[wkraus]

Two weeks past，where is formal announcement …

I had it in my mailbox on Oct. 27 (from news@newsletter.ricoh-imaging.de).

[credos4u]

First, i wanted to thank Kenspo for his work, but i think there where others too, that recklessly held their flags up high for PENTAX and got bullied for it afterwards, by envious people.

Pentax users are used to be long time Pentax fan and are friendly to each other. Maybe it is a good sign that more new users are joining us?

I recently joined pentaxforums, but I read PF for a long time now, and I would say, that more than once... some forum members brought great ideas and got bullied for that afterwards...
I think I can remember even one name out of those who are now tappin kenspos shoulders being very rude, feeling easily offended and immediately animating their admin-friend(s) to kill off distinct posts.

posts, that state something alike get deleted pretty soon. I eagerly wait to see what will happen with this post.

It's the same with criticism about the K-1...
... response is always like on some LINUX forum,
where some user who wants to shine (but actually will not have a good clue) and therefore says:
"Everything is perfect... you just think the wrong way. Stay friendly!"
(what actually helps -> ZIP)

So, I dont think that is good. Because when there is an issue, there is an issue.
And in no way does a good new idea mean, that past approaches or methods are real bad. No improvements can be made when "STATUSQUO" gets locked and considered being perfect.
Admittedly, there are some things, that appearently just cant get better...(K-5 body design for instance... what IMHO equals Canon 5D body design just with a different approach, but thats another story and others may see it in some other way and one has to respect that)

And PENTAX cameras are in no way "just a good deed" like open-source software...
They offer products, just like Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. and therefore it should be allowed to speak honestly about their drawbacks, just like on other maker-specific forums.

I am not so sure, PENTAX would have bought into the ring-motor game, if those users(who got bullied, banned and considered reckless), wouldnt have expressed the unsatisfying AF-Speed (of the lenses) and raised their voices.


Thanks to those people(who got bullied for speaking out loud what everybody has got in the back of their heads),
we actually now can enjoy speedy Ring-Motor driven AF in the new HD PENTAX-DA★ 11-18mm F2.8 and HD PENTAX-D FA★ 50mm F1.4 SDM AW...
...and hopefully in all the other upcoming lenses.

And since that announcement... I sincerely grow hope that we see a massive increase in AF-Points, and better AF-algorithms, so the AF in future PENTAX cameras will act more decisive.

For that i just wanted to say:
THANK YOU, kenspo. Thanks to all the other ambassadors who put a bit of pressure on R&D.
And thanks to all the other users who always argued in favor of improvements and progress.

And i wanted to say "Thank you for your hard work and trying to convince other people to demand progress for THEIR brand"...

. He, who is satisfied too early, will realise his dissatisfaction too late .

[normhead]

If the post is deleted it's because of the criticism of the mods. I personally have had posts deleted for one reason and one reason only, I insulted somebody. As for your Kenspo love, I have to point out as a fan of the old Pentax that made lightweight designs good for outdoorsmen and fans of human powered mobility, Kenspo is not a booster of the Pentax I treasure. He is a spokesman for the new wave. A concert shooter shooting with the world's best field camera (kind of an oxymoron right off the top.) . What he wants is not what i want. But, he is the guy that knows what the modern Pentax is thinking and in that sense a valuable opinion. At this point what he's taught me is, the modern version of Pentax is not thinking about me. They've moved on. That was hard to hear. I and many other members of the forum bought into Pentax because they did what we wanted them to do. Lightweight, portable, rugged, water resident lenses. They are here because of us, but it appears they've left us behind. Kenspo had the unenviable job of informing us of that decision. I hope he was paid well for doing that. But the end result for me and many others is there isn't a piece of Pentax glass out there in the catalogue or on the lens map that we are interested in buying. I really don't have a Pentax wish list. OK, maybe the 55-300 PLM for it's fast focus and light weight. But it's not a premium lens and would have to compete with my DA*200, Tamron 300 2.8 and DA*60-250, all of which open to ƒ5.6 or less even with a TC and produce fantastic IQ.

