[glanglois]

If they have one, it's to find another firm as a partner. For something.

We don't know; he doesn't know; and Pentax are keeping their strategic moves to themselves.

Quelle surprise!

The important point (and good news) is that Hoya is perfectly capable of surprising us and the rest of the market. That's a good thing.

[Miserere]

So Pentax isn't going to disappear in 2010????? I feel so cheated...

.

[*isteve]

Message to the Japanese: selling lots of cameras isn't going be your future. Selling smaller quantities of dedicated, highly specialized cameras will be. Even then, if someone really figures out that open platforms and close customer relationships could apply to a camera company, too, the camera companies might start looking a bit like the US auto industry: slow to react, too big to change course, and continually iterating what used to work instead of what will work. (A punctuation to the aside: check out this article from the Economist and read the part specifically about Nikon and Canon versus ASML in the stepper market. They went from owning the market--and steppers being the dominant force within Nikon's financials--to being also rans--and steppers being the drain on Nikon's financials. What brought them down? Lack of open partnering and close customer relations.)

Does this sound something like what Hoya says it wants from Pentax? Does this sound like what we say is wrong with Canon and Nikon?

Looking ten years out I'd say the future is brighter for Pentax than for Canon or Nikon - I'm really, really tired of Pentax negativity, to the point of wanting to stop reading threads and just look at and post pictures.

Canon and Nikon are behaving like IBM and DEC in the 1980's. Canon being a diverse entity and by far the largest (like IBM) has the best chance of changing, but will have to change to match Panasonic's venture into EVIL cameras which will almost certainly be the precursor to a Canon/Sony/Panasonic bloodbath to own the current mid-tier hobby market. My money is on Panasonic.

I once told Thom rather testily that Nikon was a far shakier company (financially) than Hoya in 2008 and that instead of looking at their model lineup as any indicator of long term success (didnt work for DEC) he should start checking on their financials comarative financials. He never posted on the DPReview Pentax forum again.

I agree that the SLR is not an ideal mass market product, nor is it an ideal movie camera. EVIL cameras are far more likely to provide the successful general purpose system that most of the public actually want and need. SLRs are too complex mechanically to make money at the $400 price point so I suspect they will move upmarket.

Pentax does not need to be a mass market maker to survive - it needs to establish a solid niche and a powerful USP that appeals to a core subset of camera enthusiasts. However they DO need to get the message out what that is about and quick because they are losing their grip in the UK.

[Rondec]

Canon and Nikon are behaving like IBM and DEC in the 1980's. Canon being a diverse entity and by far the largest (like IBM) has the best chance of changing, but will have to change to match Panasonic's venture into EVIL cameras which will almost certainly be the precursor to a Canon/Sony/Panasonic bloodbath to own the current mid-tier hobby market. My money is on Panasonic.

I once told Thom rather testily that Nikon was a far shakier company (financially) than Hoya in 2008 and that instead of looking at their model lineup as any indicator of long term success (didnt work for DEC) he should start checking on their financials comarative financials. He never posted on the DPReview Pentax forum again.

I agree that the SLR is not an ideal mass market product, nor is it an ideal movie camera. EVIL cameras are far more likely to provide the successful general purpose system that most of the public actually want and need. SLRs are too complex mechanically to make money at the $400 price point so I suspect they will move upmarket.

Pentax does not need to be a mass market maker to survive - it needs to establish a solid niche and a powerful USP that appeals to a core subset of camera enthusiasts. However they DO need to get the message out what that is about and quick because they are losing their grip in the UK.

I agree. It is much harder to be top dog, than a niche player. It is not to say that Pentax wouldn't like to move up over time, but when you have to release cameras for every level and specification, you can bleed pretty hard during tough times. The biggest issue I have with Pentax right now, is their pricing. It just seems random -- they really need to have a couple of low priced primes that people can buy to get them into the system. Even if they lose some money on them, I know from experience that once LBA gets its hold on you, there is no holding back.

[philbaum]

An interesting thread. I've always maintained that for Nikon and Canon, being a large company can be an advantage (in bulk purchases, e.g.) but also a curse (more folks have to sign off on any decision, so a smaller company can often be more flexible to change and take advantage of new opportunities)

I've been shooting publicity photos of local playhouse actors and productions with a friend who's shooting with a Canon 50D. The two of us and another friend get together after a shoot and decide which photos to select. Sometimes my photos surface far more times than his, and other times, my experience and skills are lacking and he'll get the shots. I paid less than half for my older K20 than he paid for his newer 50D, certainly his liveview and rear screen is better than mine, but image wise, my K20 more than keeps me in the game, esp when i toss in some images from my FA50 f1.4 and DA-21 and DA 35. Meanwhile, i keep learning with equipment that outclasses my own skill.

I've only been shooting seriously since 2007, and i doubt that i would gained so much experience with lenses, with any other camera system. Whether Pentax lives or dies, i don't begrudge any time i've spent withPentax, its been "interesting"