[monochrome]

Western writer thinking western thoughts selling to western readers. Knows nothing about Japan, Japanese culture or Japanese design ethic. Typical arrogant white male European / American. Ignore him. Look to Japan. Pentax is thriving.

.:

[reh321]

Western writer thinking western thoughts selling to western readers. Knows nothing about Japan, Japanese culture or Japanese design ethic. Typical arrogant white male European / American. Ignore him. Look to Japan. Pentax is thriving.

The question we don't know the answer to is whether Pentax's various masters have reduced their overhead to the point where Japan is all they need, whether the rest of us are just on "for the ride" if we choose.

[ffking]

The question we don't know the answer to is whether Pentax's various masters have reduced their overhead to the point where Japan is all they need, whether the rest of us are just on "for the ride" if we choose.

That's a pretty risky strategy IMHO - all the eggs in one basket, and losing potential economies of scale as the rest of the world dips out - which would make them have to cut back further to maintain margins. If you want to consolidate around your core market, so you can be profitable without expansion as a launchpad for expansion, that's not a bad idea, but the expansion has to come or you'll continue to shrink.

[monochrome]

That's a pretty risky strategy IMHO - all the eggs in one basket, and losing potential economies of scale as the rest of the world dips out - which would make them have to cut back further to maintain margins. If you want to consolidate around your core market, so you can be profitable without expansion as a launchpad for expansion, that's not a bad idea, but the expansion has to come or you'll continue to shrink.

The Return on Invested Capital in digicams is around 8%, fairly low for a capital intensive business at high volume. (Medical Imaging devices is closer to 20%). Sony changed the metric a bit with the MILC because they can a). make a higher margin on a shiny new technology, and b). invest capital in efficient machine sub-assembly production and fewer persons, raising return on their capital investment.

Ricoh paid so little for the shell of Pentax that any capital injection for new machinery dramatically lowers the ROIC, thus calling into question the justification to continue. It is a conundrum. If they stay small, they survive. If they grow, they die.

[c.a.m]

In his Viewpoint article in Amateur Photographer, Andy Westlake discusses his fear that the Pentax camera brand is destined to disappear. Mr. Westlake reflects positively on the Pentax history and expresses his affection for the brand. While he suggests several factors to explain his concern, his premise lacks a substantive analysis and factual basis.

The Pentax brand. The piece mentions several other brands that have left the market, but the short article is absent of any sort of business analysis to support a comparison of Pentax to the others. Noting that Pentax is “nothing more than a brand name” owned by Ricoh, the article doesn’t explain why this is a negative association, or why branding cameras with a company’s own name is favourable.

Keeping the brand alive. In stating that “Ricoh has attempted to keep the line alive,” [my italics] the article casts an unnecessary uncertainty. To be accurate, the author should have stated simply that Ricoh has kept the line alive.

Product releases. Concerned about the rate of new product releases, Mr. Westlake mentions only the very recent timeframe and focuses on 2017. To be more balanced, the article should have reflected on the past five years while also mentioning the introduction of the 645Z, the K-1, and the series of new full-frame lenses – all major milestones.

The K-1 Mk II review. The article states that the K-1 Mk II “replaces” the K-1. In fact, the first K-1 is still included in the Pentax product line as presented at the web sites for Ricoh Pentax Japan, Canada, USA, and Europe, so it is not clear why the Mk II is deemed to be a replacement. The article also neglects the innovative hardware update service that Ricoh has offered to owners of the original K-1.

Mr. Westlake seems to summarize his concurrent review of the K-1 Mk II by saying that it “doesn’t add much new.” The author then contrasts the K-1 Mk II to the “sheer pace of development of competing mirrorless systems, particularly from Sony...” I believe the only full-frame mirrorless camera lines are offered by Leica and Sony, so it’s not clear in the article’s context how the other implied mirrorless lines (e.g., Micro four-thirds and APS-C) compete with the K-1 Mk II.

“New Blood” The article argues that the Pentax brand doesn't enjoy a sufficient user-base of enthusiasts, so the brand struggles to attract buyers who want to “step up” to a full-frame body. However, the main supporting points seem to be inconsistent. The claims that Canon and Nikon have dominated the “entry-level DSLR market” while others have drawn business with their mirrorless systems are certainly applicable to other camera makers and non-full-frame lines, not only Ricoh and the K-1 Mk II. It’s difficult to understand the logic in the author’s concern or the sole focus on the K-1 Mk II. Furthermore, the author doesn't offer any data or references to back up his perspective on the brand's weak attraction to new buyers; it seems that the point may be based on intuition or guesswork rather than fact.

