[TedH42]

I never make my plans and decisions based on anyone else's... at least, not without alternative options. That extends way beyond my photography hobby, and into all aspects of my life, especially my old professional one.

I say never... In my early professional career, I made a couple of forming important plans that were reliant on those of others, with assumptions that they'd make good. But they didn't. That was the swing point for me, and it taught me an extremely-valuable lesson: "There's no such thing as a sure thing"

Going back to my photography, I base my choices and decisions entirely on what's available right now. I might hope and look forward to more (I'm sure most of us do), and I welcome companies' plans and goals in developing and releasing additional products, but if they don't materialise, I'm never truly disappointed

Wisdom

[Not a Number]

"There's no such thing as a sure thing"

Death and Taxes?

[photoptimist]

"There's no such thing as a sure thing"

But if there's no such thing as a sure thing then that statement can't be a sure thing. And if that statement is not a sure thing, then sure things do exist.

And to loop this tangent back on topic, we need to assess whether the roadmap is a sure thing or not. For this task, all we need to remember is that the roadmap is not the road. The roadmap is an ephemeral piece of paper no better and no worse than the hopes and foibles of the map's creators. In contrast, the road is a tangible construct exposed to the vicissitudes of the real world.

[Kunzite]

"When the map disagrees with the terrain, trust the terrain" - Swiss Army proverb (presumably).

A roadmap is a plan (or, to be rigorous, a planning instrument). It makes no sense to say, "Ricoh has a roadmap but no plan".
If the roadmap is subject to change, that's because the plan is. Woe to those who don't adapt their plans to the ever changing conditions and unpredicted factors.

A plan is not the end result; but good luck obtaining the end result without any sort of planning!

[BigMackCam]

But if there's no such thing as a sure thing then that statement can't be a sure thing. And if that statement is not a sure thing, then sure things do exist.

Are you sure?

[normhead]

Are you sure?

But let's get down to the really important questions, like is a bird in the hand worth two in the bush?
or

"I've done a study that concludes 60% of the conclusions of studies are not supported by the data provided."

That's one of my favourites, and that study was actually published.

[photoptimist]

But let's get down to the really important questions, like is a bird in the hand worth two in the bush?

Is this an old FA f/4 bird in the hand being compared to two DFA* f/1.4 birds in the bush? And what if one of the bush birds has hatched and the other is still an egg?

Why did HD Pentax-DA 11-18mm f/2.8 bird cross the roadmap?

[Nakedgun]

Are you sure?

All one can be sure of is that we don't know what tomorrow will bring.

---------- Post added 17th Aug 2018 at 09:38 ----------

But let's get down to the really important questions, like is a bird in the hand worth two in the bush?
or

"I've done a study that concludes 60% of the conclusions of studies are not supported by the data provided."

That's one of my favourites, and that study was actually published.

Studies will either confirm common sense, or they are wrong.

[Mistral75]

Do other camera companies even publish Lens Roadmaps (...)

Some challengers do: Fujifilm (Fujifilm X and Fujifilm G mounts), Hasselblad (Hasselblad X mount) and Tokina (Sony E mount) for instance.

[tellwill]

It's easy to say, "I would've paid another 1000 euro for a better camera".
But for Ricoh Imaging to make and profitably sell such a camera, that's another story. They'd have to develop a faster AF; to update the electronics (faster processor, more RAM, faster card writes etc.); to complete the lens line to a reasonable degree. And they'd need to persuade us to buy (which might imply marketing).
...

it seems theY would NOT have to persuade you at least... me neither...

And again... i would pay 1000 bucks more... and dont care what "your" or "your" friend(whoever that is) would be willing to pay, and certainly i wouldnt hook that "who would buy what"-logic onto the price of the A7III...
Because if that where a thing to do... no one would buy a K-1 anymore... by this year. No One..
(Because not exactly everybody makes economical use of the 36MP resolution at all... and the A7III has nearly everything one would want from a camera...and costs 2000 just like you said.)

The failure in thinking like that may lie exactly here, where somebody says, that ONLY the usual/common PENTAXIAN would buy a PENTAX but that is just not true...
Not only advertising convinces people.... Convincing products do... they advertise themselves... Especially PENTAX DSLRS that would drop their AF-weakness.... would sell like hotcake with much less advertising than Sony has to do...
That is because the loyalist are still here and strong... and many other people at photog-magazines and reviewers are fond of the PENTAX design-directives, even if they mention their drawbacks... They would also like the company to get around that certain point and come with those one cam that brings back the glory days.... You just have to listen...
Northrup wishes only the best for upcoming products, but he cant cover the drawbacks of our gear... That does not make sense for a reviewer...
The guy from TheCameraStore.com ... he loves our gear... you can see it...
Kaiman wong and his friend... the same.... they over and over praise PENTAX products for what is there to praise ... but they also wont hide the drawbacks and cant...
Jared Polin... OK, no... forget him, i honestly think he is some kind of a programmed monkey who likes to speak bad about everything he can, to pretend he is cool. But he aint.
and there would be more and even more people in the industry who would love to see the PENTAX come back on its feet.(if we are lucky we can even reach the top of SLR sales when Nikon and Canon are slowly leaving off to mirrorless land.. People dig the SLR optical viewfinder so much, believe me... and the click-clack... Just a few hours ago(I was photographing ants in harsh sunlight), I saw, that an optical viewfinder is sooo much better than an EVF!!!!

