Originally posted by Wheatfield Let's also not pretend that Pentax would have been making cameras in 2008 had it not been for Hoya. Having said that, Hoya never did want the imaging side of the company, their sole aim was to acquire the medical imaging division. What they did after that was a travesty. The K-7 was the first fully Hoya camera, and it had a problem with floating hot pixels. Then came the K5 with all of it's problems.
Now you're just refusing to support your claim, trying to shift the burden of proof on me. It won't work.
The simple fact that Pentax Imaging Systems survived Hoya means it was viable, especially when supported by a profitable medical division. To say it survived because of Hoya - Hoya, who made a hostile takeover on Pentax Corporation, basically killing the company; Hoya, who didn't wanted the Imaging business and was overly concerned with downsizing and cost cutting...
Hoya managed to transform an imaging division able to launch as many as 8 lenses a year to one that is struggling to execute its roadmap. How is that an improvement?
There is no such thing as a "fully Hoya camera".
---------- Post added 19-09-17 at 12:25 PM ----------
Originally posted by mecrox TA look at the CIPA returns shows the trends in Japan and Asia, half or more of the world camera market.
Uhh... less than half, if you actually add the numbers. About 41% of all the cameras, and about 49% of the ILCs.