I guess we have the divide here between the Pentax of the past and the Pentax of the future. I guess I should be happy Pentax even has a future. Unfortunately they've tried to do it by doing a "me too" of everyone else's product (two of them not even designed in house, everyone else's third party glass is Pentax's OEM) instead of the unique company with unique designs that us older Pentaxians are used to. If I wanted what Pentax currently is bringing to market I would have been better off to invest in Nikon or Canon.I could already have a modern 50 1.4 or 85 1.4 from a variety of "we don't serve Pentax" sources. I could have had it years ago.

[Kunzite]

@credos4u:
Uhh... it's not like we're stopping Pentax' progress by not complaining "enough". And repeating ad nauseam issues we all know about - and some issues that are made up, exaggerated or no longer actual - can only serve one purpose: to scare potential customers away, and hurt the brand. Is that what we should do?
Also, I'd like you to point out those claims about everything being perfect, because I don't remember seeing any.

I'm sure Pentax/Ricoh wouldn't had worked on the ring-type SDM if people didn't buy the K-1 and the expensive D FA lenses, thus proving that there is a market for such high-end products.
The question is: those people who got banned, did they buy the K-1 and expensive D FA lenses? Or they were just complaining?

[zapp]

First, i wanted to thank Kenspo for his work, but i think there where others too, that recklessly held their flags up high for PENTAX and got bullied for it afterwards, by envious people.



I recently joined pentaxforums, but I read PF for a long time now, and I would say, that more than once... some forum members brought great ideas and got bullied for that afterwards...
I think I can remember even one name out of those who are now tappin kenspos shoulders being very rude, feeling easily offended and immediately animating their admin-friend(s) to kill off distinct posts.

posts, that state something alike get deleted pretty soon. I eagerly wait to see what will happen with this post.

It's the same with criticism about the K-1...
... response is always like on some LINUX forum,
where some user who wants to shine (but actually will not have a good clue) and therefore says:
"Everything is perfect... you just think the wrong way. Stay friendly!"
(what actually helps -> ZIP)

So, I dont think that is good. Because when there is an issue, there is an issue.
And in no way does a good new idea mean, that past approaches or methods are real bad. No improvements can be made when "STATUSQUO" gets locked and considered being perfect.
Admittedly, there are some things, that appearently just cant get better...(K-5 body design for instance... what IMHO equals Canon 5D body design just with a different approach, but thats another story and others may see it in some other way and one has to respect that)

And PENTAX cameras are in no way "just a good deed" like open-source software...
They offer products, just like Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. and therefore it should be allowed to speak honestly about their drawbacks, just like on other maker-specific forums.

I am not so sure, PENTAX would have bought into the ring-motor game, if those users(who got bullied, banned and considered reckless), wouldnt have expressed the unsatisfying AF-Speed (of the lenses) and raised their voices.


Thanks to those people(who got bullied for speaking out loud what everybody has got in the back of their heads),
we actually now can enjoy speedy Ring-Motor driven AF in the new HD PENTAX-DA★ 11-18mm F2.8 and HD PENTAX-D FA★ 50mm F1.4 SDM AW...
...and hopefully in all the other upcoming lenses.

And since that announcement... I sincerely grow hope that we see a massive increase in AF-Points, and better AF-algorithms, so the AF in future PENTAX cameras will act more decisive.

For that i just wanted to say:
THANK YOU, kenspo. Thanks to all the other ambassadors who put a bit of pressure on R&D.
And thanks to all the other users who always argued in favor of improvements and progress.

And i wanted to say "Thank you for your hard work and trying to convince other people to demand progress for THEIR brand"...

. He, who is satisfied too early, will realise his dissatisfaction too late .

It is on Pentax to judge weather an idea is good or not - not to forum admins, but also not to individual users who want to be heard.

Responses here are often very pro status quo and not very critical or open to new ideas. We can see that Pentax is working on new products and the new D-FA line is going into a particular direction. Large aperture, big designs - thats it. Wishful thinking should include these and other facts. Deleting of post and aggressive responses are not necessary by all means. You can defend against aggressive posts, deleting happens on admins discretion and can really tick off users. The whole rumors forum is full of Pentax approved news - no rumors. still, it's worth hanging around.

