Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-11-2013, 01:53 PM   #166
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,497
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
Brilliant!

$5 to the first person that can post a picture of a "Pentax" camera that has no other corporate name on it!
QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
I thought we were talking about branding.
I was responding to johnmflores and assumed you were posting a picture of a Pentax-only camera - but this is truly getting silly now.

10-11-2013, 02:03 PM   #167
Veteran Member
krebsy75's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chester County, Pa.
Posts: 804
Ricoh bugs me for doubling lens pricing without adding further value. Beyond that, they are the best thing to happen to Pentax in a long time.
10-11-2013, 02:27 PM   #168
Pentaxian
c.a.m's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 990
QuoteOriginally posted by newmikey Quote
Upon unboxing it I saw a label on the bottom stating "Pentax Ricoh Imaging Co.Ltd." and it seems to be "Made in China" to add insult to injurie! Do you all think I should ditch it?
The label says "Pentax..." ? Oh-oh, I think you should return it - it's not pure Ricoh.

- Craig
10-11-2013, 02:44 PM   #169
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 122
QuoteOriginally posted by tabl10s Quote
Would you rather have a camera with "Hasselblad" or one with "Fisher-Price" added to the name? I've never desired to own anything Ricoh. I didn't know about until a co-worker asked if he could borrow a lens when he thought the mounts looked similar back in '81.
First of all, both of those names only have significance because of their histories and the quality of the products. If Fisher-Price had been making Leica-quality cameras for the last 50 years, it wouldn't matter to me if my camera said Fisher-Price (in fact I would be happy about it). Ricoh has been known as a quality manufacturer for quite a while, just primarily in other product areas.

Second of all, you do realize of course that that '81 was 32 YEARS AGO....so in and of itself that indicates that Ricoh isn't a fly-by-night newcomer.

Personally, I hope they keep the Pentax name on their cameras, both because of the connection to the Pentax heritage, and because, while not as recognizable today as Canon, Nikon, etc, it still carries some cache' in the photography world (certainly more than Ricoh). But that being said, Ricoh paid a ton of $$ for Pentax. That, plus the additional investment they have made since in the products earns it the right to place their name on them.

10-11-2013, 02:58 PM   #170
Banned




Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NY/Germany
Posts: 1,183
QuoteOriginally posted by krebsy75 Quote
Ricoh bugs me for doubling lens pricing without adding further value. Beyond that, they are the best thing to happen to Pentax in a long time.
I could have sworn that it was under Hoya that the prices were doubled and Ricoh simply continued Pentax's pricing policies with a mostly hands off approach.
10-11-2013, 02:58 PM   #171
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central Kentucky
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,415
If this point has been posted I apologize but I am not reading 11 pages of this to find out.

I'm sure the Lincoln, Mercury, Oldsmobile groups felt the same way. Get over it. Ricoh owns the Pentax brand. They bought and paid for it.

I personally think maintaining the brand identity is in their best interest but the choice is theirs as is the choice to buy or not is yours.
10-11-2013, 03:11 PM   #172
Veteran Member
krebsy75's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chester County, Pa.
Posts: 804
Someone mentioned that Ricoh paid "a ton of money" for Pentax. $200 million is chump change for a global manufacturer of technology like Ricoh. CHUMP CHANGE!
10-11-2013, 03:28 PM   #173
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 122
QuoteOriginally posted by krebsy75 Quote
Someone mentioned that Ricoh paid "a ton of money" for Pentax. $200 million is chump change for a global manufacturer of technology like Ricoh. CHUMP CHANGE!
It may not be a lot of money compared to the size of the company, but do you think for a second that it is not a lot of money? Also, do you think for a second that some junior level manager could make a decision to spend $200M? Not a chance. And do you think someone wouldn't get fired in a nanosecond for squandering $200M? Even if the company was Microsoft or Apple or Exxon, it is still a lot of money, and expenditures of that size are only done after extensive research, planning, and due diligence, and are only approved at high-level management.

