[Raffwal]

"partners" + "investment" = fusion?

[MMVIII]

Lens rental said about A7R III that and I quote "So What Did We Learn Today?
Sony spoke truly. Except for the bottom this camera has thorough and extensive weather sealing, as good as any camera I’ve seen." If they said this about an older model like A7R III, then their findings seems to contradict you and they do have arguments and images to back up their findings.

Wait, they found the bottom is practically not sealed. If left on a table and water is spilled or it starts to rain it is entering the camera. There is no such thing as 99% water sealing. It's like having a tire that is 99% sealed "except for the small hole that can't be closed".

[Dan Rentea]

Wait, they found the bottom is practically not sealed. If left on a table and water is spilled or it starts to rain it is entering the camera. There is no such thing as 99% water sealing. It's like having a tire that is 99% sealed "except for the small hole that can't be closed".

Sure, but even my K-5 II got some drops of water inside the top LCD when used in bad weather. I learned my lesson and since then I have a rain cover in my backpack. Also, it is possible that the bottom in the new Sony models to have some protection but we don't know until someone will make a video in this regard. What I wanted to point out is that the word "junk" is a bold statement which in my opinion doesn't have any kind of arguments other than a personal opinion of someone who most certain doesn't have experience with Sony cameras. As with every manufacturer, we see pro photographers using their Sony, Pentax, Fuji, Oly, Canon, Nikon, Panasonic cameras in quite challenging conditions. That's why I can't agree with such bold statements when comes to gear in general, being Sony, Pentax, Nikon, Canon, etc... It's clickbait rather than reality.

[MMVIII]

A collaboration with a Chinese handphone maker like what Leica does with Huawei would be a good way out, but given the tensions now and past animosity, its not likely to happen.
I am sure makers like Xiaomi, Oppo, would also benefit if they can have a claim that they have imaging lens and technology from a 'renowned Japanese maker'

I'm not sure how strong Pentax is in industrial optics as that is a big market too with the semi-conductor shortage/boom.


I can only wait to see what happens and buy accordingly.

It's interesting what this could mean. Pentax traditionally used cooperation in the last 20 years with HP to enter the digital market with the EL-2000.
Later a sort of cooperation must have existed because the K10D was available by Samsung as the GX-10

In which form and way both worked is a question.

If Ricoh would be looking for a Japanese cooperation there would be Casio, Epson or Sigma, all with own camera experience and strong in consumer electronics. But I don't want to indicate there are any hints for anything here.

[totsmuyco]

I don't really know what to make of his statements. Ricoh management seem committed but seem unsure. Just my own understanding.

[Dan Rentea]

Sony sensors are good. Sony cameras are "junk", the cheapest assembly of all camera brands, but the Sony build is consistent with two years life cycle of their camera model, they expect customers to upgrade every two years, so there is no need to make rugged Sony cameras, cheapo craft is enough (disposable camera concept, at $3000 and more).

Again, clickbait. It's the same as "Pentax is in the stone age" remark that I see on other forums.

[jersey]

I don't really know what to make of his statements. Ricoh management seem committed but seem unsure. Just my own understanding.

There will be yearly financial summary in may, we should get more informations then, unless someone from Ricoh gives some explanation sooner. But I doubt. Their communication with customer is not the best one.

[Pål Jensen]

It depends on what that relationship is meant to be. Something like I suggested with Nikon would be less “investment” and more “trading in local capabilities”, though there could be more exotic approaches used.

I think an arrangement with a Chinese lens maker would look more like a traditional arrangement, as Pentax likely has “things for them to buy”.

But I wonder if Ricoh is looking for an unusual solution. The Tokina/Tamron shared development thing does not seem to have worked as well lately as it seemed to in the past. Maybe an unprecedented market leaves them searching for something unique...

-Eric

Nikon is bleeding money and downsizing. The last on their list is to invest in another potentially unprofitable camera company. Pentax have nothing Nikon need.
I don't think Ricoh will seek partners outside japan. Lens manufacturers in japan could be candidates provided they have any ambition to delve into camera manufacturing. It is unlikely though; these companies too faces downsizing. Perhaps camera companies that do not make interchangeable lens cameras and/or not FF cameras or MF cameras, or DLSR's of course, could be candidates. Or perhaps faceless subcontractors for the camera industry. Also the consumer electronics firms who may want to go more into digital cameras, although it is hard to understand why in todays reality. Hard to tell....

[Rondec]

I guess I get the feeling that Ricoh is like someone who bought a business a few years ago and realizes that they don't have the time and the energy to run the business in such a way as to turn a profit. It doesn't mean that the business is bad or that they want to shutter it, but they would like to have someone else come in and share the load a bit and get things moving again.