Perhaps the least-supported point is the concluding one that “sometimes making attractive, well-featured, value-for-money products isn’t in itself enough.” The article doesn’t present any explicit ideas that might put the Pentax brand on a better footing in the author’s view. The article hints that if Ricoh were to introduce innovative products at a rate comparable to other makers, then all would be well. However, lacking a business analysis, neglecting a broader view of the camera market and its trends, and largely ignoring Ricoh’s recent successes, the article seems to be a weakly supported and premature lament.

[normhead]

In his Viewpoint article in Amateur Photographer, Andy Westlake discusses his fear that the Pentax camera brand is destined to disappear. Mr. Westlake reflects positively on the Pentax history and expresses his affection for the brand. While he suggests several factors to explain his concern, his premise lacks a substantive analysis and factual basis.

The Pentax brand. The piece mentions several other brands that have left the market, but the short article is absent of any sort of business analysis to support a comparison of Pentax to the others. Noting that Pentax is “nothing more than a brand name” owned by Ricoh, the article doesn’t explain why this is a negative association, or why branding cameras with a company’s own name is favourable.

Keeping the brand alive. In stating that “Ricoh has attempted to keep the line alive,” [my italics] the article casts an unnecessary uncertainty. To be accurate, the author should have stated simply that Ricoh has kept the line alive.

Product releases. Concerned about the rate of new product releases, Mr. Westlake mentions only the very recent timeframe and focuses on 2017. To be more balanced, the article should have reflected on the past five years while also mentioning the introduction of the 645Z, the K-1, and the series of new full-frame lenses – all major milestones.

The K-1 Mk II review. The article states that the K-1 Mk II “replaces” the K-1. In fact, the first K-1 is still included in the Pentax product line as presented at the web sites for Ricoh Pentax Japan, Canada, USA, and Europe, so it is not clear why the Mk II is deemed to be a replacement. The article also neglects the innovative hardware update service that Ricoh has offered to owners of the original K-1.

Mr. Westlake seems to summarize his concurrent review of the K-1 Mk II by saying that it “doesn’t add much new.” The author then contrasts the K-1 Mk II to the “sheer pace of development of competing mirrorless systems, particularly from Sony...” I believe the only full-frame mirrorless camera lines are offered by Leica and Sony, so it’s not clear in the article’s context how other mirrorless lines (e.g., Micro four-thirds and APS-C) compete with the K-1 Mk II.

“New Blood” The article argues that the Pentax brand struggles to attract new owners and buyers who want to “step up” to a full-frame body. However, the main supporting points seem to be inconsistent. That Canon and Nikon have dominated the “entry-level DSLR market” while others have taken business with their mirrorless systems are certainly applicable to other camera makers and non-full-frame lines, not only Ricoh and the K-1. It’s difficult to understand the logic in the author’s concern or the sole focus on the K-1 Mk II.

Perhaps the least-supported point is the concluding one that “sometimes making attractive, well-featured, value-for-money products isn’t in itself enough.” The article doesn’t present any ideas that might put the Pentax brand on a better footing in the author’s view. The article hints that if Ricoh were to introduce innovative products at a rate comparable to other makers, then all would be well. However, lacking a business analysis, a broader view of the camera market and its trends, and Ricoh’s recent successes, the article seems to be a weakly supported lament.

Nice summary, thanks for taking the time.

[Rondec]

Western writer thinking western thoughts selling to western readers. Knows nothing about Japan, Japanese culture or Japanese design ethic. Typical arrogant white male European / American. Ignore him. Look to Japan. Pentax is thriving.

.:

The interesting thing is by all accounts, the K-1 II is doing well in Japan (see JPT's thread on that) and K-1 owners are upgrading fast enough in the US and Japan that Pentax is having trouble keeping up.

The important thing is not whether Pentax releases thirty cameras a year, but whether they are able to target their releases well enough that they sell well -- not Nikon/Canon well, but well enough that they make back their R and D and have some to invest into future projects.

If we were to believe the DP Review analysis, the K-1 II should be dead in the water. Who would upgrade their camera to a worse one? But fortunately, most Pentaxians don't seem too concerned about DP Review's review.

[ffking]

Noting that Pentax is “nothing more than a brand name” owned by Ricoh,

Yes - that's not even true, either - it makes it sound like it's just a name slapped on Ricoh cameras - but a lot of Pentax DNA (not to mention patents) remains in the output.

[Pål Jensen]

Comparing Pentax to Konica and Yashica is missing the mark. Neither had 30 000 000 lenses (+ unknown millions of third party lenses) out threre that fits their cameras.

[monochrome]

The interesting thing is by all accounts, the K-1 II is doing well in Japan (see JPT's thread on that) and K-1 owners are upgrading fast enough in the US and Japan that Pentax is having trouble keeping up.

The important thing is not whether Pentax releases thirty cameras a year, but whether they are able to target their releases well enough that they sell well -- not Nikon/Canon well, but well enough that they make back their R and D and have some to invest into future projects.