So to keep it short, the people do still buy PENTAX, because most of the PENTAXians tend to be VERY loyal customers up to a certain point, because the cameras are rock solid, weather resistant and (despite those new'n'weird "wheel logic") are easy to handle and not overloaded with a 1000 buttons alongside their displays like some Nikon for instance... and their design really is convincing... because they look so analog and professional anyway, we dont have to do dirty trickery products like a Nikon Df to profile ourselves as "keeping it real"....

And whoever you say you are or who you know who knows what... I dont think, any person despite the guys on the executive floor of RICOH Imaging really knows about what costs what...
It could generally be said that people of the 21st century believe in some "everybody produces nearly at self cost"-fairytale... What would explain the sales numbers of iphones for instance..
. I .. do not fear such fairytales, because i know people from the industry and todays R&D and parts are cheap. (JFYI: a smartphone with a 5MP camera can be built for less then 10 dollars...yes you will say DSLRs are a whole other story and partly you would be right for sure... i dont question that... but in some way... its pretty close and many people would be astonished about the low production cost of a very average DSLR)
Since that is so..I actually think cost(s) for bringing a camera to the market are burried in some other places...
Like you said: Advertising (in this point I agree with you... companies have to fight for their presence on the market...and most of the time they will have to fill their cannons with money i guess.
-So yes, if you want to sell something you will have to invest some money anyway... Nothing comes from nothing.



And i guess it was kind of a Schrödingers Cat decision situation going on on the "executive floor" anyway. *>

Kind of a mexican standoff if you whish so...
but than some guy with a shotgun and a sheriffs badge on his breast came into the room and said, "lets keep it quiet and play according to the old laws.... because we dont know if people will buy into FF anyway since we have convinced Pentax-consumers and loyalists that FF would not make any sense because we had non." (AFAIR, "Fool Frame" was a very common word at that time, that was used several times by some "forum-old-bones" who are NOW suddenly as keen as mustard about/on the PENTAX K-1.)


>*... Because over at Pentaxeros the specs of the PENTAX K-1 where rumoured to be more closely to what now became the Nikon D850....



So sry, I really cant see your "Pentax Can't Do It"-Point ... here... From what I heard from Mr. Baus, I think K-1 sales numbers convinced them and a real Step-Up will follow this falls or next years springs photokina or on CP+...
First APS-C and then a more "suitable for the mass" FF DSLR.
At least i hope so, since rumor had it for a while that they actually should or would give up on APS-C at all and only concentrate on FF and 645
... What actually would not be a bad thing to do for 2-3 years... (after introducing a more professional APS-C flagship at first, of course...)

[Kunzite]

No offense, but that's a bit long and convoluted. I'll try touching the essential, but...

First thing first - you were talking about the past. You "would have" paid 1,000 more for a better K-1. But then, you "would have" paid about the A7III's price, which isn't 1,000 more.
And now you're saying the A7III "has nearly everything one would want from a camera" - it looks to me you're building a case against buying a more expensive K-1
It's a bit confusing.

The K-1 can't be changed (without a time machine ), and it was the best Pentax/Ricoh could do while keeping a 2,000 price tag (I strongly suspect a higher performing version would've been much more difficult to do). It makes no sense to complain about it; it's a very good camera. But in this latest post, you say "I would pay" - so perhaps you're hoping - like me and many others - for a more advanced model?
A future, higher performance "K-1"? Sure, bring it on. I'm supporting that idea by buying current high-end Pentax products.

[D1N0]

The K-1 wasn't built to compete with anything Sony, it was built for Pentax users and maybe attract some people over from Canon and Nikon (which it did). Since Ricoh is not going to go mirrorless any time soon (or ever) it is useless expect something that competes with A7 III.

[Schraubstock]

Studies will either confirm common sense, or they are wrong

Voltaire:
“Common sense is not so common.”

[ffking]

Going back to my photography, I base my choices and decisions entirely on what's available right now

I think we have all got caught up, or are in danger of getting caught up, in a consumerist 'next big thing' culture. When I bought my first camera, I looked around at what was available and chose what I liked best (an ME Super as it happened). I looked through the little booklet of lenses that were available from time to time, but with no internet to fuel expectations I happily used that camera until I broke it about 7 years later. I know it was different with film, but it never occured to me to replace it while it still worked, even though I could see AF and autowind coming in. I suppose I read Amateur Photographer every week, but I was much more interested in the 'how to' than the kit. I think that the first camera I actually keenly anticipated was the Z-1 - but that was a month or so = now we wait for years for things to come, then start waiting for the next one...

Hmm - where did that all come from? I had no intention of going into that sort of (mild) rant

[pxt]

If I am not wrong Pentax K1 is the cheapest option for full frame camera. My dream is compact longer primes fx. 200/300 mm with 2.8.