I think Ricoh is in the position of not knowing if Pentax can turn a profit or not. When you turn out a new lens every year or two and a new camera every two years, you aren't going to have great revenues, even if the products sell decently right after release. I am just not sure that there is a partner out there that really wants to take on this sort of project and figure out what sorts of products they should release to start selling cameras and lenses for a profit again.

[RobA_Oz]

Partnering with a lens-maker seems to me to be the most useful thing Ricoh could do for Pentax right now, as the roll-out of new lenses is slower than most people would like. The most obvious of the possible candidates to me would be Tokina, who seems to be struggling against their opposition. Spreading the cost of new product across several different mounts would benefit both parties, but to be successful the DSLR lens market would have to hold up enough to justify it.

Tamron appears to be pivoting to MILC, although that could be illusory, as most of the publicity is in that area at the moment. Sigma, of course, is interested in the L-mount as well as others. I have no idea where Cosina is aiming, as they've always had a spread across Leica's M-mount and Nikon's F-mount, with Canon's EF-mount coming on line in recent years, so maybe they'd be interested. Cosina also has a history of camera bodies (including the Epson R-D1 series) which could be useful.

[ffking]

It's difficult to know what Ricoh hoped for when they bought Pentax. It seems reasonable to assume that they thought they could take advantage of the brand recognition and start to increase market share and profitability with a little of the investment that Hoya had starved the cameras of - and it's quite possible that the rapidity of the rise of MILCs was not part of their calculation. They are clearly trying to make the brand more prestigious again, but on a shoestring, which comes across as a little indecisive. They have the problem also that many people bought into the brand as a value proposition and, although the value remains, it is at a higher price point than previously. I do think that the speed of producing new kit carries the real risk of the brand totally dropping off the radar, and from there it's a slippery slope - but the alternative of a huge advertising budget and consequently over-priced goods didn't work for Olympus. What worked for Sony is huge investment in R&D and getting the product into the hands of 'influencers' at big launch events and sending out samples etc - what we don't know is how sustainable that is now that Canon is in the race with their own big war chest.
It's actually hard to see a way forward for Ricoh with cameras other than trying to maintain cost neutral or only making small, affordable losses and slowly building a system that has a distinct place in the market - and that's what they seem to have been doing. To me, the only mistake is throttling back just too much on investment so that development times are too long and new releases are always behind the curve of what others are doing and fail to make a splash when they come to market. It's easy to forget, but the K-3 was actually quite competitive spec wise, but things have been getting slower and slower ever since. So - I would say that they need to follow basically the path they have been, but just turn on the investment taps a little more - the alternative is a slow decline in sales followed by disappearance of the brand - which nobody here wants.

[ffking]

I guess I get the feeling that Ricoh is like someone who bought a business a few years ago and realizes that they don't have the time and the energy to run the business in such a way as to turn a profit. It doesn't mean that the business is bad or that they want to shutter it, but they would like to have someone else come in and share the load a bit and get things moving again.

I think Ricoh is in the position of not knowing if Pentax can turn a profit or not. When you turn out a new lens every year or two and a new camera every two years, you aren't going to have great revenues, even if the products sell decently right after release. I am just not sure that there is a partner out there that really wants to take on this sort of project and figure out what sorts of products they should release to start selling cameras and lenses for a profit again.

Totally agree - I was writing along the same lines (though less succinctly put!) so I didn't see this until after posting.

[JPT]

Going back to the original account by kwb and some other articles I've read about this, I don't see this really changes much. The audience here was a bunch of investors, who predictably challenge parts of the business that are not reaching the ROI desires. In response to this Yamashita-san said he sees value in the camera business, indicates that he is not looking for hasty divestment of the business and that he feels a responsibility to keep the brand going for the loyal users. How often do you see business leaders make that argument in an investor meeting?

[jersey]

You are right, of course, but in the end if such information hit the press/net all people will see is "investors are not happy" and "Ricoh boss looks for partnership". Year ago reactions will be like "good, good, new cameras from Pentax", now I think it's more like "we saw this with Olympus, Pentax is dead (this time for sure), run away".

[UlrichSchiegg]

Going back to the original account by kwb and some other articles I've read about this, I don't see this really changes much. The audience here was a bunch of investors, who predictably challenge parts of the business that are not reaching the ROI desires. In response to this Yamashita-san said he sees value in the camera business, indicates that he is not looking for hasty divestment of the business and that he feels a responsibility to keep the brand going for the loyal users. How often do you see business leaders make that argument in an investor meeting?

That is also how I would interpret.

If management wants to sell a unit, usually you do not announce ahead. The risk that your employee start applying may be triggered by such statements. And it is usually the high performance employees that leave first. If you look for buyers, there are other none public channels. There may be occasions where you use an investor forum, but aren't those usually triggered if you have strong investors that can force an announcement? Don't see that with Japanese, don't see that with Ricoh.