If we were to believe the DP Review analysis, the K-1 II should be dead in the water. Who would upgrade their camera to a worse one? But fortunately, most Pentaxians don't seem too concerned about DP Review's review.

For once I’ve used my head and not let my heart rule my purchase decisions. Rather than buying a Mkll and selling Mkl, I waited. I’ve decided that as soon as Precision re-opens the window I’ll have my K-1 upgraded, and start the (long) process of selling the excess gear I’ve collected and fully using the stuff I keep.

Oddly enough, this whole DPR mess has made me think about my Pentax collection and also think before commenting. I don’t understand what’s going on at DPR. It just doesn’t feel rational; the obvious potential implication that there could be active, intentional sabotage doesn’t feel likely either - why bother with that?

So I choose to ignore it and go about my business with K-1 (ll) and (mostly) manual lenses as if I never knew DPR existed. The daylillies are blooming, my grandchildren are growing and Colorado is as full of beautiful vistas as Virginia. As much as they might seem to want to, DPR can’t change that.

[clackers]

But maybe if you look deeper you can in fact see the pictures, social engagement, and helping of newbies I have offered to this community over the many years I've frequented here instead of just dismissing me and my views because you don't like to hear what I have to say.

Looking back through your posts, Mee, it's like 'Where's Waldo'.

IMHO, you're on so many ignore lists because you never built the social capital to get away with being a vocal critic of the forum, the moderators, the members and our gear.

That's a shame, you need not repeat that now on nikonforums or whatever.

[clackers]

This may be a moment to cue that consoling music from the Hamlet cigar ad ...

Did you know that the boss of AmPhoto wears saffron robes and owns 91 Rolls Royces? He bathes in asses’ milk and champagne. He sends deadly sannyasins (second class carriages only, strictly no taxis) to re-educate anyone who has the temerity to say in public what’s long been talked about in private. Ghastly conspiracies known as FUDs are detected as often as seven times daily and are conveyed to him on vellum prepared from the testicles of palm squirrels by a chapter of devoted scribes. Respectable matrons faint on hearing them. Those found guilty as charged (a formality: they were of course always guilty even unto the ninth generation) can expect the most condign punishment from Mr Justice Cocklecarrot of the Bench, if he returns from lunch.

I do like entertaining writing, Mecrox, so you've won me there.

But of course, if you look at my post 222 about Westlake, I thought he *wasn't* a Bond villain, just a lazy guy really phoning that op-ed in from the pub.

[LensBeginner]

Title says all. Amateurs.

I used to read magazines, then discovered a certain cyclicity in the topics they treated. I don't like paying twice or more for the same stuff.
"HDR photography" - "HDR workflow" "create HDR photos that pop"
"Winter landscapes" - "Summer landscapes" - "Improve your landscapes" - "Lanscaping landscapes" - "Escape the landscape"
"Pro Portraits" - "Improve you portraits" - "Perfect Portraits"...

Those are made up, but I swear I could make a list of real-world magazine features, and it would look exactly the same.

[mee]

Looking back through your posts, Mee, it's like 'Where's Waldo'.

IMHO, you're on so many ignore lists because you never built the social capital to get away with being a vocal critic of the forum, the moderators, the members and our gear.

That's a shame, you need not repeat that now on nikonforums or whatever.

It's there. I've posted several images, participated in photo contests, answered many questions, asked many more questions, and had a generally pleasant time here in the 8 years I've frequented this place. If you care not to see it then that is your loss. That said, you'd be entirely wrong to paint the picture black because you want the picture black because it presents the story, in your head, that you want of me. In short, you don't like me and it is affecting your interactions. Can we at least agree to that? You consider me an outsider. You and the most vocal of the community here have made me feel like an outsider for the past 8 years. I get it, you never wanted me here. But I still find this place, on the whole informative and (on the photos side at least) quite pleasant. We have some talented photographers in the community and it is a joy to view their work.

Yet attacking the person isn't getting you anywhere. Really, if anything, it makes my greater point I made on the current state of the community. I get it though.. you come here to not hear the truth and discuss the ins and outs, but to revel in your view of camera life as you want to view it. It really is an echo chamber and that is what you want. I now think a lot of people come here to do the same. To step out of line of that means you get the treatment as you're giving me now... and this place loves to have a villain or two to swat at for entertainment. I'm understanding that now. Sorry it has taken so long for me to understand.

But really suggesting someone sue DPR for their review of a camera is rather surreal. And getting hostile with me for pointing out that this place can be rather hostile (to anything but a shiny response to the brand) is not helpful to the community or the brand imo. It is rather ironical to me..

[BigMackCam]

Folks, let's get back to the thread subject, please. Thank you