[stihlmania]

LarryMc, there is no concrete evidence of almost anything about predicting what the future holds. What I said in my post was my opinion, everyone is free to agree or disagree and state their own opinion. What is not an opinion is if my A star 400 fails, my first lens purchase will be an autofocus 400 f2.8...... then a camera that can use it....if Ricoh/Pentax made that lens I would buy it tonight as my K3-II does almost everything I ask of it and I use it almost every day so I do not need a K3-III ,or whatever it will be called , at this moment. But if it was available I would purchase one.

[normhead]

Jeeps are by far the best selling make under the Fiat-Chrysler umbrella. About 45% of their total sales. Chrysler itself sells less than 10% of their overall cars, with RAM trucks around 25%. It would be like if Pentax's sales were almost as much as the whole rest of Ricoh combined, while Ricoh-branded products were at maybe 7%.

What is Pentax' percentage of Ricoh sales?

Why does that matter?

[Larrymc]

LarryMc, there is no concrete evidence of almost anything about predicting what the future holds. What I said in my post was my opinion, everyone is free to agree or disagree and state their own opinion. What is not an opinion is if my A star 400 fails, my first lens purchase will be an autofocus 400 f2.8...... then a camera that can use it....if Ricoh/Pentax made that lens I would buy it tonight as my K3-II does almost everything I ask of it and I use it almost every day so I do not need a K3-III ,or whatever it will be called , at this moment. But if it was available I would purchase one.

You stated the following "Hoya and Ricoh both have gathered all the Pentax technology that they wanted and will soon tire of the Pentax name...."

I was just curious where you gathered that information you are basing your opinion on, I'm not trying to disagree with you but am genuinely interested how you came to that conclusion.

Wow, so you would let the lack of one specific lens cause you to jump ship to another brand? Does your livelihood depend on that lens? Just curious.

[Merv-O]

Wow, so you would let the lack of one specific lens cause you to jump ship to another brand? Does your livelihood depend on that lens? Just curiou

Was in Best Buy picking up some new peripherals for my computer and next to the computer section was the camera section.....Picked up and began playing with the new $3,000 Canon with its18-135 lens. Yes, the focus was fast, but the viewfinder was off a bit, the camera felt plasticky and cheap for the price point, the ergonomics were not as good and it didn't even feel as tight as my K-S2 (only plastic body Pentax I own). Clearly, Pentax stands alone in what they seek to accomplish. I will match my K-1's 36mp output with any 40+ mp camera from the CanIkonOny oligarchy anytime. The pictures you take are the value, not the camera, you and your symbiotic connection to your equipment.

Perhaps the OP is not symbiotically connected to his camera. I know when, where and I how I need to use any of my (5) Pentax bodies and I maintain a 65-70% keeper ratio. Photography is very subjective, but it's also the acknowledgment of others that, like art, is where the satisfaction often lies.

[Racer X 69]

Oh, look, a butterfly.

[Larrymc]

Oh, look, a butterfly.

Photos......man photos, it may have been a moth! I need to see proof!!

[Racer X 69]

Photos......man photos, it may have been a moth! I need to see proof!!

Click the link.

[ThorSanchez]

Why does that matter?

If you're using Jeep/Chrysler as an example of a brand that continues after being acquired by a different corporation that's a somewhat different situation than Ricoh/Pentax. Jeep is keeping Fiat-Chrysler afloat. Pentax is a relatively small sliver of Ricoh, if I understand correctly.

[normhead]

If you're using Jeep/Chrysler as an example of a brand that continues after being acquired by a different corporation that's a somewhat different situation than Ricoh/Pentax. Jeep is keeping Fiat-Chrysler afloat. Pentax is a relatively small sliver of Ricoh, if I understand correctly.

You cherry picked your example. You could have chosen a lesser brand, but that would have defeated your purpose so you chose not to. Have you ever heard of Balderson Cheese? A small 20 man cheese factory in perth Ontario, bought by general foods 40 years ago. It's still marketed around the world as Balderson cheese even though it' probably less than0.5% of General Foods total sales. The issue being, a small brand name can survive in a big company that acquires it. You're trying to prove a negative, saying Pentax is too small to survive. You should know, you can't prove a negative. There are many examples of product that started as small innovative companies and kept their names, long after being swallowed by giants. I'm not really sure why it take someone else to tell you. It's the kind thing that's googleable if you really cared to post accurate statements. For me, I had an example off the top of my head, just from paying attention to the world I live in.