10-11-2013, 04:15 PM   #174
Veteran Member
krebsy75's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chester County, Pa.
Posts: 804
toukan: I can't argue with anything you said.

snake: The increase in lens pricing was absolutely done under Ricoh's realm. And it was outlandish. That's when I stopped recommending Pentax to people. Overnight Pentax glass went from undercutting Canikon to becoming premium in comparison. This is still an issue. I don't think a single lens is worth MSRP.
10-11-2013, 04:51 PM - 2 Likes   #175
jac
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Clyde River, Nunavut, Canada
Posts: 2,363
I am truly disgusted by Ricoh's flagrant abuse of my right to instant gratification. I was expecting something that was FF, could fit in my shirt pocket, could be operated by remote using satellite connection through GPS and came c/w adapters to fit all that CaNikon glass. Where is the propulsion system and Artficial Intelligence module that will save my from walking around in the country-side, getting my shoes muddy instead of sitting on the couch getting caffeine withdrawal? I didn't even see any sign 'the box' includes a set of stencils so that I can brand it with my own personal favorite name. In fact my Grandfather, who knew McLaughlin personally, almost never forgave him for selling out and letting his beauties be called McLaughlin - Buick.
With no hope in sight, me and my little KIIs will have to do things the hard way, auto focusing when applicable or (horrors) pre-focus at the kids games until my dreams are brought to fruition by Kodak, Polaroid or some other obscure outfit. Gawd knows what I'll do with the LX.
The K3 looks like great little camera. Had I not splurged on the IIs in July, I'd be suffering some serious CBA. (Actually I am but I'm fighting it with long walks in the fresh air with another great camera from the makers of Pentax.)

Last edited by jac; 10-11-2013 at 05:05 PM.
10-11-2013, 04:54 PM   #176
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Hampshire UK
Posts: 280
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
My ME Super isn't; it's "pure Pentax"
My ME Super has "Asahi Opt. Co., Japan" embossed at the foot of the rear film box lid holder. They do seem to have done it in several different ways though, so I won't argue with you.

The real point is though, that PENTAX has always been a brand, created and owned by Asahi (which had cameras and lenses before PENTAX was created) and changed its name to Pentax Corporation as recently as 2002 IIRC. That phase of its history lasted only 5 years before Hoya bought the company/brand, and then RICOH.

So for most of its life, the PENTAX brand was owned by one company or another, who in most cases stamped their company name somewhere on the camera. I do miss Asahi, though. I don't miss Hoya.

Anyway, Nikon is owned by Mitsubishi and that doesn't seem to have done them much harm.

Last edited by Dave L; 10-11-2013 at 05:19 PM.
10-11-2013, 05:01 PM   #177
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bronx NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,599
QuoteOriginally posted by TER-OR Quote
Back is fine with me, that's no big deal. I do think it's very important to keep the Pentax name on the front.

More people are likely to be excited by the new Jaguar F-type than a Tata F-type...
Oh, I don't know, I might just get quite excited about F-type tatas!

NaCl(double D's are quite large, can you imagine what F-types might look like? )
10-11-2013, 05:08 PM   #178
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
$128 million

QuoteOriginally posted by krebsy75 Quote
Someone mentioned that Ricoh paid "a ton of money" for Pentax. $200 million is chump change for a global manufacturer of technology like Ricoh. CHUMP CHANGE!
" In a stunning move in which two smaller, financially struggling but very innovative camera manufacturers will join forces, Hoya Corporation, which bought Pentax in 2008, has just sold its Pentax Imaging Systems division to Ricoh Company, Ltd. for $128 million dollars. According to a press release distributed this morning, all of Pentax's business assets and shares will be transferred to Ricoh, with the merger expected to be completed by October.

