[luftfluss]

It would cost me a lot of money, much more money than buying a new up to date Pentax body.


Pentax didn't say that they are working on a new digital full frame camera. The last two press releases said that 1) they stop mass production of cameras and withdraw from B&M retail in Japan, 2) they are studying the feasibility of making and selling film cameras. Some people affirmed on the forum that Ricoh are working on a K1 III, but there is not a single evidence or statement from Ricoh themselves to confirm this information.

There is a strong implication that a K-1 III is forthcoming in this thread: Pentax Interview in Cameraman Magazine from Late 2022 - PentaxForums.com. Some highlights:

- K-mount is the number one priority at the moment

- There was a discussion about the new OS (firmware) on the K-3 III, and Kawauchi mentioned that a hypothetical K-1 III would have the new OS too. At no point did the panelists ask about the K-1 II successor and he just came out with that as an example.

The final comments were that 2022 had been year where a lot happened for Ricoh Imaging with reorganizations and other changes. Kawauchi-san apologized that they hadn’t been able to come out with many new products. It was a year of taking important steps for the future. Although 2022 was a quiet year, expect more to be excited about in 2023.

[Michael Piziak]

Pentax is going to come out with new cameras at widely spaced intervals. If a new K-1 III comes out this fall, I would not expect to see a K-1 IV for 6 or 7 years. Once a year or every couple of years they will come out with new versions based on that base model -- different color schemes, monochrome, astro version. Their goal is no longer (if it ever was) to gain market share, but simply to generate adequate revenue to keep moving forward.

A niche brand they are, but a viable niche brand as long as they don't make mistakes.

I think Pentax is in a better position than Nikon. Nikon is diversified, but not nearly diversified enough like Ricoh (or Canon or Fujifilm or Sony or Panasonic) are - these/those brands have many products (such as printers, computers, etc...). I look for Nikon to go down a similar path that Pentax has, which is eventually a larger company may swallow them up and keep the Nikon name going. Nikon is just starting to follow the path that Pentax took many years ago - such as lay offs and factory closings. It may just be my wrong opinion, but I think Nikon is too invested in the dying camera segment. Where Pentax has an advantage is they have created a niche by keeping their mount the same and keeping that niche customer base. Nikon, on the other hand, has abandoned their F mount and gone down the mirrorless pathway in an attempt to keeping up with/competing with Canon & Sony. Nikon did recently report profits, but it was largely created due to employees being layed off and a large factory being closed. What niche does Nikon have? They've abandoned their F mount base & thus abandoned their niche. Of course, all in my opinion...

[Wheatfield]

While all you said is true, there is one thing that you forgot.

First DSLRs were made under Pentax, but then it was acquired by Hoya which obviously had its own ideas. Then first FF and MF were released and Q was started - I suppose Hoya wanted to keep Pentax working but not to invest into MILC for sole purpose of selling camera business. Then Ricoh bought it. It is hard to blame that new owner had different ideas then old one and it is hardly Ricoh fault that it axed ideas that were started by last owner but not worked or were not able to be sustained by them. It is first time in a long time when new owner keeps Pentax and tries to do something with at least some sort of plan.

Where you are right is that this uncertainty make people wary of getting more into system. At some point you start to wonder if there is future for lenses you bought and eyeing competence that offers maybe less interesting set of features, but offers more certainty that if they set on a course they will keep it for longer time.

Still, we get what we get and we need to live with choice me made. And believe that future of DSLR that Ricoh/Pentax believe in will be longer lived then SDM drive

The big thing he forgot was that if Pentax had pursued mirrorless technology they would have been the smallest fish in a pond of piranhas, and they would have failed. By choosing to stay with SLR technology they are setting themselves up to be the only fish in an admittedly small pond.
It's not a bad place to be for a company that isn't playing the go big or go home game.

[Rondec]

The big thing he forgot was that if Pentax had pursued mirrorless technology they would have been the smallest fish in a pond of piranhas, and they would have failed. By choosing to stay with SLR technology they are setting themselves up to be the only fish in an admittedly small pond.
It's not a bad place to be for a company that isn't playing the go big or go home game.

True. It simply doesn't make sense for Pentax to release an MILC.

1. They would need to develop a lens line up. They have admitted in interviews that they don't have the budget to do this. Canon and Nikon threw huge amounts of money at getting new lenses out the door. While an adapter could bridge the gap, even that would be challenging due to the fact that Pentax still has a lot of screw driven lenses in their line up.

