[BigMackCam]

What a silly thing to say.
We cannot escape the MILC propaganda even here, on Pentaxforums. This isn't about us being sensitive, it's about those MILC fanboys being utterly and insistently annoying.

I'll say again - anyone worth listening to knows that there are pro's and con's to both types of camera. The rest can be quickly dismissed as luddites or trend-followers, or those looking to reassure themselves they did the right thing by staying with DSLR or switching to mirrorless (when they should know already).

Not that many here need convincing, but whilst mirrorless technology has its benefits, it ain't the Holy Grail. Try shooting an EVF camera with the sun directly or (almost-directly) behind you on a sunny day and see how much fun you have unless (a) you eye is jammed into the rubber viewfinder surround, and (b) your eyes have had time to adjust from the day-time brightness to that of the EVF. I got to "enjoy" this experience first hand on a couple of occasions this year. On one of those occasions, I missed a couple of (potentially) decent shots...

---

Last edited by BigMackCam; 01-15-2019 at 02:23 PM.

[Mistral75]

I'm only guessing, here, but I think the main reason for that - aside from a slump in DSLR sales generally - is that the KP was released two full years ago, the K-1II is a relatively minor update of an existing model, the K-3II is discontinued and folks are waiting for the replacement. If Ricoh releases at least one fully new model this year - ideally including the K-3II replacement - the sales numbers should improve. Perhaps not to 2016/2017 levels, but an improvement nonetheless...

It's a vicious circle and, as such, hard to break: less sales --> less money to spend on marketing and R&D --> lower brand awareness and less new products --> less sales and so on.

A shrinking market doesn't help either, in particular when there isn't much money to tap other, more promising markets. Nor does a shareholder that doesn't want to inject any money and commands its subsidiary to turn a positive EBIT / operating result whatever betide.

Ricoh Imaging thought the Theta ecosystem would be the goose that lays the golden eggs, unfortunately it wasn't: Theta is doing OK but the 360° market is more a professional market and less a prosumer one than they thought it would be and Chinese products are tough competitors in the prosumer part.

[BigMackCam]

It's a vicious circle and, as such, hard to break: less sales --> less money to spend on marketing and R&D --> lower brand awareness and less new products --> less sales and so on.

A shrinking market doesn't help either, in particular when there isn't much money to tap other, more promising markets. Nor does a shareholder that doesn't want to inject any money and commands its subsidiary to turn a positive EBIT / operating result whatever betide.

Ricoh Imaging thought the Theta ecosystem would be the goose that lays the golden eggs, unfortunately it wasn't: Theta is doing OK but the 360° market is more a professional market and less a prosumer one than they thought it would be and Chinese products are tough competitors in the prosumer part.

Agreed.

The Theta's an interesting one... No disrespect intended to any of our members who own one, but I never quite understood the amount of focus and product development that went into that, and the significant portion of show stand space devoted to it. But, then, didn't it get moved into a different division or sub-division of Ricoh? Something to do with commercial / government applications?

[Mistral75]

I'll say again - anyone worth listening to knows that there are pro's and con's to both types of camera. The rest can be quickly dismissed as trend-followers, or those looking to reassure themselves they did the right thing by switching completely to mirrorless.

Not that many here need convincing, but whilst mirrorless technology has its benefits, it ain't the Holy Grail. (...)

You are right but believe me: had Ricoh Imaging had enough resources, they would propose a full mirrorless offer by now. If they are full-DSLR, it's out of necessity, not conviction.

[BigMackCam]

You are right but believe me: had Ricoh Imaging had enough resources, they would propose a full mirrorless offer by now.

Oh, no doubt. And had they enough funding and resources, that would be the right thing to do, IMHO. Both bases covered, as it were. And, despite what I've said about DSLRs, at least in the short term I think a mirrorless platform would have attracted the majority of new sales. As for the longer term, the jury is out, I think. Personally, I could see myself with both DSLR and mirrorless products from Pentax if they were available. Right now, I use Sony for the mirrorless portion.

If they are full-DSLR, it's out of necessity, not conviction.

Yep. But, the commitment to DSLR is still very meaningful. When the manufacturers are rushing like thousands of lemmings towards mirrorless market over-saturation, DSLRs still offer a particular kind of photographer the most enjoyable and practical experience in certain use cases...

[Kunzite]

I'll say again - anyone worth listening to knows that there are pro's and con's to both types of camera. The rest can be quickly dismissed as luddites or trend-followers, or those looking to reassure themselves they did the right thing by staying with DSLR or switching to mirrorless (when they should know already).

Just a few posts before, someone had to remind us how "the dslr is over". He's obviously not worth listening to, but he is noisy.

---------- Post added 15-01-19 at 11:29 PM ----------

You are right but believe me: had Ricoh Imaging had enough resources, they would propose a full mirrorless offer by now. If they are full-DSLR, it's out of necessity, not conviction.

If they had "enough resources", they would've completed the K-mount DSLR line by now.