With this transaction, Ricoh overnight has become a major player in the DSLR and interchangeable-lens compact camera market. But it could also be the first of many dominoes to fall. The Nikkei business daily says “the move by Ricoh could trigger a major industry realignment.” Ricoh will take over Hoya's domestic and overseas production bases, employees and Pentax brand, according to Nikkei.

Two Struggling Brands

In May, Ricoh announced it would cut 10,000 jobs—10% of its workforce. Ricoh's digital camera business has been unprofitable but the company hopes Pentax's established sales channels in the US will reverse its fortunes. Hoya shipped 1.63 million digital cameras in 2010, down 10% from 2009. Ricoh is said to have shipped less than half a million cameras. "

RICOH BUYS PENTAX from Adorama Learning Center
10-11-2013, 05:09 PM - 1 Like   #179
Senior Member
jeff knight's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Pacific Northwest USA
Posts: 254
QuoteOriginally posted by Colbyt Quote
Get over it. Ricoh owns the Pentax brand. They bought and paid for it.
What you are apparently too insensitive to comprehend is that many Pentaxians have been, and still are, fiercely loyal to Pentax. Ricoh has been a camera manufacturer with it's own style, reputation, research and development team, and patent base. The Ricoh camera division was a competitor to Pentax previous to purchasing it. (though probably a minor one) This is not like Hoya buying Pentax, or Honeywell distributing Pentax or any other of these corporate configurations people love to mention here. So there are some fierce loyalists out there that are understandably upset to see the Ricoh name on the camera. It's the end of an era and the start of a new one.

I personally hope this melding of Ricoh and Pentax teams makes the new cameras better and better and that Ricoh succeeds.

I'll buy the K-3 but I'm still a little sad. We should appreciate the fierce Pentax loyalists here and not jump to cannibalize our own. They may need time to get over it. If they can't I'm not going to bitch them out for it!
10-11-2013, 05:49 PM   #180
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,497
QuoteOriginally posted by krebsy75 Quote
Someone mentioned that Ricoh paid "a ton of money" for Pentax. $200 million is chump change for a global manufacturer of technology like Ricoh. CHUMP CHANGE!
QuoteOriginally posted by toukan Quote
It may not be a lot of money compared to the size of the company, but do you think for a second that it is not a lot of money? Also, do you think for a second that some junior level manager could make a decision to spend $200M? Not a chance. And do you think someone wouldn't get fired in a nanosecond for squandering $200M? Even if the company was Microsoft or Apple or Exxon, it is still a lot of money, and expenditures of that size are only done after extensive research, planning, and due diligence, and are only approved at high-level management.
It was $128MM, not $200MM, but that isn't the cost. That only reflects the price for empty husk left by Hoya. The real cost will be the hundreds of millions of dollars Ricoh will invest rebuilding the brand - literally so much money that financial analysts refer to Digicams as a risk to their earnings estimates if Ricoh proceeds with their plan.

Pentax isn't such Chump Change after all.

Last edited by monochrome; 10-11-2013 at 05:55 PM.
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!
arctic cold, aussie shepherds, bacon, basque paella, beer, caffeine, camera, canada, catch 22, cheddar, cheese, dachsunds, dew, drink, dslr, gin, hair, igunaq, k-mount, k3, kids, lutefisk, maine, marital relations, mother, mountain, norm, patent, pentax k-3, pentax lens, possums, research, ricoh, rupert, sandwich, scotch, shirley, snoring, spam, study, toilet, tokyo, veggies, vermont, world
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
why I will buy a K3 chicagojohn Pentax K-3 80 09-18-2016 08:42 AM
Suggestion Neutralize the 'why I won't buy a k-3' thread crewl1 Site Suggestions and Help 61 10-04-2014 05:08 PM
Why I Won't Be Buying A K5IIs Racer X 69 Pentax K-5 40 02-03-2014 08:12 PM
Why I don't buy Pentax lenses keyser Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 44 12-20-2012 01:58 AM
I feel so old: 8 things the facebook gen won't buy Nesster General Talk 27 04-22-2012 11:01 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:54 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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