[MadMathMind]

More so if you're trying to do a Sigma (full functional lenses) less so Samyang/Zeiss - manual only (the Touits are different).

I don't think it would be viable to produce AF lenses for your own body and MF ones for other mounts. It's hard to put a price on just autofocus...Samyang avoids the issue because they don't make any AF lenses. It's a matter of the message that is sent. If you're offering AF lenses in your own mount but MF ones in another, you can't really sell them for the same price. Sigma does this with Pentax, removing OS to save money. The move is looked at with at least some distaste, as Pentax users really do pay the same amount for less. In that case, Pentax users are covered by SR in body (those who aren't can't use the HSM lens with AF either), so it's not really a loss of feature to the end user. As much as an obvious attempt to cut production cost can be irritating, it doesn't really affect the product experience for the user.

But with a price different, it makes one look inferior to the other--why is the Nikon version $500 and the Pentax one $600? That's what people will notice first. Then they'll see one is MF and the other is AF. They will not know or care why. They will just wonder whether they are getting a half-assed product from a company who's just looking for a cash grab. That damages the entire brand.

What's interesting is that Samyang could probably make AF lenses for Pentax easiest because of screw drive. Canon requires a motor in-lens (and features a much more complicated electronic mount for AF), so that's probably what holds up the move to AF. Without going to in-lens motor, Nikon would be a disaster because the lenses would AF on some bodies but not others; marketing that without ending up with droves of unhappy customers who will never come back is a mess. If you put "autofocus" too large, a bunch of people will miss the "on some bodies" fine print and think it will work when they haven't got a high enough body. If you make it too small, then even the informed may miss the message. And then there's the middle: people who decide to pass because they just aren't sure.

As for camera vs lens, I think you'd shut down the camera division anyway if its sales were no longer profitable, regardless of what the rest of the company is doing.

Regardless of that, you wouldn't necessarily shut down a loss-making activity if your overall profits were sound and that activity attracted sales in related areas. In the case of the Pentax lines, shutting down the body line prior to building up other areas would undoubtedly cause lens sales to suffer, at least in the medium term.

It's the razor blades model. The camera bodies may be a dog (speculation)--that may be the case for Canon and Nikon as well--but they drive profitable lens sales.

Obviously, shutting down the body line would destroy the lens market. Why would a rational consumer purchase new lenses for a discontinued line? That was like people buying up HD DVDs after Toshiba tossed in the towel. Sure, some people did it, but most of the ones who did were irrationally attached to the product and didn't want to lose. Others did it because the movies were cheap, but I'm sure they regretted that after their players failed or they needed the space on the rack being taken up by their limited-use device.

---

Last edited by MadMathMind; 01-15-2015 at 09:39 PM.

[clackers]

I don't think it would be viable to produce AF lenses for your own body and MF ones for other mounts.

I don't think any of us are serious about this idea, MMM, although you seem to be pondering it deeply.

This could be done though, and pricing would be a matter for the execs.

I'd personally have no problem with owning and using some Pentax lenses on another platform for their rendering while losing other capabilities. I already do that on my Sony with an adapter.

[johnmflores]

Next idea...

They should put a Pentax Q7 and a K-01 in a dimly lit bar with some wine and Barry White playing in the background. We'd end up with...a Q-01, with a K-mount (without an adapter) and the same battery used by the K-01, K-5, K-3. Why on God's good Earth would we want this for?

- The ability to use K-mount lenses without an adapter
- The ability to AF K-mount lenses with the Q7 sensor
- A fighting chance to capture birds in flight with the reach of the Q
- A battery that will last all day

It doesn't have to be the size of the K-01 either, just share the K-mount and battery. Make it a rugged little square for all that I care.

[Clavius]

Next idea...

They should put a Pentax Q7 and a K-01 in a dimly lit bar with some wine and Barry White playing in the background. We'd end up with...a Q-01, with a K-mount (without an adapter) and the same battery used by the K-01, K-5, K-3. Why on God's good Earth would we want this for?

- The ability to use K-mount lenses without an adapter
- The ability to AF K-mount lenses with the Q7 sensor
- A fighting chance to capture birds in flight with the reach of the Q
- A battery that will last all day

It doesn't have to be the size of the K-01 either, just share the K-mount and battery. Make it a rugged little square for all that I care.

I would pre-order that one for sure. Sounds like fun.

[clackers]

The Q7 could end up barefoot and pregnant, the K-01 falling behind in child support - it might get ugly, John!

[Digitalis]

a place for those crazy ideas that happen in the shower

Please keep it PG-13 please

You give us a title like that and not expect us to do anything with it...you're no fun at all.

[Sagitta]

I also wondered why it wouldn't be possible to have a firmware update to allow the point-and-shoots like my trusty Optio E80 to do RAW photos? Maybe an engineer can answer this for us?

I used a hacked Canon (the utility is called CHDK - Canon Hack Development Kit, if I remember right) point and shoot for years that had its RAW ability unlocked. I also could use it for bracketing - that camera (combined with the fact I had an old Pentax film camera fro a decade earlier) is what led me to buying a Pentax as my first DSLR.

Its doable, but the code would need to be unique for each camera and Pentax (and Canon, etc) would rather you spend money on a higher end camera than a budget camera for your RAW shooting.

[THoog]

The Q7 could end up barefoot and pregnant, the K-01 falling behind in child support - it might get ugly, John!

Especially since the K-01 settled down with a nice K-x, and they had the K-S1 (and maybe the K-S2, I'm not sure yet).

[clackers]

Especially since the K-01 settled down with a nice K-x, and they had the K-S1 (and maybe the K-S2, I'm not sure yet).

You know, there's something to that!

The K-S2 adds a flippy screen, which suits the phone upgraders targetted by the S-line. Its higher price is justifiable, I'd just rather do without the 120 grams extra weight in what's my hiking camera and backup.