[Kunzite]

And I'm saying there's way too much negativism around.
Repeating same old complaints is counter-productive and annoying. Let's not do that without a very good reason.

[normhead]

The answer is simple. Accept disagreement and show some respect instead of becoming aggressive and throwing insults around because someone comes at a subject from a different point of view. If that's too much for you to understand, put me on your block list and report me to the mods. I will not put up with bullying here or anywhere else.

You mean accept disagreement like you accept disagreement, calling other's bullies?

Is calling others bullies in an attempt to silence them bullying?

Just wondering?

@normhead:
I wouldn't say I'm a snob but since getting the K-1 I decided to buy "modern" lenses, avoiding film-era designs. The best lenses for the best camera, or something like that.
Which means I'm directly impacted by the seemingly slow roadmap execution. I have to wait for the new primes, yet I'm not the loudest complainer Neither is Rondec, despite his impressive kit of D FAs (and the high likelihood of buying new primes).
Isn't this a bit weird?

I have no problem with people stating their own point of view. As long as it's their point of view. What I have a problem with is someone coming in and telling us what a lot of other people think and is crazy.

I can look at your post, and Rondec's post and think, OK that's two in favour of the new primes. That's some information. People telling me what Pentax has to do, what everyone else thinks, etc. I see that as meaningless internet posturing my world everyone gets one vote. You don't get to tell people what everyone else thinks. If mecrox is an Olympus shooter, he's voted with his wallet. I respect his opinion, if he thinks he can speak for Pentax shooters and tell us what we want, ..well that's completely different.

[biz-engineer]

And I'm saying there's way too much negativism around.

Ricoh Imaging don't give any news because they want to create the surprise for their beloved customers :-)

[Rondec]

You mean accept disagreement like you accept disagreement, calling other's bullies?

Is calling others bullies in an attempt to silence them bullying?

Just wondering?



I have no problem with people stating their own point of view. As long as it's their point of view. What I have a problem with is someone coming in and telling us what a lot of other people think and is crazy.

I can look at your post, and Rondec's post and think, OK that's two in favour of the new primes. That's some information. People telling me what Pentax has to do, what everyone else thinks, etc. I see that as meaningless internet posturing my world everyone gets one vote. You don't get to tell people what everyone else thinks. If mecrox is an Olympus shooter, he's voted with his wallet. I respect his opinion, if he thinks he can speak for Pentax shooters and tell us what we want, ..well that's completely different.

To me, if there is an issue it is that there are a lot of different lenses that could fill out the lens line up for full frame. How about a 70-300 variable zoom or f4 versions of 70-200/24-70/15-30 (and a version of the 15-30 that takes screw in filters)?

Clearly there are different folks out there that are looking for different things. Not everyone wants super fast aperture primes, but there are some people who want them, just as there are some who would like a 28-110 f4 lens. If Pentax can move to cover some of those different lens gaps (in whatever order they choose), I think it would end up selling more K-1s in the long run.

[MadMathMind]

I don't think that many people are buying Pentax cameras any more specifically for the FA limiteds and most Pentaxians who want them own them. They probably don't sell a whole lot every year.

All the reviews of the FA limiteds are from like 5+ years ago. To the newcomer, they look old and all the reviews indicate they ARE old. There's a certain level of charm to them, for sure, but I can't imagine the average camera buyer looks at them and says "THAT MAKES ME BUY IN." If anything, I think a "That's all you got? Meh, I'll pass" is more common.

I do love my FA77 but the other two just feel really out of date and not really up to snuff for modern sensors. In particular, the weak contrast wide-open greatly affects the lenses' autofocus capabilities, which is pretty obvious on the 36MP K-1; on things like the K10 and other <10MP cameras, it wasn't so obvious.

[mee]

To me, if there is an issue it is that there are a lot of different lenses that could fill out the lens line up for full frame. How about a 70-300 variable zoom or f4 versions of 70-200/24-70/15-30 (and a version of the 15-30 that takes screw in filters)?

