Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-29-2009, 08:36 AM   #181
Veteran Member
*isteve's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,187
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
The 35mm market was ALWAYS crowded. It is a standard, open-source format. That's why Kodak wasted its energy trying to change film formats under patent.

Pentax in the 1970's got trumped because Nikon, then Canon, followed by Minolta, embarked on a low-end volume sales strategy. Then Nikon took those gross revenues and subsidized a professional market where they practically gave the gear away for free just to have the product associated with the shot.Goal: advertising. Canon followed, moving aggressively to the sports and nature photographer whereas Nikon was the portrait and art scene. Canon stole a huge chunk of the market. Minolta rocketed up the sales charts because they took Canon's marketing technique and made them about the technology and price ""From the mind of Minolta") , about the same time as the PC was taking off in the early 1980's. Nikon looked like your grandpa's Oldsmobile, Canon was too "pro", so Minolta almost moved into 2nd place. Pentax, Oly and other brands (Konica, Yashica) never quite recovered. The move to digital was equally brutal, but the need for optical legacy was a factor in favour of some smaller players.

What history teaches is that in the long run, you need mass market sales to drive capital accumulation and gross revenues. With those leveraged, you can pursue other markets. Ask Hyundai. Ask Porsche (fascinating ownership about-face there). What history teaches--now more than ever--is that up market will kill you if you cannot continue to drive a large revenue base. When everyone moves "up market" what's left for the rest?
Something of an oversimplification. Since when has Porsche ever relied on mass market sales? None of its cars are exactly cheap. On the other hand, which car companies have recently had to beg the US government for bailouts? What happened to Minolta?

Mass market production has one major problem, which is maintaining profitability. None of the Japanese makers are currently making any money from P&S cameras, so one revenue source is drying up. For Nikon its pretty much a dead loss.

Canon have expanded to the extent that they may have real problems contracting to levels of production that a mature market will stand. And thats what we now have, a mature market which is reaching saturation.

The fact is, volumes will shrink, prices will rise and there will be some consolidation. As GM and Ford found out, making small margins on bulk sales is a difficult place to be in a contracting market. Marketing is an expensive way to sell cheap goods unless you assume your buyers are mostly sheep.

10-29-2009, 08:56 AM   #182
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,080
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
Because they have almost the same sourcing and distribution costs as Canikon with too small market share. .
It is not marketshare that matter, but volume.
10-29-2009, 09:04 AM   #183
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,080
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
The 35mm market was ALWAYS crowded. It is a standard, open-source format. That's why Kodak wasted its energy trying to change film formats under patent.

Pentax in the 1970's got trumped because Nikon, then Canon, followed by Minolta, embarked on a low-end volume sales strategy. Then Nikon took those gross revenues and subsidized a professional market where they practically gave the gear away for free just to have the product associated with the shot.Goal: advertising. Canon followed, moving aggressively to the sports and nature photographer whereas Nikon was the portrait and art scene. Canon stole a huge chunk of the market. Minolta rocketed up the sales charts because they took Canon's marketing technique and made them about the technology and price ""From the mind of Minolta") , about the same time as the PC was taking off in the early 1980's. Nikon looked like your grandpa's Oldsmobile, Canon was too "pro", so Minolta almost moved into 2nd place. Pentax, Oly and other brands (Konica, Yashica) never quite recovered. The move to digital was equally brutal, but the need for optical legacy was a factor in favour of some smaller players.

What history teaches is that in the long run, you need mass market sales to drive capital accumulation and gross revenues. With those leveraged, you can pursue other markets. Ask Hyundai. Ask Porsche (fascinating ownership about-face there). What history teaches--now more than ever--is that up market will kill you if you cannot continue to drive a large revenue base. When everyone moves "up market" what's left for the rest?

