[Jeff Lopez]

Perhaps what Pentax Ricoh is needs to do is strike some deals with Sigma and Tamron again, asap. Word on the street is that Pentax lenses are so damn expensive right now, compared to other brands, that no serious photog would invest long time on a Pentax system..Yes, we have a lot of old slow lenses that are very good, but Canikon people are still worried about going above the 6400
standard limit..The money are on the 2.8's now.

[Rondec]

In answer to your question, the K-S2 is gone from most stores now in Japan. You can still get it from some online stores. But even so, it was not much different to the K-70 - still a lot heavier than the smallest Canon and Nikon DSLRs, and much bigger than mirrorless. The last time Ricoh had a genuinely small K-mount body was the K-S1.

To continue my argument, there's a Japanese retail survey called BCN that published a yearly market share percentage for DSLR makers. It's mainly focused on the more consumer end of retail. Pentax is normally between 5 and 7 percent. What I found interesting was that Pentax tends to hit the 7% when they have a camera like the K-x, K-r or K-S1 on the market for the whole year. They tend to be at 5% when they don't. This is why I'm saying that not having a product like this in the last year could be the explanation for why their sales are so low. Maybe it's just a bad quarter of a quiet year.

The smaller, lighter, cheaper cameras are really important because they are the gateway into the brand for a lot of people. Canon understands this very well. I can totally see the path from being a beginner to being a serious pro with Canon. Some people have been saying Ricoh should just forget the low end, but in that case what would be the path to becoming a Pentax user? Perhaps users are expected to jump straight in with a camera like the K-3. Or perhaps they start with another brand and then after some years they have some kind of epiphany when they realize that they should move to Pentax for pixel shift or Astrotracer or something. It's not very convincing to me.

That's why I think having an attractive entry level camera is important for every brand. The K-70 is a great value camera, but its selling points are quite esoteric (IBIS rather than OIS, weather sealing, pentaprism vs. pentamirror, pixel shift, dual control dials and so on). It doesn't address what a lot of users want, which is a smaller total package, simple operation that doesn't baffle them with too many acronyms, and probably better integration with smartphones.

I really think a lot comes down to availability and advertising.

The KS-1 was small, it was relatively full featured (Pentax hadn't figure out pixel shift then) and it was cheap. As far as I can tell, it sold really poorly, at least in the US. The issue wasn't specifications, it was that people who are looking for an entry level camera aren't browsing B and H, they are going to their local department store or Best Buy and Pentax simply isn't there. And there is no advertising to speak of here either -- not even much internet stuff. It's just hard to imagine people purchasing a Pentax who haven't even heard of the brand.

[Pål Jensen]

Pentax cannot hope to compete in the volume end of the marked. Sony is in every electronics shop on the planet and can sell a turd in high volumes. Pentax doesn't have the distribution or marketing power. They have to cater to the enthusiast and the K-mount user base. Pentax is moving upmarket.

[Kunzite]

The K-S1 wasn't their first attempt at selling 'cheap'...
It's not easy; if you do it you have to beat the competition, and as noted by Pal Jensen, they don't have the volumes for that. They have to enter volume electronic shops - with sales agreements favorable to the shops. And they need to spend money on marketing.
IMO attempting this would be a disaster.

[monochrome]

Hoya abandoned the USA market. Ricoh hired the wrong person to manage RIAC. Rebuilding that infrastructure without cash flow is prohibitively expensive.

When their attitude is wholesale discounts are wasting money it just isn't likely they're going to invest in expanding the brand recognition and share. If they invest, it will be high-margin products and spherical (but they'll probably futz around and lose that opportunity to China).

[dafbp]

Pentax needs to take all the advancements of the K-1 and implement them into the 645 line.

A 645 with PixelShift would be a killer for static photography. And a great way to fight back Fuji.
If they improved the movement detection/treatment algorithm, it could even be used for photoshoots where movement might occur, like weddings, etc.. Not saying the algorithm (as is) is bad, just that PS could then be marketed for more situations, just like IS was improved to the point you can now pan with it.

[Mistral75]

A 645 with PixelShift would be a killer for static photography. And a great way to fight back Fuji.
(...).

