Pentax hits their magic 10% or so.

**grey goat** · 02-06-2010, 08:30 AM

Very good to hear the good numbers for Pentax.

Sony . . . it seems to me they're trying to be all things to all people--photographers, anyway. How many models do they have now? Even DPR notes the minor features that differentiate the various Sony DSLRs from model to model. C and N can pull that off, given their market share, but not Sony.

It'll be interesting to see what Pentax adds to the current lineup. But they're playing it smart, it seems to me, with the K-x and the K-7.

And lenses . . . well, that was one of the reasons I just got a K-7. Lots of great glass to choose from!

Rupert · 02-06-2010, 10:44 AM

Maybe if we grow to the size of Japan here, a Pentax camera will find its way onto a retail shelf somewhere nearby. We are just a small Metroplex of about 8 million people, apparently way to small for Pentax Marketing to have any interest. A plan like this has got to bring them huge success......? Right?
Regards!

shiner · 02-06-2010, 11:08 AM

Originally posted by Art Vandelay II

I still think Sony messed up by removing the Minolta name. Photographers can be passionate about their brands (this forum is a perfect example), and Sony killed off all of Minolta's history with a simple name change.

You got that right! I once worked for Minolta as a repair tech, and have had a soft spot for Minolta ever since. It was a sad day when they were assimilated by the evil Sony.

Blue · 02-06-2010, 11:19 AM

Originally posted by shiner

You got that right! I once worked for Minolta as a repair tech, and have had a soft spot for Minolta ever since. It was a sad day when they were assimilated by the evil Sony.

As has been pointed out, when sony bought the Minolta camera and lens factory and rights to the cameras and lenses, they didn't get the name. Konica-Minolta kept the name. In fact, the factory had already been shut down and the people laid off. Sony rehired some of those people after the bought the manufacturing facility etc. Therefore, Sony had to change the name. Konica-Minolta is still around in copiers etc.

shiner · 02-07-2010, 02:35 AM

Originally posted by Blue

As has been pointed out, when sony bought the Minolta camera and lens factory and rights to the cameras and lenses, they didn't get the name. Konica-Minolta kept the name. In fact, the factory had already been shut down and the people laid off. Sony rehired some of those people after the bought the manufacturing facility etc. Therefore, Sony had to change the name. Konica-Minolta is still around in copiers etc.

But I need an excuse to hate Sony...

lithos · 02-07-2010, 03:56 AM

There's always the Sony Tax, shiner.

There's always the Sony Tax.

Blue · 02-07-2010, 10:30 AM

Originally posted by shiner

But I need an excuse to hate Sony...

That doesn't take away Sony's arrogance thinking they could replace one of the legendary photographic names in the 20th Century with there own and pull it off on people like they showed up on the dSLR scene "large and in charge" with the illusion that they did it from scratch. The should have known they needed the Minolta name. Alpha is a good name for a new Minolta series but not a replacement for the name recognition. They should have bought the name Minolta from them and left the rest of the company as Konica.

*isteve · 02-07-2010, 10:47 AM

Sony did not kill off anything, they bought the camera division of Konika Minolta Corp, not the whole company. There were not entitled to the name in the first place, Konika Minolta still exists.

Secondly the infighting between Konika and Minolta camera engineers was in full swing when Sony took over. By all accounts many people left and went to work elsewhere including much of the original talent.

And thirdly their entire model strategy has been lacklustre and incoherent. The gap between their entry level cameras and top end FF cameras is a yawning chasm. Not a single one of their cameras has movies and all have worse noise perfomance than other cameras using the same sensors.

There is nothing wrong with the Sony brand name per se, but there is a lot wrong with their disfunctional camera division. The best thing they have come up with is a downgraded version of an existing camera for die hard FF nuts which sells in mere handfulls. WHolesalers in the UK cant give the things away because dealers dont want to stock them.

In the meantime they keep promising a mirrorless camera but to no avail.

The irony is, half the people on this forum have been urging Pentax to follow exactly the same strategy. Thankfully, Pentax ignored them.