You got the history wrong. Besides Porsche is strictly high end, low volume and is the worlds most profitable car company, killing your theory outright.
Anyway, Pentax have always followed the volume market. In fact, they invented the SLR volume market. Pentax mistake was to ignore(?) the upper end segments and the evolution of the SLR market. In the early 70's Pentax sold twice as many SLR's as Nikon and Canon combined. Nikon didn't start in the entry, volume level until 1979 with the Nikon EM; a copy even in name of the Pentax ME. You could say that Pentax was too busy making another Spotmatic and lost the vision of the SLR market.
10-29-2009, 09:15 AM   #184
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
DxO style lab tests reveals K-x has a full frame sensor

DxO style lab tests reveals K-x has a full frame sensor

This is a fast spinning thread and since it was hard work to do it, let me bring my DxO style lab test for the K-x to the attention of a broader audience.

Of course, the K-x is APS-C. But as far as dynamic range and high ISO noise are concerned, I found that the K-x is seriously challenging even the best full frame cameras in this regard.

Participate in the discussion and read the full story here:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/77974-lumolabs-k-x...on-2009-a.html

I didn't want to hihack this thread but found this to be of relevance. If we get an FF sensor in 2010, we want it to be better than the K-x, won't we?

10-29-2009, 09:38 AM   #185
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Colorado USA
Posts: 1,337
Hoya-Pentax should announce Full Frame K Mount in 2010

Hoya-Pentax should announce Full Frame K Mount in 2010 and then Roadmap for late 2013- to sometime in 2016 delivery. Kinda like what they've done with 645D concept.

Wasn't working model 645D first shown in 2003 or 2004 at a major imaging event? Its late 2009 and the 645D Roadmap Dream Camera still pleases most Pentaxians, in just knowing its out there somewhere...

Pentax knows that Roadmapping a Full Frame K Mount concept is all thats needed to keep the system jumpers at home and happy with K Mount. Roadmapped words and a non touchable full frame k dslr on display at whatever imaging show Pentax still attends is all thats needed to rally the faithful.

QuoteOriginally posted by KungPOW Quote
Large sensors will get cheaper. APS-C sensors will get more and more pixels. Eventually, the highest pixel count APS-C sensors will cost more then the FF chip with the same pixel count.

So you can either have an APS-C with 60 MP, for 150 bucks, or you can buy a FF 60MP for $150.00.

I expect when this happens, FF will becoame the mainstream, and ultrahigh MP count APS-C sensors will be used by those that want the reach of a crop sensor.

Eventually, all builders will offer FF along with APS-C. Nikon is the best example of this right now. Their D300 and D700 are almost the same camera, except for sensor size. Although Canon has both APS-C and FF, they still do not have two cameras with similar feature sets but different sensors. But, I expect they will eventually. Then there is Sony. They just broke the $2000.00 barier. I expect they will soon release the A800 (A700 replacement), and it will be in the $1500.00 to $1800.00 range. maybe they will not have two cameras as close as the D300/D700 pair, but they will be closer then the 7D/5Dmkii pair.

As for Pentax, I just cannot see them releasing a FF in 2010. They need to get the 645D out in 2010, and I expect that will take everything they have. Near the end of 2010 I expect they will anounce the K-7 replacement. At Photokina I bet. Maybe they will have a working D645, the K-8, and a K-LX (ff) mockup in a glass box. I doubt anyone will be able to buy a Pentax FF before late 2011. We will see the D645, and the replacements for the K-x, the K-7 before we see a FF pentax. Three releases in one year is allot for Pentax. No way they get in the FF as a fourth.

So Pentax FF in 2010? I say no chance.
10-29-2009, 09:46 AM   #186
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,801
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
You got the history wrong. Besides Porsche is strictly high end, low volume and is the worlds most profitable car company, killing your theory outright.
Anyway, Pentax have always followed the volume market. In fact, they invented the SLR volume market. Pentax mistake was to ignore(?) the upper end segments and the evolution of the SLR market. In the early 70's Pentax sold twice as many SLR's as Nikon and Canon combined. Nikon didn't start in the entry, volume level until 1979 with the Nikon EM; a copy even in name of the Pentax ME. You could say that Pentax was too busy making another Spotmatic and lost the vision of the SLR market.
Do your research on what just happened to Porches ownership and why. They tried to leverage the advantages you just expressed for the brand, then got burned when the market fell out last year. Their "upmarket" focus left them extremely vulnerable to price-driven correction. Porsche took on unsustainable debt burdens based on the glowing theory that its high-end market would pay off no matter what.