2. MILC doesn't play to Pentax's strengths. MILCs tend to be tech heavy cameras that have higher end video and fast specs. Simply buying a sensor that has PDAF points on it doesn't magically mean that your camera can auto focus light years around previous generations of cameras. We have seen Sony and Nikon have growing pains as they figured out MILC tech. Pentax simply doesn't have the know-how to get one of these cameras that would match others on the market.

3. Pentax would be really late to the market. I don't know how many brands have released MILCs at this point. Panasonic, Nikon, Fuji, Canon, Sony, OM-D, Sigma, and Leica all have MILCs on the market. Maybe there are others. Finding a niche there that isn't already met is unlikely.

4. Pentax understands their strengths. They make solid cameras with sealing. The make really good optics -- the DFA *primes are especially nice. I don't see any reason that they can't continue to release interesting products for the K mount for a long time to come.

[jersey]

The big thing he forgot was that if Pentax had pursued mirrorless technology they would have been the smallest fish in a pond of piranhas, and they would have failed. By choosing to stay with SLR technology they are setting themselves up to be the only fish in an admittedly small pond.
It's not a bad place to be for a company that isn't playing the go big or go home game.

This is knowledge we have now. At the point when Hoya and Ricoh were merging and creating "new" cameras effort was certainly there. Both in form of K-01 and Q. It is just that Pentax and its owners were not able or willing to commit to this. Frankly if Ricoh or Hoya really invested into MILC then with Pentax color science and MF base it could have been Fujifilm-like maker with solid base of photographic MILC and MF cameras.

What Pentax could or could not be is just wild guessing now.

BTW what Pentax/Ricoh is doing now may be ok for Pentax fan base (slow releases with no informations of what is going on) but it is not best way to keep or gain new people. If all you know is that maybe there is something going on and there will be new camera, but who know when, and there will be new lenses, maybe, but no one knows when then it is hardly good point to plan for future. And with camera and lens prices going into system is usually long term attachment.

Who will put money into maybe, who knows when, for sure but maybe not and in few years?

[gatorguy]

... they said that this was just a project to see how it goes, such lack of certainty isn't going to convince retailers to sell new Pentax film cameras. Want to convince retailers to sell new Pentax SLR film camera? You have to say that you are going to develop a range of film cameras, you are 100% delighted and proud of your own product, you are 100% committed to support your retailers no matter what it will take, and you are 100% certain that it will work.

Temporarily ignoring your top-to-bottom brand-bashing spin on every Pentax product I'll comment on just one aspect, one that seems to really bother you.

Announce a range of film cameras??? And re-establish a new dealer network and pledge support to it? Seriously? On a camera they haven't even announced as in production? At this point it should be obvious Pentax is asking for reactions and product suggestions before deciding on how to proceed.
How To Gauge Interest In A New Product Concept - Branding Strategy Insider

You've obviously never owned and definitely haven't run, a company developing consumer products. Despite any signals from folks who swear they'll buy it, until at least one model comes to market there's no assurance what the reaction will be, or what camera specifics are making it a success or failure.

Geesh is this your non-sensical business advice from a self-proclaimed industry expert on a Sunday morning?

[Serkevan]

Any business can make money for 3 quarters simply by cutting costs, winding down projects. Depends on what costs are being cut. Some cost cutting have serious consequences on the future capability to make and sell new products. Sometimes, it's better to lose money for 3 quarters and keep customers for the years to come, as opposed to make money for 3 quarters and lose customers forever.

But you do not know if this was the case.

---------- Post added 02-12-23 at 05:20 AM ----------

It would cost me a lot of money, much more money than buying a new up to date Pentax body.

Sunk cost fallacy.

[thibs]

Well of you either have the certainty to survive (more or less) or go fully mirrormess (point intended) and hope maybe you can survive....

I'd chose the more certain way IMO.

[gatorguy]

Who will put money into maybe, who knows when, for sure but maybe not and in few years?

Who is putting money into ANY prosumer camera system now? It's a smaller and smaller pool of those who think a multi-thousand dollar camera system makes sense for them.

Pentax holding steady with a commitment to DSLR is the only strategy that makes long-term sense. At the non-inventive pace of the Canikon's they'll be overtaken by the Apple/Google/Samsung camera AI innovations within just a few more years. Almost anything that can be done on a MILC will be replicated on a smartphone.