Originally posted by Art Vandelay II

I don't know if I'd say that. Sony only has one DSLR in the top 50 of Amazon whether it be APS-C or FF. Sony simply isn't doing very well in the DSLR business period (which is probably why they're so eager to start an EVIL system). I don't know if you can draw any parallels between Pentax and Sony. Pentax and Olympus maybe, but not Sony. I absolutely love the A850, and if it were a Pentax I'd be all over it, but I have a very hard time bringing myself to buy a Sony camera despite how much I like it. I still think Sony messed up by removing the Minolta name. Photographers can be passionate about their brands (this forum is a perfect example), and Sony killed off all of Minolta's history with a simple name change.

Nass · 02-07-2010, 11:34 AM

Originally posted by *isteve

The irony is, half the people on this forum have been urging Pentax to follow exactly the same strategy. Thankfully, Pentax ignored them.

Such a good point. I'm always amused by people trashtalking Nikon & Canon, then having a potshot at pentax because it's not those 2. And doesn't do what those 2 do. *rolls eyes*

Damn Brit · 02-07-2010, 11:38 AM

Originally posted by *isteve

Sony did not kill off anything, they bought the camera division of Konika Minolta Corp, not the whole company. There were not entitled to the name in the first place, Konika Minolta still exists.

Secondly the infighting between Konika and Minolta camera engineers was in full swing when Sony took over. By all accounts many people left and went to work elsewhere including much of the original talent.

And thirdly their entire model strategy has been lacklustre and incoherent. The gap between their entry level cameras and top end FF cameras is a yawning chasm. Not a single one of their cameras has movies and all have worse noise perfomance than other cameras using the same sensors.

There is nothing wrong with the Sony brand name per se, but there is a lot wrong with their disfunctional camera division. The best thing they have come up with is a downgraded version of an existing camera for die hard FF nuts which sells in mere handfulls. WHolesalers in the UK cant give the things away because dealers dont want to stock them.

In the meantime they keep promising a mirrorless camera but to no avail.

The irony is, half the people on this forum have been urging Pentax to follow exactly the same strategy. Thankfully, Pentax ignored them.

Originally posted by Nass

Such a good point. I'm always amused by people trashtalking Nikon & Canon, then having a potshot at pentax because it's not those 2. And doesn't do what those 2 do. *rolls eyes*

So refreshing to see some common sense regarding FF. Thanks guys.

Blue · 02-07-2010, 11:48 AM

One additional point is that the "Alpha" was a name created by Minolta just prior to the Konica Minolta decision to stop camera production. The Konica Minolta merger required less than 4 years to reach that point (2003-06). Sony had originally started a joint venture with Konica-Minolta in 2005 regarding CMOS and CCD technologies. Sony's acquisition was probably in part due to their R & D investment in that direction. The Sony FF designs were probably already on the drawing boards.

Originally posted by *isteve

Sony did not kill off anything, they bought the camera division of Konika Minolta Corp, not the whole company. There were not entitled to the name in the first place, Konika Minolta still exists.

Secondly the infighting between Konika and Minolta camera engineers was in full swing when Sony took over. By all accounts many people left and went to work elsewhere including much of the original talent.

And thirdly their entire model strategy has been lacklustre and incoherent. The gap between their entry level cameras and top end FF cameras is a yawning chasm. Not a single one of their cameras has movies and all have worse noise perfomance than other cameras using the same sensors.

There is nothing wrong with the Sony brand name per se, but there is a lot wrong with their disfunctional camera division. The best thing they have come up with is a downgraded version of an existing camera for die hard FF nuts which sells in mere handfulls. WHolesalers in the UK cant give the things away because dealers dont want to stock them.

In the meantime they keep promising a mirrorless camera but to no avail.

The irony is, half the people on this forum have been urging Pentax to follow exactly the same strategy. Thankfully, Pentax ignored them.

ilya80 · 02-07-2010, 05:04 PM

Original Post is a great news really, although I`ve seen it somewhere.

However some of the older member's comments here regarding FF and all that "we laugh at people who scream doom, but still forsee doom if Pentax ( Hoya now ) goes the FF route" are really depressing.