[Chris Mak]

......we actually now can enjoy speedy Ring-Motor driven AF in the new HD PENTAX-DA★ 11-18mm F2.8 and HD PENTAX-D FA★ 50mm F1.4 SDM AW...
...and hopefully in all the other upcoming lenses.

And since that announcement... I sincerely grow hope that we see a massive increase in AF-Points, and better AF-algorithms, so the AF in future PENTAX cameras will act more decisive.

Yes, it is about time for Pentax to step into the modern era, and all the better that these new lenses feature appropriate modern age motors, that also make better camera bodies (regarding AF) worthwhile. I'm not sure if people around here grasp the implications of Pentax upgrading to new, fast motors for future high grade lenses, but without this, the hope at Pentax ever seriously stepping up its long near hopeless AF game, would be very dim. Now, on the other hand, there is indeed hope for a possible K3 successor. I think Ricoh is too much of a professionally oriented company, to simply let AF be of second interest. On the long term, that would be as much as accepting an eternal underdog position, and never be taken seriously as an imaging company. I somehow feel that would be below Ricoh. And all the better so!

Chris

[grahame]

I guess we have the divide here between the Pentax of the past and the Pentax of the future

normhead: I agree with you completely on that, and I personally like a lightweight camera with compact lenses. To have that, I would rather give up some features, such as GPS, flash, moving LCD screen, many AF points, > 20 mp sensor, fast continuous shooting model.. and many others.

But we have to agree that, photographer like us are minority these days. Even we buy everything Pentax releases in the future, the selling is not going to be enough to give Pentax a good future as we talked. Pentax has to meet the needs from new users.

Imaging Pentax make a digitalized K1000, or better, super-A. You will buy, I want one, but how many can pentax sell? So the price will have to be high due to the low selling, which will further reduce selling units # and it in turn makes the price higher if Pentax wants to keep the line. Review comments: Pentax is doomed!!! Wants that much $ for such a simple camera?! Look at Canikon! look at Sony! Look at fuji if you want retro deign! ---- when the internet or social media is filled with such words, how can pentax keep doing this?

When Pentax's history becomes its burden, it might have to move on. Anyway Pentax is a company...

Minolta changed the mount (and left me behind, I hate it and switched to Pentax) but Minolta might have survived if not the patent issue. Canon changed the mount and so many users were mad, Canon grew from there and becomes the #1. Sony (almost) gives up A mount, so many A mount users are crying, NEX-E mount makes Sony successful.

I will not buy the new DFA 50 and 85, for the same reasons you have, but I can see why pentax has to do it in this internet and social media era. People makes decision based on reviews, and reviews are base on numbers...

---

Last edited by grahame; 11-20-2017 at 04:35 PM.

[Kunzite]

Most of the "new ideas" - of which few are actually new - are inapplicable, even to the point of endangering Ricoh Imaging. And usually can be grouped in two* categories: "I want this product now", and "I can't afford to pay more than $$$".
I seldom see a proper idea, one that starts with a problem to be solved and described in sufficient depth to recognize it's solving that problem. The authors must be congratulated; this is no easy feat.

At some point I've read that Pentax should rebadge the Tamron primes instead of making their own versions. That's a "I want this product now", by the way.
Guess what, Photozone OpticalLimits tested one of the Tamron primes, the 35mm f/1.8... 3 stars out of 5 for optics and price/performance. So the "new idea" here is for Pentax to release an average lens - for a higher price.
OTOH, the me-who's-not-complaining-enough is thrilled at the news of the high-end D FA* primes, as a yet another significant step for Pentax.

* that's ignoring the "my new system is so much better"

[agricius]

when will the new 85mm arrive?

[normhead]

No one knows.