[ThorSanchez]

You cherry picked your example. You could have chosen a lesser brand, but that would have defeated your purpose so you chose not to. Have you ever heard of Balderson Cheese? A small 20 man cheese factory in perth Ontario, bought by general foods 40 years ago. It's still marketed around the world as Balderson cheese even though it' probably less than0.5% of General Foods total sales. The issue being, a small brand name can survive in a big company that acquires it. You're trying to prove a negative, saying Pentax is too small to survive. You should know, you can't prove a negative. There are many examples of product that started as small innovative companies and kept their names, long after being swallowed by giants. I'm not really sure why it take someone else to tell you. It's the kind thing that's googleable if you really cared to post accurate statements. For me, I had an example off the top of my head, just from paying attention to the world I live in.

I only used the example because you brought up Chrysler and Jeep. You're right, Pentax will continue on as they have. Thanks.

[stihlmania]

You stated the following "Hoya and Ricoh both have gathered all the Pentax technology that they wanted and will soon tire of the Pentax name...."

I was just curious where you gathered that information you are basing your opinion on, I'm not trying to disagree with you but am genuinely interested how you came to that conclusion.

Wow, so you would let the lack of one specific lens cause you to jump ship to another brand? Does your livelihood depend on that lens? Just curious.

No, I stated the following "my biggest concern with such a late release of a replacement for the K3-II [the camera is in Ricohs sphere of influence the best I can tell] is that Hoya and Ricoh both have gathered all the Pentax technology that they wanted and will soon tire of the Pentax name...." If you wish to quote me use the whole sentence in question please.


Read more at: Why I will buy a K-3 III - Page 10 - PentaxForums.com

[stihlmania]

You stated the following "Hoya and Ricoh both have gathered all the Pentax technology that they wanted and will soon tire of the Pentax name...."

I was just curious where you gathered that information you are basing your opinion on, I'm not trying to disagree with you but am genuinely interested how you came to that conclusion.

Wow, so you would let the lack of one specific lens cause you to jump ship to another brand? Does your livelihood depend on that lens? Just curious.

Glad you are interested in hearing more and not trying to disagree. The lack of one specific lens, which is in my "opinion" the best focal length for wildlife, is not something most could understand unless you have used that lens [or any long telephoto lens] for many years. I have, since 1988, which is when I purchased the 400 with the 1.4XL and the 145mm Pentax UV filter.. I can make do with the AF1.7 when I need to capture moving objects, it is a superb lens to use with the A star 400, and with many other lens, I love to use it on my SMC 50mm F 1.7. Better than the 1.4 XL in "my opinion" on the 400. If you want examples I do not have any to share at this moment..sorry!. I am considering the 250-600 but not having the F2.8 has held me back to this point, the zoom is very attractive to me if I don't want to do portraits [head shots} of near by critters even though I have a portable blind, you cannot move when critters show up.
Honestly Larry, did I say anywhere that I was going to sell my Pentax gear and change brands? Ever hear of owning 2 different camera systems? Must I quote what I said again about getting a autofocus 400 F2.8 and a camera to use it? I said nothing about dumping my Pentax gear and "jumping ship" as you say....If the camera name changes to Ricoh it affects nothing I am doing unless my gear fails. My 1 experience with a Pentax camera issue [ my DS flash failing in the first 6 months resulted in a fixed camera at no cost] was positive. That was in 2005. Just so you know, my A star 400 paid for itself [$3900.00] in 1989 with 3 rolls of 36 exposure Kodacrome 100 of a great horned owl with my K2 DMD. Like the forum user Digitalis [I hope I spelled that correctly] I sell my photos outright and move on. The 400 F2.8 accounts for about 80 percent of the images I sell, so yes, I would like to upgrade to a modern autofocus 400 F2.8. I have used the 55-300 plm, 150-450, and the 560. All are owned by a close by Pentax only photographer who also loves to use my lens, until things start moving too much!. They are all excellent lens once you learn how to use them. I do not like to do weddings, street, video, people portraits..... I like to shoot wildlife! Ok, now you know much more and can base your "opinion" on "concrete evidence" of my "opinion"!

