[biz-engineer]

I'm sure this DFA*50 is going to be an exceptional lens (similar to the Leica) but with Pentax star rendering and Pentax price. Question for me is what's next. I'm invested in so much new Pentax lenses right now that I would need to have more clarity on Pentax future before I commit any more money to Pentax lenses. Postponement of the 11-18 was not reassuring me because I wonder how Ricoh are going to be able to keep customers without a regular refresh of their product line.

[jatrax]

without a regular refresh of their product line.

Define 'regular'. I think introduction of new products is going to slow dramatically from all vendors, at least the traditional ones. I think the days of many new bodies and lenses each year are gone forever.


The market is shrinking. And the way to survive in a shrinking market is play safe and never overextend. One win at a time with limited investment risk. Sounds like what Ricoh is doing actually.

[bobbotron]

I agree. If enough people don't buy this lens, it would jeopardize future releases like the DFA*85 and DFA*35 or whatever it will be. Remember, the failure of the K-01 (for various reasons) killed mirrorless development at Pentax.

Their market research would have said the Fifty would be a good barometer for the need of a big premium prime line.

I can only imagine there's some truth in this! If only I wasn't saving for multiple house renovations and farm upgrades. :/

[beholder3]

In two weeks time we should have a new toy and Ricoh can focus on the next DFA.

[RobA_Oz]

Define 'regular'. I think introduction of new products is going to slow dramatically from all vendors, at least the traditional ones. I think the days of many new bodies and lenses each year are gone forever.

The market is shrinking. And the way to survive in a shrinking market is play safe and never overextend. One win at a time with limited investment risk. Sounds like what Ricoh is doing actually.

I’d be more concerned to define “refresh”. That word sounds to me like a small change to an existing product or group, such as the move from SMC to HD coatings in the DA lenses. There are several of those still to be changed, BTW, but the move to KAF4 is another, and even that seems to be paused while the D FA lenses are slowly rolled out.

Completing the move to HD coatings (and rounded aperture blades, though I recognise some prefer starbursts to bokeh rendering) would involve minimal production process change, and could be programmed to occur with each lens as the previous batch is completed. Converting to KAF4 would involve greater manufacturing change, but still less than with a completely new lens design.

[monochrome]

I think it's more down to over-conservative bean-counters at Pentax. They refused to authorize a realistic amount of up-front build without demonstrated demand.

On the other hand it's probably a positive signal for green-lighting similar projects at headquarters.

You have no business making that direct statement.

None of us has any basis for forming an opinion about whether these sellouts reflect conservative resource allocation or genuine unanticipated demand. Even making such a statement as you made (by a respected commenter) contributes to negative Pentax sentiment and is, I believe, irresponsible.

Of course you could reveal your credible source on the production planning team and prove me wrong, but you can’t. Otherwise your post is pure speculation with no substantive foundation in fact.

[monochrome]

I've seen some good discounts on Pentax equipment at B&H photo, so perhaps not directly, but through some of their distribution channels.

Was thinking something similar, but figured if the bean counters green lighted what they did produce up front, that was probably tied to a break even/risk point they could all agree on. So hopeful that it encourages more development.

I agree. If enough people don't buy this lens, it would jeopardize future releases like the DFA*85 and DFA*35 or whatever it will be. Remember, the failure of the K-01 (for various reasons) killed mirrorless development at Pentax.

Their market research would have said the Fifty would be a good barometer for the need of a big premium prime line.

Don’t give that notion credibility.

I could just as easily say demand for Pentax new introductions regularly outstrips agressive production plans and you can’t prove me wrong, but my supposition is positive and the posters supposition is knee-jerk anti-Pentax failure narrative (whether conscious or just habit).

P.S. They’re doing better than you think.

[monochrome]

I'm sure this DFA*50 is going to be an exceptional lens (similar to the Leica) but with Pentax star rendering and Pentax price. Question for me is what's next. I'm invested in so much new Pentax lenses right now that I would need to have more clarity on Pentax future before I commit any more money to Pentax lenses. Postponement of the 11-18 was not reassuring me because I wonder how Ricoh are going to be able to keep customers without a regular refresh of their product line.

I suspect Pentax will actually gain customers who buy new product off-the-shelf, and will constantly have a durable ‘waiting list’ for their new releases, no matter how much stock they build for the rollout.

[monochrome]

I’d be more concerned to define “refresh”. That word sounds to me like a small change to an existing product or group, such as the move from SMC to HD coatings in the DA lenses. There are several of those still to be changed, BTW, but the move to KAF4 is another, and even that seems to be paused while the D FA lenses are slowly rolled out.