Mirrorless strategies cannot be sustainable, and the current spate of incremental improvements across multiple bodies with little separation except by questionably useful feature add-ons and unnecessarily large sensors is essentially a last gasp money-grab IMHO. Different shells with similar innards purposely handicapped with software limitations is not innovation. It's an effort to project a mirage of a vibrant camera industry, which it is not. It's getting smaller every quarter even if the revenues may be momentarily steadying. The industry is not healthy, and I don't believe there is anything the MILC market can do to reverse the trend. A dozen fish all fighting over what's left in the pond is NOT where Pentax needs to be.

IMO Pentax is on the only path that makes sense for them.
- Commit to one platform where they have a wealth of expertise, DSLR, and make every one of the cameras and lenses they sell solid and highly capable with features that truly matter.
- Don't create multiple confusing levels of the same product with artificial constraints defining them.
- Stay profitable, and build in enough excess to test new ideas and float trial product.
- Don't try to be a sell-it-cheap and make-it-up-on-volume manufacturer. That ship sailed a decade ago.
- Be more vocal about advantages, near-future plans, and both upcoming and potential products.
- Continue to add features and improvements via firmware, don't stop with version 1.x. It proves commitment to those who bought in.

There will always be a market for ILC's even if it's a relatively small one, and in it there will always be those who want a pure visual connection to the subject, a window framing the view and not a television projecting it.

My 2 cents.

[Parallax]

Do we have a record of headcount working for the Pentax division over the last five years?

---------- Post added 11-02-23 at 12:01 ----------


For the K33 monochrome, we have some video talk and rumors. We haven't see any slight rumor about the K1 III development or GR. GR is not ILC, so I'm not concerned about it, for me getting or not getting one of the GR is like getting a compact camera from any other brand.
For K mount cameras, the situation is different as I'm thinking about what to do with my K mount lenses if the K1 is the last Pentax full frame camera. Ricoh sent a press release saying that they'll stop mass production of cameras , replaced by workshop style such as the J limited, so for me that would mean there won't be any new full frame camera unless it's just a J limited version of the original K1 II from parts they have in stock. Unless Ricoh decides to disclose that they will mass produce a new full frame camera. They would need to disclose their full frame plan so that it's easier to decide to sell my lenses or keep them. I don't think I'll be satisfied with K1 performance for the next 10 years in case Ricoh decided that the K1II is their last full frame DSLR. So if Ricoh would tell that the K1 II is last Pentax FF DSLR, I would put all my Pentax lenses for sale.

Here's an idea...................
Instead of constantly bashing Pentax for what they are doing (or what you think they're doing), and pontificating about what you think they should be doing why don't you just start a camera company of your own and run it the way you think Ricoh should be running theirs? Then, when your company becomes the most profitable company in history producing flawless products you can point back to all of your forum posts and say, "See?, See? I told you that's how it should be done!"
That should be simple, right?

[ffking]

Who is putting money into ANY prosumer camera system now? It's a smaller and smaller pool of those who think a multi-thousand dollar camera system makes sense for them.

Pentax holding steady with a commitment to DSLR is the only strategy that makes long-term sense. At the non-inventive pace of the Canikon's they'll be overtaken by the Apple/Google/Samsung camera AI innovations within just a few more years. Almost anything that can be done on a MILC will be replicated on a smartphone.

Mirrorless strategies cannot be sustainable, and the current spate of incremental improvements across multiple bodies with little separation except by questionably useful feature add-ons and unnecessarily large sensors is essentially a last gasp money-grab IMHO. Different shells with similar innards purposely handicapped with software limitations is not innovation. It's an effort to project a mirage of a vibrant camera industry, which it is not. It's getting smaller every quarter even if the revenues may be momentarily steadying. The industry is not healthy, and I don't believe there is anything the MILC market can do to reverse the trend. A dozen fish all fighting over what's left in the pond is NOT where Pentax needs to be.

IMO Pentax is on the only path that makes sense for them.
- Commit to one platform where they have a wealth of expertise, DSLR, and make every one of the cameras and lenses they sell solid and highly capable with features that truly matter.
- Don't create multiple confusing levels of the same product with artificial constraints defining them.
- Stay profitable, and build in enough excess to test new ideas and float trial product.
- Don't try to be a sell-it-cheap and make-it-up-on-volume manufacturer. That ship sailed a decade ago.
- Be more vocal about advantages, near-future plans, and both upcoming and potential products.
- Continue to add features and improvements via firmware, don't stop with version 1.x. It proves commitment to those who bought in.