[normhead]

and will soon tire of the Pentax name

And that's what is in question, I'm sure we all want to know if you have the remotest possibility for thinking that or are just talking off the top of your head. As I recall Hoya kept the Pentax name for their medical division PENTAX Medical (Canada)

So even Hoya didn't mine the technology and ditch the name, they bought and use both the name and the technology, so what possible reason would Ricoh have for doing so?

[reh321]

No, I stated the following "my biggest concern with such a late release of a replacement for the K3-II [the camera is in Ricohs sphere of influence the best I can tell] is that Hoya and Ricoh both have gathered all the Pentax technology that they wanted and will soon tire of the Pentax name...." If you wish to quote me use the whole sentence in question please.

Even including the entire sentence is unnecessarily alarmist.

The very clear message from Ricoh is that there is a K-3ii replace in the works, and it will be the next Pentax camera out. I am personally convinced that they expected the K-1ii to be the flagship - they hadn't understood that some would want more "fps" than this camera provides in FF mode and more "mp" than it provides in crop mode. Based on their comments at successive conferences, they may have made some kind of mid-course correction that further slowed them down. I am greatly pleased by the KP - I am sure that this camera will be pleasing when it does finally appear.

[reh321]

Glad you are interested in hearing more and not trying to disagree. The lack of one specific lens, which is in my "opinion" the best focal length for wildlife, is not something most could understand unless you have used that lens [or any long telephoto lens] for many years. I have, since 1988, which is when I purchased the 400 with the 1.4XL and the 145mm Pentax UV filter.. I can make do with the AF1.7 when I need to capture moving objects, it is a superb lens to use with the A star 400, and with many other lens, I love to use it on my SMC 50mm F 1.7. Better than the 1.4 XL in "my opinion" on the 400. If you want examples I do not have any to share at this moment..sorry!. I am considering the 250-600 but not having the F2.8 has held me back to this point, the zoom is very attractive to me if I don't want to do portraits [head shots} of near by critters even though I have a portable blind, you cannot move when critters show up.
Honestly Larry, did I say anywhere that I was going to sell my Pentax gear and change brands? Ever hear of owning 2 different camera systems? Must I quote what I said again about getting a autofocus 400 F2.8 and a camera to use it? I said nothing about dumping my Pentax gear and "jumping ship" as you say....If the camera name changes to Ricoh it affects nothing I am doing unless my gear fails. My 1 experience with a Pentax camera issue [ my DS flash failing in the first 6 months resulted in a fixed camera at no cost] was positive. That was in 2005. Just so you know, my A star 400 paid for itself [$3900.00] in 1989 with 3 rolls of 36 exposure Kodacrome 100 of a great horned owl with my K2 DMD. Like the forum user Digitalis [I hope I spelled that correctly] I sell my photos outright and move on. The 400 F2.8 accounts for about 80 percent of the images I sell, so yes, I would like to upgrade to a modern autofocus 400 F2.8. I have used the 55-300 plm, 150-450, and the 560. All are owned by a close by Pentax only photographer who also loves to use my lens, until things start moving too much!. They are all excellent lens once you learn how to use them. I do not like to do weddings, street, video, people portraits..... I like to shoot wildlife! Ok, now you know much more and can base your "opinion" on "concrete evidence" of my "opinion"!

The one shortcoming of being a Pentax user is that there aren't very many of us - a DA* 400mm f/2.8 is a rather specialized lens, so I don't know there are enough of you to justify the cost of designing one. Looking at B&H, I see that the newest 400mm f/2.8 lens from Canon costs $12K - from Nikon the cost is $1K less. An appropriate camera will cost another $2K; the total cost of nearly $15K is totally out of the question for many of us, but if you can justify that expense, "more power to you",