Clearly there are different folks out there that are looking for different things. Not everyone wants super fast aperture primes, but there are some people who want them, just as there are some who would like a 28-110 f4 lens. If Pentax can move to cover some of those different lens gaps (in whatever order they choose), I think it would end up selling more K-1s in the long run.

Big time. If they came out, tomorrow, with f/4 versions that had front filter threads (82mm or less), I'd be in the market. Instead I'm pondering a possible Nikon move to get those type of lenses (and pickup a better AF system to boot).

That is the thing with lenses, different lenses sell to different people with different sets of requirements. Therefore, the more types of lenses you offer, the more your potential audience.

Just because someone is "whining and crying" about lack of lenses doesn't mean they're bored and not serious about buying. Some are serious. Since it is difficult to discern the bluffs from the serious, it is probably better to just consider everyone's "whining and crying" as seriously founded. That is, they actually want to buy what is not there.

[MadMathMind]

Clearly there are different folks out there that are looking for different things. Not everyone wants super fast aperture primes, but there are some people who want them, just as there are some who would like a 28-110 f4 lens. If Pentax can move to cover some of those different lens gaps (in whatever order they choose), I think it would end up selling more K-1s in the long run.

I think one of the problems is that Pentax got way too far behind in the Hoya years; Canon and Nikon (the former especially) have a zillion lenses from el cheapos to super duper pro ones. One of the reasons Pentax was able to compete so well in medium format is that the competitors didn't have a super deep lens lineup, so Pentax was able to get in easily with an equivalent modest offering. A super expansive set is not what users of MF need or want and so their offering was more than sufficient to be attractive.

I think Pentax trying to be anything and everything is destined for failure, in part because of the lagging AF performance and/or FPS compared to Nikon and Canon (so things like sports are not going to be a Pentax specialty). More than anything, Pentax doesn't have the 3rd party support to make it a serious contender in event photography, especially when it comes to flash support. As a result, developing a lens lineup that plays to your camera's strengths is the best strategy. I think that means portraits and landscapes, mostly things that don't move. Studio strobes can work with anything and all that stuff gets set manually anyway, so x-TTL support is just unnecessary, greatly expanding the 3rd party offerings to be sufficient.

Things like consumer-grade zooms just aren't really going to do much for the K-1. Sure, they sell well with the crowd that just wants an FF to have it, but this crowd doesn't make much money because they buy the body and one or two lenses and that's it. Canon can have that guy and it's not a terribly big loss.

[Winder]

I think Pentax trying to be anything and everything is destined for failure,

This is true, but they have to be something to someone. They need to figure out who their target audience really is. Yes they have the legacy users they need to keep happy, but if they want to grow then need to figure out who they will target. Wedding an portrait make up the single largest segment of professional photographers. That is an extremely diverse market with budget shooters using to Canon Rebels to super high end, high production wedding using medium format or even teams of 5DIV shooters. I have seen wedding where the photography and post production bill was $50,000.

I seems like Hoya and even Ricoh are simply throwing what ever they can into the camera. The lenses are all over the board. One minute they are releasing a 560mm and the next a 20-40mm zoom. The produce what is arguably the best FF landscape camera on the market, but don't even have a D-FA* 24mm on the road map? The rebadged Tamron is a great lens, but its massive and not in the same league as what you would expect from a 24mm D-FA* lens. If you are going to produce the best FF landscape camera you can buy doesn't it make sense to produce the best 24mm or a tilt shift lens to go with it? The first primes are the 50mm & 85mm? Does that make sense? If Ricoh is targeting wedding and portrait, then the 35mm, 50mm, & 85mm make sense, but the K-1 is not the best camera for this work. It looks like the team working on the lenses are developing for one market while the team developing glass is targeting a different market. Producing lenses for one user group while making bodies for a different user group probably isn't the best marketing plan.

