[Cerebum]

Some of my favorite "pentax" lenses are Sigma. So I have mixed feelings too

At least the existing ones can't be unmade so maybe one day. It is a shame though that their numbers will inevitably dwindle

[repaap]

I'm sorry, but really I don't know why this is Pentax news/rumours?


No new info.


Other than someone being sad to not have Pentax where they were not going to be anyway.

[Cerebum]

I'm sorry, but really I don't know why this is Pentax news/rumours?


No new info.


Other than someone being sad to not have Pentax where they were not going to be anyway.

I think it started as nearly news then devolved lol

[ffking]

There are two things that businesses need to manage here, aren't there? One is finances, and the other is perceptions. What can make good short term financial sense can send the wrong signals. In a world where more and more people say they didn't know you still existed and YouTube 'influencers' routinely ignore your existence and ever fewer bricks and mortar shops stock your products, it's possible to reach a tipping point where you have no customers. The company I used to work for (admittedly in pre-internet days) felt it had to attend trade shows even where it made a loss because a) customers would find other sources to buy from if you weren't there - and quite likely stay with them, producing a sort of death spiral, and b) the rumour mill quickly decided that you were out of business or at least in trouble if you didn't show. Not wanting to speak for him, but that's how I understood the OPs comments. We all know Pentax make some great products, but others need to also, and saving costs can be a false economy if you sacrifice future sales by doing so.

---

Last edited by ffking; 11-13-2019 at 04:36 AM. Reason: multiple typos :)

[Kunzite]

I don't work for Ricoh/Pentax, I'm just going by what gets reported in photography outlets. Out of curiosity, what is the source on this claim that Pentax does not directly support third party?

The claim was broader than I intended, I meant regarding Sigma.

[Jean Poitiers]

There are two things that businesses need to manage here, aren't there? One is finances, and the other is perceptions.What can make good short term financial sense can send the wrong signals. In a world where more and more people say they didn't know you still existed and YouTube 'influencers' routinely ignore your existence and ever fewer bricks and mortar shops stock your products, it's possible to reach a tipping point where you have no customers. The company I used to work for (admittedly in pre-internet days) felt it had to attend trade shows even here it made a loss because a) customers would find other sources to buy from if you weren't there - and quite likely stay withthem, producing a sort of death spiral, and b) the rumour mill quickly decided that you were outof business or at leastin trouble if you didn't show. Not wanting to speak for him, but that's how I understood the OPs comments. We all know Pwntax make some great products, but others need to also, and saving costs can be a flase economy.if you sacrifice future sales by doing so.

Thank you for your comments. Well said. Short-term cost reductions which can lead to mid-term and/or long-term sales losses, lost market share and lost prestige appearance.

In my opinion, it is "not good news" (my title) that Pentax has decided to remove itself from public view at an important event ... especially when there's a company milestone to be touted.

Obviously people can politely disagree about these points, but it's certainly not fake news nor living in an alternative reality.

[Kunzite]

Is that not essentially the Pentax Story... The name has be sold to anyone who wanted to pilfer the profitable sections of the company... And they kept the Pentax name alive for the camera division.

The Pentax Story told by whom?
There are exactly 3 points to note, on this subject:
- two companies attempting to use the Pentax brand for cameras, Asahi Optical was first (Mistral might confirm or correct me, if I'm not mistaken it was him posting a detailed account on this story)
- Hoya's hostile takeover on Pentax Corporation
- Hoya selling Pentax Imaging Systems to Ricoh.

So... fake story?

[Jean Poitiers]

The Pentax Story told by whom?
There are exactly 3 points to note, on this subject:
- two companies attempting to use the Pentax brand for cameras, Asahi Optical was first (Mistral might confirm or correct me, if I'm not mistaken it was him posting a detailed account on this story)
- Hoya's hostile takeover on Pentax Corporation
- Hoya selling Pentax Imaging Systems to Ricoh.

So... fake story?

Whatever ... the original subject was the Paris Photo Salon/Expo.

Nothing in your post above has anything to do with Pentax's no-show at this event.

Nothing.

[Jean Poitiers]

To be constructive and show the other side of the debate, here is an ad for the 100 year celebration at Pentax (France).