There will always be a market for ILC's even if it's a relatively small one, and in it there will always be those who want a pure visual connection to the subject, a window framing the view and not a television projecting it.

It's interesting (to me, at least) that the Pentax reaction to the mirrorless takeover of the big brands was to improve the OVF experience. Maybe I'm just old-fashioned but, to me, the more enjoyable the process the better the results, and I think that this is the way that Pentax is going - do ANY of the other companies worry about the smallest design details the way they do or take such delight in their solutions?. I think that the old way of working a scene, trying out lots of angles, just works better with an OVF, for instance. I fully realise that I, like almost everyone here, grew up of film where those things are what you did, so we might find it more natural, but any camera or sysem that encourages you to take pictures that way encourages you to take better pictures - and, in the end, it's the result that matters.

[jersey]

It's interesting (to me, at least) that the Pentax reaction to the mirrorless takeover of the big brands was to improve the OVF experience.

Actually it was not. Improvements and SLR dedication is recent affair with K-3 Mk III. Earlier it was just making same DSLR as others, but lagging behind and then simply stopping MILC developement. For obvious reasons. It seems that only recently someone at Pentax had a light bulb moment and realized that DSLR and SLR as legacy sort of camera experience may be a value in itself. Now we need to see if they are able to push through with this idea.

As for @gatorguy and putting money into ILS there are prosumers and pros who are willing and able. They need to choose system and new generation is not sitting on mountain of Kmount lenses to see value in Pentax because its mount or any sort of legacy.

Pentax push toward more analog OVF experience is a good thing, but with current culture of getting new stuff, switching brands and so on the 1 body and few lenses each 5 or 6 years may not be enough for them.

[biz-engineer]

Sunk cost fallacy.

Yes, we have to avoid the sunk cost bias, past spending doesn't come into equation.
So, we compared the net present value of investing in :
A) The value for money of buying the new camera camera that doesn't exist yet, keep the Pentax glass
B) The value for money of selling all Pentax lenses and bodies, and buying a new camera system body and lenses (other brand)
I would need to calculate at which point the price of the new Pentax camera equate to switching brand, that would be interesting I think.
Having 10 new DFA lenses, I think Ricoh could charge $8000 for the next Pentax FF body, it would still be cost effective to stay with Pentax.
Of course, if you own e.g 3 DFA lenses, the threshold price for a new FF body would be more like $4500 (depending on which lenses are already owned).

[thibs]

Actually it was not. Improvements and SLR dedication is recent affair with K-3 Mk III. Earlier it was just making same DSLR as others, but lagging behind and then simply stopping MILC developement. For obvious reasons. It seems that only recently someone at Pentax had a light bulb moment and realized that DSLR and SLR as legacy sort of camera experience may be a value in itself. Now we need to see if they are able to push through with this idea.

As for @gatorguy and putting money into ILS there are prosumers and pros who are willing and able. They need to choose system and new generation is not sitting on mountain of Kmount lenses to see value in Pentax because its mount or any sort of legacy.

Pentax push toward more analog OVF experience is a good thing, but with current culture of getting new stuff, switching brands and so on the 1 body and few lenses each 5 or 6 years may not be enough for them.

You mean Pentax producing only cameras with prism rather than pentamirrors ?
That's not new. At all.

[luftfluss]

I think Pentax is in a better position than Nikon. Nikon is diversified, but not nearly diversified enough like Ricoh (or Canon or Fujifilm or Sony or Panasonic) are - these/those brands have many products (such as printers, computers, etc...). I look for Nikon to go down a similar path that Pentax has, which is eventually a larger company may swallow them up and keep the Nikon name going. Nikon is just starting to follow the path that Pentax took many years ago - such as lay offs and factory closings. It may just be my wrong opinion, but I think Nikon is too invested in the dying camera segment. Where Pentax has an advantage is they have created a niche by keeping their mount the same and keeping that niche customer base. Nikon, on the other hand, has abandoned their F mount and gone down the mirrorless pathway in an attempt to keeping up with/competing with Canon & Sony. Nikon did recently report profits, but it was largely created due to employees being layed off and a large factory being closed. What niche does Nikon have? They've abandoned their F mount base & thus abandoned their niche. Of course, all in my opinion...

Canon, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji all abandoned their mounts to go mirrorless. Nikon has simply done what nearly everybody else has.

Nikon is working on building a more multifaceted business:
(Source: Nikon released financial results for the third quarter of 2023: significant increase in revenue and operating profit YoY - Nikon Rumors)





Recent financials look OK...