Translation: Their stock was over-valued when their market share contracted and gross revenues fell. The Porsche attempt to consolidate its debt (moderately severe compared to profits) met with downgrades from debt rating agencies. Effectively, VWAG bought out Porsche and the latter's CEO was turfed and the owning families are being forced to sell their shares as well. An expected consolidation and elimination of product lines is expected as Porsche is over-extended both in production and sales expectations, not to mention debt. There's no doubt Porsche brands are profitable, but its attempt to take over VWAG was spurred by the fact that it depended on the latter for supply. In other words: it needed a lower-end, mass manufacturer to keep it profitable. The market for new GT's went into a tailspin, and so did Porsche. No elasticity in their structure meant a hard, corporate fall. Porsche depended on someone it partnered with making mass market sales. That was why Porches tried to acquire VWAG in the first place. There is little ability to custom make or source auto parts for a small market, high-cost product. The player (Toyota with Lexus is an example) whose foot is in both markets successfully will eventually challenge, and if markets contract, win. So, yes, Porsche DID rely on mass market sales, through the backdoor, if you will.

As for cameras, this fable could just as well explain Leica, where, without massive subsidies from a camera-hobbyist owner whose real revenues come from another industry (forestry), the brand would have capitulated years ago.

And yes, market share matters. Volume is critical, but the guy with both higher market share AND volumes is still more profitable should other factors be equal. Pentax missed marketing and branding opportunities decades ago and has yet to recover, where the other guys nailed them on volume and newer designs. It wasn't that Pentax just ignored the higher end, it was that they failed to translate higher end tech to lower end models. They stuck with their standby tech for too long, jading pros and the emerging prosumer market. I was primarily shooting my little Euro-made Rollei back then, so I was on another planet.
10-29-2009, 10:51 AM   #187
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
Do your research on what just happened to Porches ownership and why.
I am not sure we will ever know enough to understand the drama which was going on in the Porsche Volkswagen deal.

It was an epic war, for sure. Owner families of both corporations are closely related. E.g., the CEO of VW is a Porsche grand child ...

The war of one overtaking the other started long ago. The last two episodes being that small Porsche took a huge risk in their attempt to aquire VW and they struck back in the financial crisis.

I fear there is nothing to be learned from except that Dallas is not in Texas only
10-29-2009, 12:06 PM   #188
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,801
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
You got the history wrong. Besides Porsche is strictly high end, low volume and is the worlds most profitable car company, killing your theory outright.
Anyway, Pentax have always followed the volume market. In fact, they invented the SLR volume market. Pentax mistake was to ignore(?) the upper end segments and the evolution of the SLR market. In the early 70's Pentax sold twice as many SLR's as Nikon and Canon combined. Nikon didn't start in the entry, volume level until 1979 with the Nikon EM; a copy even in name of the Pentax ME. You could say that Pentax was too busy making another Spotmatic and lost the vision of the SLR market.
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
I am not sure we will ever know enough to understand the drama which was going on in the Porsche Volkswagen deal.

It was an epic war, for sure. Owner families of both corporations are closely related. E.g., the CEO of VW is a Porsche grand child ...

The war of one overtaking the other started long ago. The last two episodes being that small Porsche took a huge risk in their attempt to aquire VW and they struck back in the financial crisis.

I fear there is nothing to be learned from except that Dallas is not in Texas only
True. And you're right there.

I receive this newsletter from a bond fund I have shares in, and the outrage of the bondholders over the actions of the former Porsche CEO and some family members are well-detailed. The VW takeover and loss of independence of Porsche (VW shareholders will be the de facto majority owners) was in part caused by Porsche vastly overestimating its profitability, and slyly trying to buy controlling interest in the more mass market VW brand as a means of paying off its debts.