This was scanned from the major French photo magazine, "Chasseur d'Images", and it was the back page of the front cover in the October 2019 issue.

I also saw similar in other French photo press magazines and I will try to relay that info later if possible.

[MarkJerling]

I do wonder how many people (if any) arrived at that expo and thought: "Dang. No Pentax. That's it - I'll not buy Pentax ever again."
I suspect not very many. Not because no-one buys Pentax, but because I don't know anyone who makes purchasing decisions based purely on what they see at expos.

[sbh]

There are two things that businesses need to manage here, aren't there? One is finances, and the other is perceptions.What can make good short term financial sense can send the wrong signals. In a world where more and more people say they didn't know you still existed and YouTube 'influencers' routinely ignore your existence and ever fewer bricks and mortar shops stock your products, it's possible to reach a tipping point where you have no customers. The company I used to work for (admittedly in pre-internet days) felt it had to attend trade shows even here it made a loss because a) customers would find other sources to buy from if you weren't there - and quite likely stay withthem, producing a sort of death spiral, and b) the rumour mill quickly decided that you were outof business or at leastin trouble if you didn't show. Not wanting to speak for him, but that's how I understood the OPs comments. We all know Pwntax make some great products, but others need to also, and saving costs can be a flase economy.if you sacrifice future sales by doing so.

Agree. In this case Pentax decided to not attend this specific show and instead make an alternative appearance. That's all I see here.

The reason behind that? I don't know. From my own experience I would assume it comes down to limited resources (mainly manpower) to do both at the same time at the same place. (Even a small booth is a LOT of work.)

Would I be disappointed if I visited the show and Pentax wouldn't be there? Sure! Would I call it a disaster? No. Tbh, I find the alternative events much more exciting. I'd rather attend or follow one of those than seeing their booth. But that's just my personal perception.

These days trade shows aren't as important as they were many years back. Today the majority happens 24/7 online and by word of mouth. That doesn't mean trade shows are meaningless, not at all, its a good opportunity to communicate the brand in person, but skipping shows doesn't communicate the death of a company. It happens in other industries as well. IIRC at the last IAA (formally the largest show in the Car industry) some car manufacturers did not bother to come as they did not see the benefit from attending.

[Mistral75]

No - the "Pentax" brand has been sold, but only twice now. The medical brand and the camera brand are now owned by separate companies, but only Hoya and Ricoh use the name, and only Ricoh uses it for photography per see. That is a complete different process than what was done to poor old Polaroid after their bankruptcy.

There are actually at least five companies that use the Pentax brand in their respective field(s):

1. Ricoh for photographic equipment and binoculars
2. Hoya for medical products (Pentax Medical)
3. Pentax Industries Spa, an Italian company, for hydraulic pumps
4. Diewe - Diamantwerkzeuge GmbH, a German company, for abrasive tools
5. SPX Flow, a US company, for mixing, kneading and attritioning machines and sifters.

The first two obviously emanate from Asahi Optical: Asahi Optical (renamed Pentax in 2002) ==> Hoya (sale and merger; that was the one and only sale of the Asahi-trademarked Pentax brand) ==> Ricoh (licence agreement). I don't know for the other three.

[sbh]

To be constructive and show the other side of the debate, here is an ad for the 100 year celebration at Pentax (France).

This was scanned from the major French photo magazine, "Chasseur d'Images", and it was the back page of the front cover in the October 2019 issue.

I also saw similar in other French photo press magazines and I will try to relay that info later if possible.

Nice! I like this kind of advertising. I wish there was more of that.

[Mistral75]

But that's just the point; it's not really a competition.

Pentax needs to remain profitable. Spending heaps of money in a futile attempt to be the biggest can get in the way of that.

Exactly. As already written, Smart Vision / Ricoh Imaging have only one directive from Ricoh: turn in an operating profit. Within this strict limit, they do more or less what they want (within reason, of course). When times are hard, as they were until last year, they have to cut on R&D and marketing expenditures to conform with their instruction. When times are more favourable (e.g. since the GR III came out) they use the additional flexibility to spend a bit more on R&D and marketing.

[Jean Poitiers]

Nice! I like this kind of advertising. I wish there was more of that.

Yes, I would agree 100% ... and I wish that there was more Pentax advertising, too.