---------- Post added 11-21-17 at 05:16 PM ----------

Yes, it is about time for Pentax to step into the modern era, and all the better that these new lenses feature appropriate modern age motors, that also make better camera bodies (regarding AF) worthwhile. I'm not sure if people around here grasp the implications of Pentax upgrading to new, fast motors for future high grade lenses, but without this, the hope at Pentax ever seriously stepping up its long near hopeless AF game, would be very dim.

Really, there's someone around here that doesn't grasp the implications?

Here's another implication for you.
A loyal Pentax shooter, switched to Nikon recently. He hung around and still posts in the 300 plus club. He reported his keeper rate went from 40% to over 70% because of the better AF. A person like myself, looks at that and thinks, so if I shoot 500 images in a shoot, with Pentax I would get 200 clean images, and with Nikon 350-400. But the thing is, I only want 3 or four. So, I have a ridiculous amount of choice. He has a more ridiculous amount of choice. But they are both ridiculous. The argument that you need better AF can be easily countered with the argument " What Pentax is doing, works for me."

Current Pentax customers are a known quantity. The odds of catching up with Nikon or Canon are remote at best without huge expenditure of research and development money. So the question becomes, can Pentax continue to go forward trying to attract new customers, a strategy that in this shrinking market is a perilous wish, or should Pentax continue to make products that appeal to their current user base, the ones that got them this far.

The argument that ring motors, faster AF etc. is going to attract new customers is a stretch at best. ANyone with the kind of money it takes to implement that system already has Nikon or Canon gear. What's left are bargain shoppers looking for good value. The new Pentax glass seems to be heavier and more expensive than comparable glass from other companies. The only thing I haven't heard is that it is better, which is the only thing I'd pay more for heavier gear for.

So, Pentax can go heavier, faster sharper, more expensive trying to draw in customers from other companies. And that will be a great thing, if it happens, but it's not guaranteed, and there seems to be a feeling among some that Pentax aren't looking after their existing base.

By the way, this push for better AF isn't a function of the new glass. The push for better AF was announced with the K-30 5 years ago. That has nothing to do with the type of glass Pentax is now producing. They could do that with smaller lighter systems as well.

AN old friend used to say "Keep what you've got until you get what you want." I'm not sure that using this current strategy Pentax is going to keep the user base they have.

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

A loyal Pentax shooter, switched to Nikon recently. He hung around and still posts in the 300 plus club. He reported his keeper rate went from 40% to over 70% because of the better AF. A person like myself, looks at that and thinks, so if I shoot 500 images in a shoot, with Pentax I would get 200 clean images, and with Nikon 350-400.

The above is not an implication

It’s a way out there attempt to rationalize the lack of keepers with and irrational implication.

The rational why to look at that 70%

I only have to take 300 images to ensure I have 200 keepers and not needing 500 images to cover the same success rate, that works better for me

Very seldom do I have the luxury to shoot 500 images, most of the time on a single subject 2-6 images are captured and for them I would like to have better odds that 50% . When image captures are time sensitive like action work in wildlife where I am only afforded the luxury of maybe 1 frame I will take the highest success I can get

[biz-engineer]

Would it be possible for Pentax forum to send an email when Pentax releases new products, that would save the huge amount of time wasted into discussions running in circle biting their tail? Send me an email between 2018 and 2019, I'll look at it.

[ffking]

The rational why to look at that 70%

I only have to take 300 images to ensure I have 200 keepers and not needing 500 images to cover the same success rate, that works better for me

Very seldom do I have the luxury to shoot 500 images, most of the time on a single subject 2-6 images are captured and for them I would like to have better odds that 50% . When image captures are time sensitive like action work in wildlife where I am only afforded the luxury of maybe 1 frame I will take the highest success I can get