Pixel Shift needs sensor stabilisation. There is no such thing for 645 sensors yet.

[DeadJohn]

...Word on the street is that Pentax lenses are so damn expensive right now, compared to other brands, that no serious photog would invest long time on a Pentax system...

Where are you hearing that? Probably not USA. Hardly anyone here knows Pentax is still in business.

I'm not a pro but I've given a dozen lectures on starting astrophotography to astronomy clubs and other groups. I have yet to meet anyone who is familiar with Pentax nevermind someone who owns one. Price didn't send those people to other brands, marketing and availability did.

Regardless, most camera makes are struggling due to market saturation. I have no idea what Ricoh should do next.

[Kunzite]

Other brands are not cheaper than Pentax. Their price advantage - in cases in which we can talk about a price advantage - is either due to 3rd-party offerings, or to older models which were replaced with new, expensive versions.

[Rondec]

Pentax certainly is a good value for the price. There is no question about that in my mind. Dual control wheels, penta prism rather than mirror and so on. They just don't have the ability to target all of the different price points that companies like Canon and Nikon do.

[Winder]

Pixel Shift needs sensor stabilisation. There is no such thing for 645 sensors yet.

Yet being the key word. IBIS and Pixel Shift are key technologies for Pentax/Ricoh. It only makes sense that they develop these for the 645 line. They can move to the larger 53x40mm Sony sensor which is 2.5 x the size of the K-1 sensor but still small enough to work rather well with the 645 image circle.

Of course the most important thing they need to do is address AF performance.

[Gedeon]

The most important thing they have to do is lenses !

[disconnekt]

From the document above:

1/ It's difficult to infer anything quantitative concerning Ricoh Imaging or Pentax from the figures of the <Other> division since Ricoh henceforth specifies that the <Other> division includes the following product lines (see p.8, 13 and 14), which go much beyond Pentax, including outside Japan:


2/ From a qualitative standpoint there is one valuable statement p. 4:


In other words: operating profit in the Other segment went from a ¥2,511m profit for the three month period ended on June 30, 2016 to a ¥20m loss for the three month period ended on June 30, 2017 as a consequence of "the decrease in income and profit in the camera business due to the decrease in amounts of sales of digital cameras."

Edit: ¥2.5bn corresponds to US$22.5m.

True, it's unclear in the <other devisions> what specific division made/lost money, and if that affected any other of the divisions (and if it did, by how much?), since Ricoh does like to keep everything close to the vest that's why they left it a bit vague to really look at see anyhing definite.

---------- Post added 07-31-17 at 11:53 AM ----------

Perhaps what Pentax Ricoh is needs to do is strike some deals with Sigma and Tamron again, asap. Word on the street is that Pentax lenses are so damn expensive right now, compared to other brands, that no serious photog would invest long time on a Pentax system..Yes, we have a lot of old slow lenses that are very good, but Canikon people are still worried about going above the 6400
standard limit..The money are on the 2.8's now.

If your comparing "name brand" (pentax vs canon vs nikon vs sony) fast f2.8 zoom lenses (14-35 range, 24-70, and 70-200 f2.8), Pentax lenses are cheaper: their 15-30 is cheaper by at least $500 , the 24-70 is cheaper by at least $600 bucks, and the 70-200 is cheaper by at least $400.

[biz-engineer]

Word on the street is that Pentax lenses are so damn expensive right now, compared to other brands, that no serious photog would invest long time on a Pentax system..

Over here, Pentax glass is cheaper than equivalent Canikon glass.

[Vantage-Point]

A lot of people want a small but full featured camera. People want a versatile but easy to use camera . Pentax should make a mirrorless APS-C and/or Full Frame camera. If they are unwilling to do that, they should at least make a WR DSLR that is about the size of the K-S1 with at least 80 auto focus points all cross type (spread across 90 percent of the total focus area) with much improved tracking, 5 axis image stabilization, articulated touch screen and 4K video with auto focusing during video recording. Pentax has to listen and give the consumers what they want. When they did, Pentax made the K-1 which was a success for them.