If Pentax came out with a FF camera, I`d gladly pay $2.5K for it ( quite a sum for me ) and I think I`m not alone at that.

Please dont ignore there is a "want" ( for someone probably a "need" ) for Pentax mount FF camera among Pentax users.

Thanks,
Ilya.

Eigengrau · 02-07-2010, 06:46 PM

This is great to see. And it is a bummer for Sony, because even if they aren't the most popular company around, I still would like to see a more diverse market out there.

But, with no successor to the A700 around, Sony's been leaving a lot of us out in the cold. I've still got an A100 from when they first started, which I got because of a few Minolta lenses that I wanted to use with digital. But, with comparatively bad noise and with their incessant focus on cranking out scads of low-end bodies, they haven't produced anything competitive, unless you're a landscape photographer or a newbie.

Anyways, kudos to Pentax for doing everything right with their last few bodies. If they keep it up, the upwards trend in marketshare is only going to continue. I've got a K100DS, K20, and K-7, and every camera has been better than the last. And better than anything else in the price range, IMO. The K-7 in particular is a body that can finally inspire in the same way that the Limited lenses have been doing for so long.

Blue · 02-07-2010, 09:45 PM

Maybe Sony could sell of their "Minolta" division to SeaGull. That should get a shitstorm started.

kevinschoenmakers · 02-08-2010, 12:53 AM

Originally posted by ilya80

Please dont ignore there is a "want" ( for someone probably a "need" ) for Pentax mount FF camera among Pentax users.

Thanks,
Ilya.

I think the point everyone has been trying to get through to the FF-crowd is that, even though some will buy it, not enough will, thus making it a bad thing for business.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
People K-7 + DA 50-135mm Hits the Beach with Friends	Christopher M.W.T	Post Your Photos!	10	10-25-2010 08:10 AM
political correctness hits Canada	gokenin	General Talk	8	06-10-2010 08:22 AM
the Daily Someone hits 100	Darren M	Post Your Photos!	2	07-20-2009 10:45 PM
Another limey hits the forums !	Squier	Welcomes and Introductions	14	04-25-2009 02:58 AM
Fall finally hits the south	deadwolfbones	Post Your Photos!	2	10-30-2007 05:54 AM

02-06-2010, 08:30 AM	#31
grey goat Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Spring Green, WI Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 926	*Very* good to hear the good numbers for Pentax. Sony . . . it seems to me they're trying to be all things to all people--photographers, anyway. How many models do they have now? Even DPR notes the minor features that differentiate the various Sony DSLRs from model to model. C and N can pull that off, given their market share, but not Sony. It'll be interesting to see what Pentax adds to the current lineup. But they're playing it smart, it seems to me, with the K-x and the K-7. And lenses . . . well, that was one of the reasons I just got a K-7. Lots of great glass to choose from!

02-06-2010, 10:44 AM	#32
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Maybe if we grow to the size of Japan here, a Pentax camera will find its way onto a retail shelf somewhere nearby. We are just a small Metroplex of about 8 million people, apparently way to small for Pentax Marketing to have any interest. A plan like this has got to bring them huge success......? Right? Regards!

02-06-2010, 11:08 AM	#33
shiner Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: N GA USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,127	Originally posted by Art Vandelay II I still think Sony messed up by removing the Minolta name. Photographers can be passionate about their brands (this forum is a perfect example), and Sony killed off all of Minolta's history with a simple name change. You got that right! I once worked for Minolta as a repair tech, and have had a soft spot for Minolta ever since. It was a sad day when they were assimilated by the evil Sony.

02-06-2010, 11:19 AM	#34
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by shiner You got that right! I once worked for Minolta as a repair tech, and have had a soft spot for Minolta ever since. It was a sad day when they were assimilated by the evil Sony. As has been pointed out, when sony bought the Minolta camera and lens factory and rights to the cameras and lenses, they didn't get the name. Konica-Minolta kept the name. In fact, the factory had already been shut down and the people laid off. Sony rehired some of those people after the bought the manufacturing facility etc. Therefore, Sony had to change the name. Konica-Minolta is still around in copiers etc.