When bondholders realized Porsche was driving (pun intended) its debt towards a buyout of VW and not towards correcting a steep sales fall, that's when al H*** broke loose. Bondholders were in no way going to fund the buyout of VW by Porsche while the latter was bleeding red ink, only so one faction of the Porsche family could profit and have sort of pedigree control. That famous 15 hour meeting was demanded by creditors of Porsche. That's why the Qatar money was brought in. The numbers were obvious to everyone: Porsche needed the market breadth and depth of VW a whole lot more than VW needed Porsche's supposedly stellar and "profitable" management. What profit? Porsche is over US$10 billion in debt with sales down 30% and margins in the negative. The clock is ticking on Porsche right now. They have debts to pay so they can issue those preferred shares. Then there was the buyout of the CEO……

Maybe that's how Hoya bought Pentax? Same story, samurai style.

And maybe a Porsche styled Pentax FF camera? That could cure both company's ills, dontcha think.

10-29-2009, 12:18 PM   #189
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by *isteve Quote
So YOU want to charge more but Pentax should charge less? Interesting.
Yeah, because I don't have any competition. besides, my fee would only be a short change as compared to what Pentax would profit from my ideas.
10-29-2009, 02:50 PM   #190
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,816
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
And maybe a Porsche styled Pentax FF camera?
I would go for a Lotus (Elise) styled camera. "The best handling camera ever"
10-29-2009, 05:37 PM   #191
Forum Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Dallas, TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 76
Don't I'll ever be able to pocket a Lotus (even in a large coat pocket). The only type of Lotus which will fit is a Lotus seed :-)
10-29-2009, 06:52 PM   #192
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
DxO style lab tests reveals K-x has a full frame sensor

This is a fast spinning thread and since it was hard work to do it, let me bring my DxO style lab test for the K-x to the attention of a broader audience.

Of course, the K-x is APS-C. But as far as dynamic range and high ISO noise are concerned, I found that the K-x is seriously challenging even the best full frame cameras in this regard.

Participate in the discussion and read the full story here:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/77974-lumolabs-k-x...on-2009-a.html

I didn't want to hihack this thread but found this to be of relevance. If we get an FF sensor in 2010, we want it to be better than the K-x, won't we?
I thought of that as well Falk. for sure the Sony FFs' got a clear spanking from the k-x. though I'm interested to know how it performs against the D700. for what's it's worth, I think the k-x HIGH ISO performance is getting really pretty close to what the FF dslrs' ISO 6400 could produce. it's possible that the next Pentax dslr would be able to match that kind of performance in an APS-C sensor or better in a FF PENTAX.

Last edited by Pentaxor; 10-29-2009 at 10:44 PM.
10-29-2009, 09:45 PM   #193
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bridgetown West Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 862
Original Poster
QuoteQuote:
I found that the K-x is seriously challenging even the best full frame cameras in this regard.
Is the sensor in the Kx a sony? Do we know what it is yet? I thought that someone said that if it is a Sony that it was the same one as used in a Nikon, however if it is ou tperforming most other DSLR's then it must be a new sensor?
10-30-2009, 02:43 AM   #194
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by ozlizard Quote
Is the sensor in the Kx a sony? Do we know what it is yet? I thought that someone said that if it is a Sony that it was the same one as used in a Nikon, however if it is ou tperforming most other DSLR's then it must be a new sensor?
There seems to be a certain consensus that Sony A500 and K-x share the same sensor (Exmor) which isn't yet used by Nikon. So, a first lab test of the A500 will be equally interesting. The good low light performance may be from the ADCs. This seems to be the first sensor integrating them on chip, 1 per line. Of course, Sony can make the same chip in full frame size.
10-30-2009, 02:58 AM   #195
Dom
Guest




I need to go and get some more popcorn.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Its 2010 now. Reportage General Talk 4 11-02-2010 10:18 AM
Picture of the Week 103: February 21, 2010 to March 7, 2010 Tamia Weekly Photo Challenges 55 03-07-2010 05:50 AM
Picture of the Week 102: February 14, 2010 to February 28, 2010 photolady95 Weekly Photo Challenges 57 02-27-2010 08:28 PM
Picture of the Week 101: February 7, 2010 to February 21, 2010 netuser Weekly Photo Challenges 63 02-24-2010 08:15 AM
Picture of the Week 100: January 31, 2010 to February 14, 2010 Peter Zack Weekly Photo Challenges 93 02-14-2010 12:43 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:30 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top