[totsmuyco]

The market is shrinking. Majority of those who bought into a DSLr system weren't photo enthusiasts. They simply thought, now it's photography made easy. In the end, those cameras are stuck in their shelves or probably their closet. Those cameras have been replaced by their cellphones. I know a lot of them here where I live.

[Rondec]

The point has been completely missed. What was a strategic mistake was to NOT have a K-3ii replacement for over 5 years. Ricoh either considered the KP/K-1 as suitable options (depending on needs - they likely assumed that most flagship users were using them because of ergonomics/IQ/build quality/features over speed) or they assumed that K-3 users were willing to wait longer because of the large numbers of people "holding on to" their K-5 cameras for a very long time¹. In any case, clearly a number of people feel their needs have gone unmet for years.

The K-1 is a fantastic camera, it has single-handedly killed any body-related GAS I could ever have ; I don't think I could be much happier with any other camera at any price level.

¹According to the interview with Mr. Farreng, Pentax users replace their equipment less often than those of other brands.

I think the big thing is to have a steady release of camera gear. There should be some sort of new camera or update of an old camera on a yearly basis. Then figure out pricing and production to make sure that a profit is made from those cameras. Between full frame, two APS-C cameras and a 645 camera and maybe the Q, they should be able to have a new release once a year.

Not every release has to be huge. Some could be K3 II/K1 II style updates, but there should be enough to let Pentaxians know that Pentax is still working on things.

[ThorSanchez]

I agree with the rest of the post, Ricoh made some strategic mistakes there - the K-1 clearly wasn't the upgrade action shooters wanted. However, IIRC the original K-5 released at something like $1700 right? The K-3 was also like 1200. Still very good value for money when compared to contemporary Canikon offerings.

EDIT: I should read *the entire* thread before repeating something that has already been mentioned
As I said, I agree with the points you make.

Thank you. I think people are getting get a little too wrapped up in specifics like "sub-$1000". When I bought the K-3ii seven months after release it was $769. Two years after the K-1II's release it's still listed at $1600-$1800. My only point was that you can't expect a camera that starts around $2000 to be a direct replacement for most people for a camera that starts around $1000. No matter how good the new one is. Some number of customers waited around for a sale to buy the cheaper camera, even $800 was a stretch.

[Kunzite]

The point has been completely missed. What was a strategic mistake was to NOT have a K-3ii replacement for over 5 years. Ricoh either considered the KP/K-1 as suitable options (depending on needs - they likely assumed that most flagship users were using them because of ergonomics/IQ/build quality/features over speed) or they assumed that K-3 users were willing to wait longer because of the large numbers of people "holding on to" their K-5 cameras for a very long time¹. In any case, clearly a number of people feel their needs have gone unmet for years.

Or they're replacing the K-3II as fast as they can, but no faster.

I believe there was a paradigm shift, from the "value flagship" to something closer to a "true flagship". Given all that happened - Ricoh's troubles, the introduction of a FF line and so on - there might not be any room for the "change of heart" theories abounding on the Internet.

[Kunzite]

Thank you. I think people are getting get a little too wrapped up in specifics like "sub-$1000". When I bought the K-3ii seven months after release it was $769. Two years after the K-1II's release it's still listed at $1600-$1800. My only point was that you can't expect a camera that starts around $2000 to be a direct replacement for most people for a camera that starts around $1000. No matter how good the new one is. Some number of customers waited around for a sale to buy the cheaper camera, even $800 was a stretch.

I don't believe a "sub-$1000" APS-C flagship is possible.
There are two conflicting requirements here. On one hand, Pentax won't get away with performance not nearing (some would say, not surpassing) the D500 or whatever's perceived as "the best". On the other hand, "sub-$1000" aka "I won't pay for it".

[Rondec]

Or they're replacing the K-3II as fast as they can, but no faster.

I believe there was a paradigm shift, from the "value flagship" to something closer to a "true flagship". Given all that happened - Ricoh's troubles, the introduction of a FF line and so on - there might not be any room for the "change of heart" theories abounding on the Internet.

I think everyone is trying to move upscale. As few sub-1000 dollar cameras as possible and as many in the 1500 to 3500 dollar range as possible. Any entry level cameras should be as severely crippled as possible in order to force consumers to move up to more expensive options.

Pentax hasn't done that, but certainly if they can release cameras at a higher price and keep them there over time, they will tend to have more revenue than if they have to severely discount their products in order to get them to move.