I do agree with your logic here, but I suspect that the original data might be a little skewed. Nobody here seriously doubts that Nikon AF is better than Pentax AF at the present, and so far always has been - by several years. However, if you change systems it's a big decision and you will be looking for justifications which might slightly subconsciously exaggerate the benefits and play down the disadvantages, maybe rounding the figures a little in the newly adopted system. I don't know who norm is referring to, and I might be doing him an injustice, but this would be the normal thing. Since this is a lens thread, I also think that we must wait to see what the new lenses are capable of - they won't make AF tracking much better as that's largely a function of the camera body, but they could increase flat out AF speed noticeably if they are fully AF oriented - with a shorter focusing throw and more effective motors - There's no doubt that Pentax has handicapped itself by keeping screw drive for too long, and a lot of the backwards compatibility that people treasure is problematic when it comes to forward progress. It seems to me that Ricoh are biting that bullet while trying to produce lenses that are flat out desirable even if a lot of us don't have the cash to afford them or want to carry that weight. Time will tell whether they are right, but the experience of the bigger players shows that you need to have some top class offerings in your armoury to make adopting your brand, even at entry level, a good proposition for aspiring photographers. My feeling is that Ricoh know that, and they're working on it. See - I've digressed back onto topic

[Chris Mak]

No one knows.

---------- Post added 11-21-17 at 05:16 PM ----------



Really, there's someone around here that doesn't grasp the implications?

Here's another implication for you.
A loyal Pentax shooter, switched to Nikon recently. He hung around and still posts in the 300 plus club. He reported his keeper rate went from 40% to over 70% because of the better AF. A person like myself, looks at that and thinks, so if I shoot 500 images in a shoot, with Pentax I would get 200 clean images, and with Nikon 350-400. But the thing is, I only want 3 or four. So, I have a ridiculous amount of choice. He has a more ridiculous amount of choice. But they are both ridiculous. The argument that you need better AF can be easily countered with the argument " What Pentax is doing, works for me."

Your implication may apply to your shooting experience, it sure does not to mine. I don't spend hours taking hundreds of shots so as to have enough keepers. Usually, I hike and may suddenly spot a bird perching nearby that gives me a few seconds to aim, focus and take a few shots at most, before it is off again. With the K3, success rate is low with the DA560, especially when the bird does not fill up a substantial part of the frame. Initial focus acquisition and lock is sub par and loses opportunities. Esp. with migrating birds that you only come across incidentally, that is very frustrating. Having your camera and lens tucked up on a tripod in a hide with coffee and buns may be a different situation, where Pentax AF is good enough.

Current Pentax customers are a known quantity. The odds of catching up with Nikon or Canon are remote at best without huge expenditure of research and development money

Sorry, but that is nonsense, and nonsense used as an excuse on top of that. Ricoh is a modern professional company with proper resources and access to new technologies. You may believe that implementing proper auto focus hardware and software in their flagship camera will bankrupt them, but that is nonsense.

So the question becomes, can Pentax continue to go forward trying to attract new customers, a strategy that in this shrinking market is a perilous wish, or should Pentax continue to make products that appeal to their current user base, the ones that got them this far.

The argument that ring motors, faster AF etc. is going to attract new customers is a stretch at best. ANyone with the kind of money it takes to implement that system already has Nikon or Canon gear.

Following that logic, Sigma has wasted its time (and huge resources and expenditure?) releasing a new 500mm f4 at 6500,-, since everyone spending that kind of money will have bought into Canon or Nikon by now? Hmmm, I am actually saving up for one, in the case Pentax follows your logic with its next Apsc top model.

What's left are bargain shoppers looking for good value. The new Pentax glass seems to be heavier and more expensive than comparable glass from other companies. The only thing I haven't heard is that it is better, which is the only thing I'd pay more for heavier gear for.

So, Pentax can go heavier, faster sharper, more expensive trying to draw in customers from other companies. And that will be a great thing, if it happens, but it's not guaranteed, and there seems to be a feeling among some that Pentax aren't looking after their existing base.

By the way, this push for better AF isn't a function of the new glass. The push for better AF was announced with the K-30 5 years ago. That has nothing to do with the type of glass Pentax is now producing. They could do that with smaller lighter systems as well.

AN old friend used to say "Keep what you've got until you get what you want." I'm not sure that using this current strategy Pentax is going to keep the user base they have.

[ffking]

in a hide with coffee and buns

mmmm! - I must try that