Unless Ricoh has a new FF body coming out that addresses AF and buffer/write speed they are going to have a hard time appealing to the larger wedding crowd who would be buying the 35mm, 50mm, & 85mm glass. Hopefully that is why its taking so long to develop the glass. They have a new body to release with it.

[Rondec]

Part of the problem is that, although there probably is some sort of a plan, we don't know what it is. It is pretty clear that the DFA *50 is the first prime, but when is it coming out? When are the other promised lenses coming?

Pentax themselves probably don't know for sure. "It'll be ready when its' ready," is basically the company line, but there are plenty of things that hopefully they are working on.

I certainly wouldn't mind a K-1 II with some improvement in auto focus, slight bump in frame rate, and boost to the buffer size. I'd be happy with the same sensor even if it meant not getting 4K video and 9 fps.

[normhead]

This is true, but they have to be something to someone. They need to figure out who their target audience really is. Yes they have the legacy users they need to keep happy, but if they want to grow then need to figure out who they will target. Wedding an portrait make up the single largest segment of professional photographers. That is an extremely diverse market with budget shooters using to Canon Rebels to super high end, high production wedding using medium format or even teams of 5DIV shooters. I have seen wedding where the photography and post production bill was $50,000.

The K-1 has been “unbelievably good” for the company, Eguchi says. What’s more encouraging for Ricoh is that half of the customers buying the camera aren’t Pentax loyalists but new customers, Eguchi notes.

Were you remembering this quote when you posted that/ Surely you realize that the sales to new customers is going to generate future lens sales, with lenses eventually being at least 5x the value of the camera?

Unless Ricoh has a new FF body coming out that addresses AF and buffer/write speed they are going to have a hard time appealing to the larger wedding crowd who would be buying the 35mm, 50mm, & 85mm glass. Hopefully that is why its taking so long to develop the glass. They have a new body to release with it.

And yet, when we had this same discussion 5 years ago, I went and found a host of wedding photographers shooting with K-5s which are about the same speed as a K-1. To quote myself from another thread. There's not much as useless as someone coming to the forum telling us what they think, everyone else thinks.

What "wedding photographers think" depends entirely on the market they serve, and the clientele they attract.

This may come as a shock to you but. my cousin used to have a very lucarative wedding business, charging up to 10,00 per wedding 1980 money, so more like 20k today. For that he owned a very nice tux and two Hasselblads. Most wedding photographers never bought a really nice tux and two Haselblads. My other wedding photographer buddy had 1 Hasselblad and 2 D4s. Some had no Hasselblads and not D4s. IN moree recent history, a friend ran avery successful business shooting with a K-10. There is not this unified "wedding photographer" demographic that you seem to think you are qualified to speak for. I like your opinions, I just get tired of you trying to speak for a whole industry as opposed to one man stating his opinion. You tend to speak for the second man, my cousin would have been a "latest greatest everything" guy. He had to impress high end clients. The second guy was more practical, far more creative and less predictable. The third guy was in a small town with limited opportunities for high end gigs. I've lost contact with him, but I'm sure a K-1 would absolutely thrill him if he's still shooting. You only speak for the first guy, if in fact you speak for any of them. To me your view of wedding photographers is bit myopic.

I'm being it picky, I know. Carry on.

[pres589]

Norm has me wanting to go onto Ebay to buy another couple K-5 II's, a DA*55, an FA 43, and a DA 20-40. I've already got a good suit jacket. How hard can this be?

p.s. I hope I don't offend folks when I interject with not completely serious comments in this thread. It's just a lens and it's not even here yet...

[normhead]

Norm has me wanting to go onto Ebay to buy another couple K-5 II's, a DA*55, an FA 43, and a DA 20-40. I've already got a good suit jacket. How hard can this be?

p.s. I hope I don't offend folks when I interject with not completely serious comments in this thread. It's just a lens and it's not even here yet...