[RonHendriks1966]

Ricoh Imaging thought the Theta ecosystem would be the goose that lays the golden eggs, unfortunately it wasn't: Theta is doing OK but the 360° market is more a professional market and less a prosumer one than they thought it would be and Chinese products are tough competitors in the prosumer part.

They took a bet on the wrong horse. They put their money in the K-1 project and instead should have developed the Theta into a professional 360 content maker.

But who would have known that a few years ago....
Why Ricoh should put the K-1 on hold! - PentaxForums.com

[reh321]

or perhaps they will be underwhelming again. the dslr is over... it is only a matter of time. canon is revamping their aps-c dslr line - down to one camera.

When was the last time they were "underwhelming"?

I am very very happy with my new KP!

Which Pentax camera are you using?

[Mistral75]

They took a bet on the wrong horse. They put their money in the K-1 project and instead should have developed the Theta into a professional 360 content maker.

(...)

Had they do that, they would be in an even worse condition by now. They have no DNA to favourably compete as a professional 360 content maker. Ricoh are a provider of services and a seller of equipment (mostly BtoB, another peculiarity of Ricoh Imaging being to be BtoC), not a content maker.

To make an analogy with cinema, Arri, RED or Panavision couldn't easily transform themselves into a new Walt Disney Pictures or Universal Studios. Only Sony have the dual capability and they literally acquired it (external growth).

[biz-engineer]

You are right but believe me: had Ricoh Imaging had enough resources, they would propose a full mirrorless offer by now. If they are full-DSLR, it's out of necessity, not conviction.

I don't think Ricoh engaged into the DSLR FF system because they lacked resources for a MILC FF system. Before Ricoh released the Pentax K1, there were nearly no DFA lenses, at this point they could have developed a MILC system without needing more resource than they had, simply because developing a MILC system isn't more costly than developing a new DSLR system (new camera + new lenses), DSLR already contains a MILC operation when the mirror is up. Adding an EVF is easy. It's just that on a full frame system, there is not size advantage of MILC vs DSLR for customers, just look at the EOS R with the enormous 28-70 f2. Changing lens mounts and pushing customers to switch from DSLR to MILC is conspiracy from the top 3 camera makers to stimulate sales again, and it's truly a ripoff of all customers who are heavily invested in legacy mounts (EF and F mount). MILC is a ripoff. The OES R is less than a 5DIV, it's a marketing ripoff.

[BigMackCam]

They took a bet on the wrong horse. They put their money in the K-1 project and instead should have developed the Theta into a professional 360 content maker.

With respect, Ron, that strikes me as a somewhat far-fetched assertion.

For the longest time, Pentax's core user base had been crying out for a full-frame DSLR. Without such a model, confidence and interest in its DSLR offerings in general would, IMHO, have waned more quickly still. With the K-1, and now the K-1II, Pentax APS-C owners have the same format upgrade path offered by Nikon, Canon and Sony. And we only have to look at the accolades the K-1 received to see what a success it was in the eyes of the public.

We can make educated guesses as to the number of units sold and the profits therein, but I find it very difficult to believe the Theta would have been more profitable by comparison. And it certainly wouldn't have been as strategically important to the rest of Ricoh Imaging's consumer photography business. There aren't many Theta folks looking for interchangeable lenses, for a start

[RonHendriks1966]

Had they do that, they would be in an even worse condition by now. They have no DNA to favourably compete as a professional 360 content maker. Ricoh are a provider of services and a seller of equipment (mostly BtoB, another peculiarity of Ricoh Imaging being to be BtoC), not a content maker.

To make an analogy with cinema, Arri, RED or Panavision couldn't easily transform themselves into a new Walt Disney Pictures or Universal Studios. Only Sony have the dual capability and they literally acquired it (external growth).

I wrote it wrong. Not to make content themselves, but to make a pro camera that can be used for this professional content making.

[biz-engineer]

But who would have known that a few years ago....Why Ricoh should put the K-1 on hold! - PentaxForums.com

I always found it was easy to forecast doom, and a lot more difficult to propose what to do what will be successful in the future.

[RonHendriks1966]

The biggest problem with the K-1 was that it came to late to the market. Everyone was expecting it at the 2014 Photokina, but it didn't. If they had started development of the K-1 in early 2012 then it would be ready for this launch in september 2014. After that date Pentax lost almost everyone who was still waiting for a fullframe k-mount camera. They all went to other brands that did offer a fullframe model. What left was either not interested in fullframe or didn't have the money to buy into such a system. So in 2016 when the K-1 came there where around 25.000 customers waiting for it and after that sales went down a lot and never went up.

[Kunzite]

I always found it was easy to forecast doom, and a lot more difficult to propose what to do what will be successful in the future. You suggested to halt the K1 project but you did say what product Ricoh should do to be successful in the future.

What I find amazing is that he's bringing up that nonsense again, after seeing how the FF was a success.
Maybe that's the thing - everything that could bring even a moderate success is a "bad" idea and should be put on hold. Instead, Pentax/Ricoh should enter one wild goose chase after another.