[WorksAsIntended]

Snide remarks... and to Mistral???
Did you miss the posts - not Mistral's, obviously - who accused Ricoh Imaging of being a lazy unprofessional mess just because they didn't update the roadmap now?

It is not about the roadmap. It is about organisating workflows. If there is a possibility to "forget" something like a road map update, there is a huge problem going on and it is a mess. Quite simple. If they do not forget but choose to not put the 5 mins of work into the update, there is another huge problem going on.


Let's just hope that development and sales are completly sepperated departmens with different workflows and for now it looks like they do better work, thankfully.

[Kunzite]

It is not about the roadmap. It is about organisating workflows.

No, it's about people finding the silliest excuses to bash Pentax.

[deus ursus]

It is not about the roadmap. It is about organisating workflows. If there is a possibility to "forget" something like a road map update, there is a huge problem going on and it is a mess. Quite simple. If they do not forget but choose to not put the 5 mins of work into the update, there is another huge problem going on.

Or they are just taking their time thoroughly evaluating the time schedules on the roadmap, just to make sure they release a roadmap that's as accurate as possible.

[LennyBloke]

Perhaps we take the roadmap too seriously !

Some lenses are posted and will never materialise, some lenses appear and their specifications change, most lenses (that do materialise) don't arrive by the originally indicated date (even when that date spans a year) - I think the most accurate thing posted on the roadmap is when they state a date of "YYYY or later"

It's designed to intrigue, to tease, and to give us hope - long live the roadmap

[bxf]

It is not about the roadmap. It is about organisating workflows. If there is a possibility to "forget" something like a road map update, there is a huge problem going on and it is a mess. Quite simple. If they do not forget but choose to not put the 5 mins of work into the update, there is another huge problem going on.


Let's just hope that development and sales are completly sepperated departmens with different workflows and for now it looks like they do better work, thankfully.

KP custom，DFA*85/1.4 CP+ Exhibit - Page 64 - PentaxForums.com

[WorksAsIntended]

Or they are just taking their time thoroughly evaluating the time schedules on the roadmap, just to make sure they release a roadmap that's as accurate as possible.

You should not hope for that. That would mean they burn a hell lot of resources without outcome, thinking about how much the roadmap changed over time.

[deus ursus]

You should not hope for that. That would mean they burn a hell lot of resources without outcome, thinking about how much the roadmap changed over time.

Well, anyway I don't think they have a huge problem or are 'in a mess' just because they are delaying an update of the roadmap.

[Kunzite]

Perhaps we take the roadmap too seriously !

It's worse.
The thing is, that "workflow" theory is completely nonsense. At no point Ricoh Imaging's actions hinted toward a "workflow" ending with a roadmap update. Blaming Ricoh/Pentax for something existing only in someone's imagination, this is what we have here.

Oh, sure, they will update the roadmap periodically, but that's it. The roadmap was never intended to be an up to date image of the lens line-up, but to give some indication about the future plans.

[Kunzite]

You should not hope for that. That would mean they burn a hell lot of resources without outcome, thinking about how much the roadmap changed over time.

Yeah, right - they could make 3 complete mirrorless lines, gain 110% market share in both DSLRs and MILCs, and solve the global warming in the time it takes to plan the products.
(What did I say earlier?)

[WorksAsIntended]

KP custom，DFA*85/1.4 CP+ Exhibit - Page 64 - PentaxForums.com

When it comes down to a big (or even small business) imho there is no "too serious".

When I invest in a local startup and see such mistakes I talk to them and advice them on how to get this perfected or at least where they might find information to find a working solution for themselves (I do realize that our solution is not the right for everyone and as long as the result is there in the end I do not care at all how it is achieved). When I see a lot of such mistakes happen and no improvement, I stop my financal support to cut my risk of financal losses. If this is the right thing to do or not, others do the same, also on big scales.

If a brand has been sold twice within a couple of years and is in a declining market with small share there is simply no space for stupid mistakes and if I were a big shareholder this might influence my decission if I invest or not. Again: It is not about a roadmap being updated in time or not. It is about a company/brand that needs to work in a efficiant way leaving as little room for human error as possible. This means they need to have a workflow pipeline and in this case it is faulty or non existent, the later being worse.

---------- Post added 02-11-20 at 07:46 AM ----------

Yeah, right - they could make 3 complete mirrorless lines, gain 110% market share in both DSLRs and MILCs, and solve the global warming in the time it takes to plan the products.
(What did I say earlier?)

In what way does this make any sense as a response to what I wrote?

The original statement to which I replied was that they may not update the roadmap because they need to make consientious backchecking with the actual development. Between the roadmap versions a lot of stuff changed (change from 70-200 to 70-210 as a recent example). If this would have all been points carefully evaluated the evaluation would have been corrected many times which means a way to nonlinear development. This is something that would mean a loss of ressources on projects without outcome and would be bad for business. I do not think this is the case, hopefully not. This however means that there is no "waiting for development and carefully checking if the new roadmap information will be exactly true".

[Kunzite]

In what way does this make any sense as a response to what I wrote?

In the way you're bashing Pentax/Ricoh for an invented problem. And for some reason, you can't stop doing it. Instead, you invent more and more nonsense.

[Rondec]

I think the importance of the road map is overstated here.

1. The Road Map is not a promise. A lens like the full frame fish eye zoom can disappear off of it without a single comment from Pentax. Clearly the 70-200 f4 changed from an in-house Pentax project to a Tamron out source once again, without a specific comment.

2. The Road Map is nebulous. That is to say the majority of future lenses on it are listed as "2019 or later." I don't even know what that means since they are all now 2020 or later.

3. The Road Map is not all inclusive. The HD FA 35 and HD DA 10-17 were both lenses that were never listed on the road map at all before they were announced.

Overall, there is a real tendency to focus on the negative. We see the lenses that aren't present yet. We get aggravated by the order in which the lenses are actually released and every delay tends to be upsetting. I think the lack of an updated lens map is another example of that. Yes, they should update it, but in the end, when it doesn't bring new information to our lives or speed the release of new glass, I don't know that is particularly helpful.

[BarneyL]

I think the Pentax lens roadmap has bigger problems than it being slightly out of date. Like the "or later" keyword.

[sundown]

Everyone is having their own interpretation of what the roadmap file is supposed to be, how it's to be read, and what the lack of update means. Will you guys calm down ? Thanks. For the record, on the website it says "Lineup and Lens Roadmap".

[Kunzite]

We're each entitled to our opinion, but when you accuse someone of incompetence you'd better have a solid case.