[Finntax]

I didn't go through all the speculations (in this preproduction specimen, there was the 1:1 crop mode)

why on earth would they have backed away from that, I wonder, unless difficulty integrating it with the auto select mode or something - but if it reached the early firmware, it's difficult to see that that would have been a problem????

I guess it's because there are no dedicated guide lines in the viewfinder, and thus users could forget they where in 1:1 mode and get pissed afterwards when the pictures are cropped, or something.

Maybe I misunderstood something here with my Finglish, but what makes you think the 1:1 mode is not included in the final product? The Norwegian representative specifically wanted to point the feature out for me. And there indeed are dedicated guidelines shown in the VF when the 1:1 mode is activated, same way as the rectangle in crop mode. Same goes with the LV, the back screen goes to 1:1 when the mode is activated.

[Zygonyx]

Good news

[ppohja]

why on earth would they have backed away from that, I wonder, unless difficulty integrating it with the auto select mode or something - but if it reached the early firmware, it's difficult to see that that would have been a problem????

Based on the CP+ interview:

Does the production K-1 support a 1:1 crop mode as we saw in a prototype?
No; the supported settings currently include no crop or 1.5x (APS-C) crop.

2016 CP+ Pentax Interview - CP+ 2016 | PentaxForums.com

So it probably was the prototype version we saw at the fair. With the 24-70 lens the 1:1 crop mode seemed to work all ok. Why they say it was removed or why they removed it - I have no idea.

[Gimbal]

And there indeed are dedicated guidelines shown in the VF when the 1:1 mode is activated, same way as the rectangle in crop mode. Same goes with the LV, the back screen goes to 1:1 when the mode is activated.

I have seen the 1:1 crop used with LV (in some youtube clip) but I haven't seen a single picture of the guide lines for 1:1 crop in the viewfinder.

But I guess they need a special LCD layer for every line in the viewfinder that crosses another line (and can be switched on and off independently), so one layer for the grid, another layer for the APS-C crop frame, and yet another layer for the 1:1 crop.

So one reason for removing the 1:1 crop mode could be cost cutting. Remove one LCD layer and save a few bucks. Pure speculation though.

[monochrome]

I wouldn't be surprised... since Henrys is a big store chain in Canada, they probably demand more (cut) from camera manufacturers. I have a feeling they (Ricoh) are more willing to work with smaller shops (like McBain, thecamerastore etc.) than big chain stores.

Some of the large USA retailers expect the manufacturer to finance their inventory, which amounts to providing a perpetual short-term line of credit. Given what happened to Nikon, Sony and Fuji when Ritz Camera went bankrupt the second time, it is possible Ricoh won't provide dealer credit, so large dealers won't stock Pentax.

[Mikesul]

Some of the large USA retailers expect the manufacturer to finance their inventory, which amounts to providing a perpetual short-term line of credit. Given what happened to Nikon, Sony and Fuji when Ritz Camera went bankrupt the second time, it is possible Ricoh won't provide dealer credit, so large dealers won't stock Pentax.

Although I can imagine what happened, could you give some details of how badly they were hit? Thanks.

[monochrome]

Although I can imagine what happened, could you give some details of how badly they were hit? Thanks.

Nikon and Canon $26 million and $13.7 million, unsecured, in the 2009 bankruptcy

Nikon $2.4 million, Sony $1.5 million and Fuji $.6 million in the 2012 bankruptcy (of the much smaller company).

IIRC Nikon took possession of their inventory and operated at least some of the stores during the restructuring phase of #1 (or maybe #2 - my memory has faded).

Imaging Resource has an interview with Jim Malcolm of Ricoh Imaging North America from last year in which he describes the effort to regain distributions in B&M stores. One of the problems, Jim said, was 'demands' retailers make on the manufacturers, and that RINA was forced to 'let one go' because Ricoh would not meet an unprofitable demand.'

---

Last edited by monochrome; 03-06-2016 at 08:04 AM.

[Mikesul]

Nikon and Canon $26 million and $13.7 million, unsecured, in the 2009 bankruptcy

Nikon $2.4 million, Sony $1.5 million and Fuji $.6 million in the 2012 bankruptcy (of the much smaller company).

IIRC Nikon took possession of their inventory and operated at least some of the stores during the liquidation phase of #2 (or maybe #1 - my memory has faded).