Completing the move to HD coatings (and rounded aperture blades, though I recognise some prefer starbursts to bokeh rendering) would involve minimal production process change, and could be programmed to occur with each lens as the previous batch is completed. Converting to KAF4 would involve greater manufacturing change, but still less than with a completely new lens design.

They must first sell the existing stock of the old-style lenses before releasing a replacement.

[robjmitchell]

I'm sure this DFA*50 is going to be an exceptional lens (similar to the Leica) but with Pentax star rendering and Pentax price. Question for me is what's next. I'm invested in so much new Pentax lenses right now that I would need to have more clarity on Pentax future before I commit any more money to Pentax lenses. Postponement of the 11-18 was not reassuring me because I wonder how Ricoh are going to be able to keep customers without a regular refresh of their product line.

The upgrade cycle is dead as the technology has matured. We haven’t seen a new aps-c sensor since the K3 came out, presumably why its replacement has been put on the back burner. The key for manufacturing is to match capacity to output. Pentax has already cut cost by outsourcing, stoped trying to compete for entry level consumers with the huge cost involved in suppling dying B&M stores, and has instead gone after informed customers who value all the features pentax brings (which compared to canon and Nikon is a lot) Why would a Pentax user leave if he looses performance by doing so. Hence why releasing products such as the DFA*50 which are “Best in class” is the perfect strategy moving forwards. It retains customers because they loose out if they leave.

[clickclick]

Don’t give that notion credibility.

I could just as easily say demand for Pentax new introductions regularly outstrips agressive production plans and you can’t prove me wrong, but my supposition is positive and the posters supposition is knee-jerk anti-Pentax failure narrative (whether conscious or just habit).

P.S. They’re doing better than you think.

HHhmmm. In no way meant failure or negativity, just more a cautious approach by Pentax (Ricoh) in a market that has a lot of FUD out there on camera sales in general, and having sold the first run of Mark II upgrades faster than anticipated in the U.S. and then perhaps already filled all orders for the first shipments of the new DFA* 50 in preorders, I see as very good. My overall view is actually pretty optimistic that Pentax is carving out an upper end market niche that will take it forward many years. I'm actually pretty happy that I have a roadmap to satisfy LBA and GAS about as fast as I can earn it.

[RobA_Oz]

They must first sell the existing stock of the old-style lenses before releasing a replacement.

The existing stocks of SMC lenses were still with resellers after the HD lenses were released. Getting the last batches out from the factory might be another matter.

[bobbotron]

It's listed on BH photo video! (Forgive me if this is already posted)


Pentax HD FA 50mm f/1.4 SDM AW Lens 21260 B&H Photo Video

[Mark Ransom]

You have no business making that direct statement.

None of us has any basis for forming an opinion about whether these sellouts reflect conservative resource allocation or genuine unanticipated demand. Even making such a statement as you made (by a respected commenter) contributes to negative Pentax sentiment and is, I believe, irresponsible.

Of course you could reveal your credible source on the production planning team and prove me wrong, but you can’t. Otherwise your post is pure speculation with no substantive foundation in fact.

I admit it was pure speculation, which is why my first two words were "I think".

As far as negative perceptions, which is more negative - that Pentax was being overly conservative, or that they are totally clueless when it comes to projecting demand? In any case it's a problem that is easily rectified, and I do consider it a positive sign overall. I notice you didn't take exception to that part of my statement.

[thibs]

I’d be more concerned to define “refresh”. That word sounds to me like a small change to an existing product or group, such as the move from SMC to HD coatings in the DA lenses. There are several of those still to be changed, BTW, but the move to KAF4 is another, and even that seems to be paused while the D FA lenses are slowly rolled out.

Completing the move to HD coatings (and rounded aperture blades, though I recognise some prefer starbursts to bokeh rendering) would involve minimal production process change, and could be programmed to occur with each lens as the previous batch is completed. Converting to KAF4 would involve greater manufacturing change, but still less than with a completely new lens design.

The (hypothetical) move to KAF4 probably isn't that big of a deal (but it would be easier to judge if we could get a diagram with the aperture motor/actuator of KAF4 lenses).
The (hypothetical) replacement of old SDM by ring SDM or DC motors is trickier and certainly need a barrel redesign.

Notice the 11-18 is still KAF3. Would RIcoh try to sell new versions to guys (like me) still using pre-K3 cameras?
That could influence the decision to go either KAF3 or KAF4. Motors are independent from this though.