nice lens line-up in a short time. Sony FE bodies still have a long way to go, but the lens line-up is no longer the problem. They just added the 50mm F/1.8 and 85mm F/1.8 which are both very good lenses for the money.

Yeah, that's what you can do if you have Sony money. But at the same time, Sony has lots of failures. They can afford it, they can afford to make a bunch of cameras, each one has one interesting thing and a couple weaknesses.. they don't care. Pentax is playing a different game. Doesn't have that kind of money

[photoptimist]

But, at the same time, people can't buy things that doesn't exist. I'm sure many people would buy more stuff given the opportunity. Just take the DA* lenses, most of them being there for about ten years. Many owners would certainly be happy to buy a newer version of these lenses. But it doesn't make much sense to ask them to buy the exact same lens they already bought a long time ago to finance the development of a new version... And new users may not find it extremely convincing to spend a lot of money on old lenses with notorious motor problems. And it's the same situation for many lenses. It's not Pentaxians' fault if Pentax doesn't provide them a convincing reason to buy a lot of new stuff. Particularly if the new stuff isn't there in the first place...

What you say is only partially true (and only for an extremely tiny fraction of Pentaxians).

First, most people (outside of a few fine folks here at PF) don't have every lens and every body made by Pentax. In fact, I'd wager that the majority of Pentax users (as with the majority of all DSLR users) have only one body (average age of maybe 5-7 years) and one lens (the kit lens that came with the camera). Most of the existing lenses and bodies (even ones introduced a number of years ago) would be entirely new to most Pentaxians and would significantly add to their photographic capabilities.

Second, the internet and consumer electronic makers have created the false impression that only this year's model of some product is any good. Sure, the newest lenses might have slightly better coatings and slightly faster AF motors but lens technology is not like computer technology where performance really does double every couple of years. And although the internet constantly makes older computer products obsolete, the physics of light has not changed in recent years (or the last 14 billion years for that matter). An old lens design, even a very old lens design can still focus light and make a great image which is why so many people see the huge value of Pentax and should not avoid new Pentax lenses even if they are based on older optical formulas. Some even argue that the newest lenses are worse than the older lenses for rendering which may be true given the optical engineering compromises created if designers push for fast AF.

Third, if the internet overhypes new products, it also over-penalizes quality issues. The internet is a giant echo chamber for dissatisfaction in which a few percent of people that have problems dominate the conversation and scare the bejeesus out of potential customers. Even if SDM does have a higher failure rate, I'd bet the vast majority of SDM lens owners have had no problems and will have no problems over the lifetime of their lenses. Sure, I'd prefer a non-SDM lens to an SDM one, but don't think that should entirely stop people from buying the product.

The point is that the more people that sit on their wallets saying they are waiting for the latest and greatest, the less Ricoh will invest. That's because Ricoh knows that a lot of people who say "I won't buy until...." are really saying "I won't buy at all" because the internet will always give them an excuse (rumors of better products, rumors of quality issues) for delaying the purchase.