[ThorSanchez]

I don't believe a "sub-$1000" APS-C flagship is possible.
There are two conflicting requirements here. On one hand, Pentax won't get away with performance not nearing (some would say, not surpassing) the D500 or whatever's perceived as "the best". On the other hand, "sub-$1000" aka "I won't pay for it".

Maybe not anymore. But it was up until they discontinued the K-3II. If/when the K-new comes out at something like $1500 it will not sell as well as the K-3 or K-3ii did. Not unless it has some absolutely astounding new features that bring in customers who wouldn't have considered previous Pentax APS-C cameras.

[beholder3]

Compact point and Shoots sell for 1500 euros these days.

Ricoh would be nuts to go lower than 1600-1700 for a similar level camera AS the k3.

If the cheapos don't like that, so what.

[Mistral75]

I think the big thing is to have a steady release of camera gear. There should be some sort of new camera or update of an old camera on a yearly basis. Then figure out pricing and production to make sure that a profit is made from those cameras. Between full frame, two APS-C cameras and a 645 camera and maybe the Q, they should be able to have a new release once a year.

Not every release has to be huge. Some could be K3 II/K1 II style updates, but there should be enough to let Pentaxians know that Pentax is still working on things.

Actually it's what Ricoh Imaging have done for a few years:

• 2016: K-1 (and K-70 as a bonus)
• 2007: KP
• 2018: K-1 Mark II
• 2019: GR III
• 2020: KNEW?

[Serkevan]

Compact point and Shoots sell for 1500 euros these days.

Ricoh would be nuts to go lower than 1600-1700 for a similar level camera AS the k3.

If the cheapos don't like that, so what.

The Leicas, maybe
The most expensive compacts otherwise are the Fuji X100 and Sony RX100, both at ~1100€ for the newest iterations. And those are not even the best sellers, most people I see out and about use "cheapo" equipment, like 300-400€ bridge cameras or a small P&S.

Also, not wanting to spend more money on an APS-C camera than on a K-1 is not being "cheapo", it's having standards
You can get a LOT of camera these days for under 1500€. I don't doubt the K-new will be great, but it's gonna have to be very, very great to be an appetizing proposal at 1700€.

[ThorSanchez]

Compact point and Shoots sell for 1500 euros these days.

Ricoh would be nuts to go lower than 1600-1700 for a similar level camera AS the k3.

If the cheapos don't like that, so what.

The so what is that the majority of the existing Pentax customer base are cheapos. Pentax will have to decide if (making up numbers here as an example) 30,000 customers at $1000 is less good than 15,000 customers at $2000.

It's a little like baseball, where it appears some teams are as happy with 20,000 fans a game at $60 a ticket as they are with 30,000 at $40. The short-term revenues on tickets are the same, profits may actually be higher, but we'll have to wait and see the impacts of excluding more and more people from the market. Fewer and fewer will probably be interested in baseball and photography as time goes on.

[reh321]

Actually it's what Ricoh Imaging have done for a few years:

• 2016: K-1 (and K-70 as a bonus)
• 2007: KP
• 2018: K-1 Mark II
• 2019: GR III
• 2020: KNEW?

You are postulating in slightly different words what I've been saying for almost a year now - effort that could have gone into replacing the K-3ii went into Ricoh cameras instead. I would have been OK with that if there were still a supply of the K-3ii, but there wasn't. You should add that the WG-60 was also released last year, leaving a number of Pentax users feeling abandoned, which is not a good thing.

[UlrichSchiegg]

When the market is shrinking, the camera makers need to move to higher end models to sustain the business. That is also valid for Ricoh. Less models, more quality. The mass market is moving away from cameras as a stand alone tool.

[monochrome]

Actually it's what Ricoh Imaging have done for a few years:

• 2016: K-1 (and K-70 as a bonus)
• 2007: KP
• 2018: K-1 Mark II
• 2019: GR III
• 2020: KNEW?

From the outside it appears they have moved from a ‘large batch’ production model to more of a constant maanufacturing production model. This reduces/eliminates the need to heavily discount* cameras held in inventory as they age, and allows the cash flow from current sales to finance the costs of current production. It would be a much leaner, more flexible, less capital-intensive business model.


* and if true calls into question the consumer strategy “wait
until the price drops in six months before I buy” so commonly espoused here.

[edri]

As a camera user I do not care about the financial flow of the corporation. I am interested in the characteristics of the cameras, the characteristics of the lenses and the pace at which the system keeps up with the modernization of the photo market.