02-07-2010, 02:35 AM	#35
shiner Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: N GA USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,127	Originally posted by Blue As has been pointed out, when sony bought the Minolta camera and lens factory and rights to the cameras and lenses, they didn't get the name. Konica-Minolta kept the name. In fact, the factory had already been shut down and the people laid off. Sony rehired some of those people after the bought the manufacturing facility etc. Therefore, Sony had to change the name. Konica-Minolta is still around in copiers etc. But I need an excuse to hate Sony...

02-07-2010, 03:56 AM	#36
lithos Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Brisbane, QLD, AUS Posts: 3,261	There's always the Sony Tax, shiner. There's always the Sony Tax.

02-07-2010, 10:30 AM	#37
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by shiner But I need an excuse to hate Sony... That doesn't take away Sony's arrogance thinking they could replace one of the legendary photographic names in the 20th Century with there own and pull it off on people like they showed up on the dSLR scene "large and in charge" with the illusion that they did it from scratch. The should have known they needed the Minolta name. Alpha is a good name for a new Minolta series but not a replacement for the name recognition. They should have bought the name Minolta from them and left the rest of the company as Konica.

02-07-2010, 10:47 AM	#38
*isteve Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London, England Posts: 1,187	Sony did not kill off anything, they bought the camera division of Konika Minolta Corp, not the whole company. There were not entitled to the name in the first place, Konika Minolta still exists. Secondly the infighting between Konika and Minolta camera engineers was in full swing when Sony took over. By all accounts many people left and went to work elsewhere including much of the original talent. And thirdly their entire model strategy has been lacklustre and incoherent. The gap between their entry level cameras and top end FF cameras is a yawning chasm. Not a single one of their cameras has movies and all have worse noise perfomance than other cameras using the same sensors. There is nothing wrong with the Sony brand name per se, but there is a lot wrong with their disfunctional camera division. The best thing they have come up with is a downgraded version of an existing camera for die hard FF nuts which sells in mere handfulls. WHolesalers in the UK cant give the things away because dealers dont want to stock them. In the meantime they keep promising a mirrorless camera but to no avail. The irony is, half the people on this forum have been urging Pentax to follow exactly the same strategy. Thankfully, Pentax ignored them. Originally posted by Art Vandelay II I don't know if I'd say that. Sony only has one DSLR in the top 50 of Amazon whether it be APS-C or FF. Sony simply isn't doing very well in the DSLR business period (which is probably why they're so eager to start an EVIL system). I don't know if you can draw any parallels between Pentax and Sony. Pentax and Olympus maybe, but not Sony. I absolutely love the A850, and if it were a Pentax I'd be all over it, but I have a very hard time bringing myself to buy a Sony camera despite how much I like it. I still think Sony messed up by removing the Minolta name. Photographers can be passionate about their brands (this forum is a perfect example), and Sony killed off all of Minolta's history with a simple name change.

02-07-2010, 11:34 AM	#39
Nass Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: The British Isles Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,402	Originally posted by isteve The irony is, half the people on this forum have been urging Pentax to follow exactly the same strategy. Thankfully, Pentax ignored them. Such a good point. I'm always amused by people trashtalking Nikon & Canon, then having a potshot at pentax because it's not those 2. And doesn't do what those 2 do. rolls eyes*

02-07-2010, 11:38 AM	#40
Damn Brit Guest	Originally posted by isteve Sony did not kill off anything, they bought the camera division of Konika Minolta Corp, not the whole company. There were not entitled to the name in the first place, Konika Minolta still exists. Secondly the infighting between Konika and Minolta camera engineers was in full swing when Sony took over. By all accounts many people left and went to work elsewhere including much of the original talent. And thirdly their entire model strategy has been lacklustre and incoherent. The gap between their entry level cameras and top end FF cameras is a yawning chasm. Not a single one of their cameras has movies and all have worse noise perfomance than other cameras using the same sensors. There is nothing wrong with the Sony brand name per se, but there is a lot wrong with their disfunctional camera division. The best thing they have come up with is a downgraded version of an existing camera for die hard FF nuts which sells in mere handfulls. WHolesalers in the UK cant give the things away because dealers dont want to stock them. In the meantime they keep promising a mirrorless camera but to no avail. The irony is, half the people on this forum have been urging Pentax to follow exactly the same strategy. Thankfully, Pentax ignored them. Originally posted by Nass Such a good point. I'm always amused by people trashtalking Nikon & Canon, then having a potshot at pentax because it's not those 2. And doesn't do what those 2 do. rolls eyes* So refreshing to see some common sense regarding FF. Thanks guys.