Thanks. Very interesting. Given the risky B&M sector Pentax may have been smart to avoid stores the way they did. I just wish they would pick up their web marketing.

[pete-tarmigan]

Some of the large USA retailers expect the manufacturer to finance their inventory, which amounts to providing a perpetual short-term line of credit. Given what happened to Nikon, Sony and Fuji when Ritz Camera went bankrupt the second time, it is possible Ricoh won't provide dealer credit, so large dealers won't stock Pentax.

Now I'm beginning to understand why Ricoh won't provide inventory to retailers. However, I think it's also affecting small retailer. The two independent retailers in my city won't stock Pentax for this reason. They'll special order it for you, but they won't spend their own money on inventory. Since we are in the age of the internet, we're expected to rely on the proliferation of reviews, camera forums, and YouTube videos.

[monochrome]

Thanks. Very interesting. Given the risky B&M sector Pentax may have been smart to avoid stores the way they did. I just wish they would pick up their web marketing.

Following is general information gleaned from reading articles and email conversations with former Pentax employees in the mid 2000's.

The dissolution of the Pentax retail marketing and distribution infrastructure has been gradual, and has been going on incrementally for decades. In the 80's they reduced their repair and inventory operation in Golden, CO. In the 90's Pentax significantly altered their selling agreements, increasing the volume brackets and significantly reducing their distributor inventory. They also altered their compensation agreements for sales reps and let a large number of them go. By the time Hoya acquired the holding company the US operation was a ghost of its former self. I think at that point there were two reps for the entire country, nearly the entire operation was outsourced to contractors (including web marketing and the Pentax Webstore) and the President of Pentax USA apparently called on the large internet retailers himself.

Hoya eventually departed Golden altogether and moved just 50 people to their current location in Denver. At the time it felt as if Hoya was dumping lens inventory in the US through the large internet retailers at crazy low prices.

MAP pricing was a real shock when the regular retail pricing strategy was announced in (I think) 2013.

Ricoh Imaging has done a pretty good job so far re-establishing itself in North America but they started from literally nothing. 645z and K-1 can be a significant attractive factor generating cash flow.

[derekkite]

Retail is a nightmare, and neither side will give. No one in their right mind would finance stock that will be worth nothing in 18 months. The pallets of boxes you see are there for a time then returned of not sold with the distributor swallowing the loss. Unless you have a huge advertising expenditure to bring crowds in, it is a loss for everyone involved.

I suspect Ricoh will try to leverage their existing distribution and support networks. The thousand dollars between the k1 and d810 may be possible only without the cost of marketing and distribution that Nikon does.

We will see. Maybe Ricoh is making money on a $700 k3.

[IgorZ]

Retail is a nightmare, and neither side will give. No one in their right mind would finance stock that will be worth nothing in 18 months. The pallets of boxes you see are there for a time then returned of not sold with the distributor swallowing the loss. Unless you have a huge advertising expenditure to bring crowds in, it is a loss for everyone involved.

I suspect Ricoh will try to leverage their existing distribution and support networks. The thousand dollars between the k1 and d810 may be possible only without the cost of marketing and distribution that Nikon does.

We will see. Maybe Ricoh is making money on a $700 k3.

Went back to Henry's yesterday and asked about Pentax again. The guy said they don't carry it because not too many people buy it, but he said he hoped they would carry K-1. Then he looked at his computer and told me that across Canada, there were a TOTAL OF 12!!! pre-orders for K-1. Something tells me that it is not the overwhelming show of interest they were looking for.

[Transit]

I'm frequently amazed at the size and enthusiasm of the Australian corps here on PF considering how little servce you seem to get

same applies to NZ on both counts ...

[Zygonyx]

Went back to Henry's yesterday and asked about Pentax again. The guy said they don't carry it because not too many people buy it, but he said he hoped they would carry K-1. Then he looked at his computer and told me that across Canada, there were a TOTAL OF 12!!! pre-orders for K-1. Something tells me that it is not the overwhelming show of interest they were looking for.

Certainly not that surprising to see such a number for Henry at this stage.
The real driver for pre-orders is roadshow...
We are eventually seeing K-1 in France's main Pentax retailers since last friday, and the pre-orders are picking up.

[Kunzite]

The number of preorders at a store which doesn't carry Pentax might not be representative Would you preorder if you're told they hope to get the product?