Having had first hand experience with this situation, many times, the difference between me and those guys, first, they loved going to go to weddings, (I don't). Those guys were hobnobbers and elbow greasers. My cousin lived in Seattle and his customers included Bill Gates and his crowd (my Uncle was a high level exec. at Boeing. Most of us simply don't have access to that kind of crowd. He was also a full time photography HS teacher. Despite making 100k a year doing up to 20 weddings year, he never gave up his day job. He bought gear that his clients would approve of and had no interest in keeping up with the world of photography in general.

The next guy Norm Groat was a TA in a high school I taught in. We'd discuss photography over lunch in the staff room on a regular basis. He was a real hustler. He'd hire my photography students to shoot events, like golf and hockey tournaments as well as his wedding work. He was a real gear freak. He'd buy whatever he thought was the latest greatest. I bet he has an A9 or a D4 right now. Kind of a Nikon freak so probably a D4. (He used to own an F4)

The third guy trained at Ryerson like I did, had a house front studio on main street in a small town. Did passport photos, had small portrait studio (where he never once took a "moving portrait") and all his income was derived from photography. His wife was good friends with mine. They sit a talk wife stuff over dinner, we'd sit at the other end of the table and talk photography and wedding stuff.

The thing I find most interesting about that is, the one who didn't have an outside income had the least expensive gear.

The other thing is, all these guys loved weddings. If you have to say "I'd only go to a wedding if i was paid", I don't think you can be a succesful wedding photographer, just based on my experience. You have to enjoy being part of someone's really special day. If that's you, you can shoot weddings with point and shoot. If it's not, it doesn't matter what you buy. Those guys get energy from the crowd and the emotion. Most of the time crowds and emotion drain me, personally.

I hope you don't mind if I interject a completely serious response to your attempt at comedy.

[Winder]

Part of the problem is that, although there probably is some sort of a plan, we don't know what it is.

I'm sure they have something, but I don't know how much of a plan they have. From interviews we know that management was divided on releasing the K-1. It looks like they were surprised by how well it sold and probably didn't start developing the new glass until they realized that there was a good market for a FF K-mount. This also explains the decision to re-badge the Tamron glass. From the outside it doesn't look like they have much of a long term plan. It appears that they have very limited resources, so I'm not sure how much we can expect in the near future.

It doesn't look like they have a target market. The body seems to be designed to meet the needs of landscape, astro, and architectural photographers who can benefit from the features like weather sealing, GPS, Pixel shift. Why was a D-FA* 24mm not the first lens on the map? It would have been perfect for the K-1 feature set. The K-1 is a serviceable camera that can do a lot of things, but what it excels at is landscape, astro, & architectural. It just seems like there is a disconnect between the team designing the bodies and they team developing the lenses.

[pres589]

Norm: Interesting, good feedback/stories. I'm not that serious about doing the above. I imagine I could assemble a pretty competent kit for, say, $4k if I include my existing DA 15 and K-5 II. That's including a couple good flashes, a monopod, and a tripod.

I don't know that I'd really want to do the wedding thing though. And I can definitely understand someone only making his money from photography being very careful about the gear purchase process.

Honestly I'd like to get a bit more serious about the hobby and get more shooting gigs but I'm not putting much effort into that sort of thing right now. So shame on me.

[photoptimist]

Part of the problem is that, although there probably is some sort of a plan, we don't know what it is. It is pretty clear that the DFA *50 is the first prime, but when is it coming out? When are the other promised lenses coming?

Pentax themselves probably don't know for sure. "It'll be ready when its' ready," is basically the company line, but there are plenty of things that hopefully they are working on.

I certainly wouldn't mind a K-1 II with some improvement in auto focus, slight bump in frame rate, and boost to the buffer size. I'd be happy with the same sensor even if it meant not getting 4K video and 9 fps.

But we do know what the plan is: there's the lens roadmap, Ricoh's statements about forthcoming lenses, and the history of recent releases (which tend to show a bias toward delaying a launch rather than shipping crap on time).

The real issue is that the plan does not have hard release dates because even the top execs at Ricoh do not know when the design and manufacturing engineers will reach the desired performance/quality/cost targets for the products.