02-07-2010, 11:48 AM	#41
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	One additional point is that the "Alpha" was a name created by Minolta just prior to the Konica Minolta decision to stop camera production. The Konica Minolta merger required less than 4 years to reach that point (2003-06). Sony had originally started a joint venture with Konica-Minolta in 2005 regarding CMOS and CCD technologies. Sony's acquisition was probably in part due to their R & D investment in that direction. The Sony FF designs were probably already on the drawing boards. Originally posted by *isteve Sony did not kill off anything, they bought the camera division of Konika Minolta Corp, not the whole company. There were not entitled to the name in the first place, Konika Minolta still exists. Secondly the infighting between Konika and Minolta camera engineers was in full swing when Sony took over. By all accounts many people left and went to work elsewhere including much of the original talent. And thirdly their entire model strategy has been lacklustre and incoherent. The gap between their entry level cameras and top end FF cameras is a yawning chasm. Not a single one of their cameras has movies and all have worse noise perfomance than other cameras using the same sensors. There is nothing wrong with the Sony brand name per se, but there is a lot wrong with their disfunctional camera division. The best thing they have come up with is a downgraded version of an existing camera for die hard FF nuts which sells in mere handfulls. WHolesalers in the UK cant give the things away because dealers dont want to stock them. In the meantime they keep promising a mirrorless camera but to no avail. The irony is, half the people on this forum have been urging Pentax to follow exactly the same strategy. Thankfully, Pentax ignored them.

02-07-2010, 05:04 PM	#42
ilya80 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia Photos: Albums Posts: 410	Original Post is a great news really, although I`ve seen it somewhere. However some of the older member's comments here regarding FF and all that "we laugh at people who scream doom, but still forsee doom if Pentax ( Hoya now ) goes the FF route" are really depressing. If Pentax came out with a FF camera, I`d gladly pay $2.5K for it ( quite a sum for me ) and I think I`m not alone at that. Please dont ignore there is a "want" ( for someone probably a "need" ) for Pentax mount FF camera among Pentax users. Thanks, Ilya.

02-07-2010, 06:46 PM	#43
Eigengrau Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Colorado Photos: Albums Posts: 250	This is great to see. And it is a bummer for Sony, because even if they aren't the most popular company around, I still would like to see a more diverse market out there. But, with no successor to the A700 around, Sony's been leaving a lot of us out in the cold. I've still got an A100 from when they first started, which I got because of a few Minolta lenses that I wanted to use with digital. But, with comparatively bad noise and with their incessant focus on cranking out scads of low-end bodies, they haven't produced anything competitive, unless you're a landscape photographer or a newbie. Anyways, kudos to Pentax for doing everything right with their last few bodies. If they keep it up, the upwards trend in marketshare is only going to continue. I've got a K100DS, K20, and K-7, and every camera has been better than the last. And better than anything else in the price range, IMO. The K-7 in particular is a body that can finally inspire in the same way that the Limited lenses have been doing for so long.

02-07-2010, 09:45 PM	#44
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Maybe Sony could sell of their "Minolta" division to SeaGull. That should get a shitstorm started.

02-08-2010, 12:53 AM	#45
kevinschoenmakers Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Shanghai Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,509	Originally posted by ilya80 Please dont ignore there is a "want" ( for someone probably a "need" ) for Pentax mount FF camera among Pentax users. Thanks, Ilya. I think the point everyone has been trying to get through to the FF-crowd is that, even though some will buy it, not enough will, thus making it a bad thing for business.