[beholder3]

Solid review by a professional practician:

Periscope: A few thoughts about the Pentax K1 - YouTube

if you're looking to invest in a new system then check out pentax k 1 they also do a pretty nice medium format camera as well but 36 megapixels crystal clear pictures this is by far the best camera that I've used in my career to date so yeah that's my rundown on the pentax k 1 i hope that's been useful and like i say tomorrow i'm actually going to be shooting some portraits for a project that i'm doing called the one bride project

---

Last edited by beholder3; 04-27-2017 at 06:21 AM.

[biz-engineer]

Unlike what the forum wants to make everyone elses believe, Pentax success has nothing to do with the technical sides of those Pentax cameras. The problem of the Pentax brand is access to market, sell to the market as a whole, which in fact is far from being the case. A lot of Canon camera users are Canon users because they bought into what was on the shelf, that's all. You can post tons of pro Pentax things, that's not going to compensate for the lack of distribution channels for Pentax cameras. Look at posts, people asking where they can buy a Pentax camera... Basically, if you want a Pentax camera you have to look for a place to find one, on the other hand, even if you don't want a Canon camera, you don't need to look for it, it's there for anytime you want to buy one.

[shardulm]

A lot of Canon camera users are Canon users because they bought into what was on the shelf, that's all.

I agree with you a 100%. But that that also means Ricoh/Pentax is bleeding much less and are able to produce a stunning IQ full frame for under 2k. The revenue model Pentax has been opting for thus far is waaay conservative in my opinion and they should start showing up their muscle on the shelves so that the potential users can get the upfront feel for the superb ergonomics their DSLRs offer. Its sad they are shying away from it even now.
A K-3 alongside a 6d or D7100 or Gufifilm on the shelf will very easily stand up tall with much less effort. I am someitmes annoyed by their conservative strategy in their marketing department.

[ramseybuckeye]

I agree with you a 100%. But that that also means Ricoh/Pentax is bleeding much less and are able to produce a stunning IQ full frame for under 2k. The revenue model Pentax has been opting for thus far is waaay conservative in my opinion and they should start showing up their muscle on the shelves so that the potential users can get the upfront feel for the superb ergonomics their DSLRs offer. Its sad they are shying away from it even now.
A K-3 alongside a 6d or D7100 or Gufifilm on the shelf will very easily stand up tall with much less effort. I am someitmes annoyed by their conservative strategy in their marketing department.

I agree too but that is obviously not the Pentax marketing strategy. They must have a nice profit margin doing it this way with the funds that they do not spend in advertising and marketing. I really thought that might change when Ricoh bought the brand, but it hasn't. I still wonder if that could change when they get the full frame lineup more complete. It would be very hard to get into the b&M stores without coop advertising and incentives, but that is paid for by the customer. If that happens we may no longer see Pentax cameras being the best bang for the buck.

[MadMathMind]

Unlike what the forum wants to make everyone elses believe, Pentax success has nothing to do with the technical sides of those Pentax cameras. The problem of the Pentax brand is access to market, sell to the market as a whole, which in fact is far from being the case. A lot of Canon camera users are Canon users because they bought into what was on the shelf, that's all. You can post tons of pro Pentax things, that's not going to compensate for the lack of distribution channels for Pentax cameras. Look at posts, people asking where they can buy a Pentax camera... Basically, if you want a Pentax camera you have to look for a place to find one, on the other hand, even if you don't want a Canon camera, you don't need to look for it, it's there for anytime you want to buy one.

More so this:
"Hey Bob, what camera do you have?"
"Canon 7D."
"Ok, I will get that!"

or

"Hey Bob, what kind of camera should I buy?"
"I've owned exactly one camera ever in my entire life. Never even picked up another one. I swear it's the best thing on the market. Nothing else comes close. Nikon D750."
"I will buy that!"

[RGlasel]

It would be very hard to get into the b&M stores without coop advertising and incentives, but that is paid for by the customer. If that happens we may no longer see Pentax cameras being the best bang for the buck.

The thing is, Ricoh could pour money into selling Pentax cameras through the brick and mortar store channel and have nothing to show for it. Brick and Mortar Photographic Equipment Stores (TM) in North America (probably their European stores as well) are struggling to compete with online retailers for the key market, "prosumers." Prosumers know what they want and they plan out their purchases well in advance. Getting more Pentax cameras on the shelves at B&M PES won't do anything to get prosumers to buy Pentax instead of Canon, Nikon or Sony.

I couldn't stay awake to watch the entire 22 minute video, but I doubt the new K-1 owner who made the video bought Pentax because he happened to walk into a camera shop that had K-1's in stock that day. He probably saw something on the Internet, positive or negative, it doesn't really matter, referring to Pentax's new FF DSLR and based on his perception of an old brand with a long-time reputation for quality that not everyone is familiar with, sought out more information to make his final purchasing decision. If he got that information from a brick and mortar store that happened to have a K-1 for him to try out, they probably got the sale.

If brick and mortar stores are smart, they will seek out owners of the camera brands they happen to sell. Do things to get those owners of used cameras to come into their stores when they aren't looking to make an immediate purchase, so when the time comes to spend some disposable income on a new lens or body, that store is where they get their information to confirm their perceptions. And don't throw away that connection by asking for 25% more than online retailers. There is a tipping point where buyers can't justify the extra expense of buying locally for immediate gratification, for a five figure item like a camera body or high end lens, probably at least 10%, so brick and mortar stores don't have to be the cheapest source for the products photographers want to buy, but they have to be in the ballpark.

[C_Jones]

Not overdoing it is a safe strategy (conservative).

[pakinjapan]

They must have a nice profit margin doing it this way with the funds that they do not spend in advertising and marketing. I really thought that might change when Ricoh bought the brand, but it hasn't.

They (Ricoh) spend money for billboard ads in Japan, at less in Tokyo. I can see it from time to time and they are in quite expensive areas too. I am totally disagree with the way they spend money for those expensive billboards ads but it is their business direction and it is their money.
On the other hand, I like the way Sony spend AD money on social media and host photography related event and sponsoring online photo competition, etc.

[monochrome]

We've discussed the Pentax non-Japan marketing strategy ad infinitum. Paying for advertising, a distribution network of sales and support people, financing B&M inventory, co-op advertising, etc. lowers the per unit profit margin to the point that high volume is required. Canon and Nikon (despite recent disturbances) control this business model and assiduously protect their position.

The problem with achieving distribution in Walmart, Costco and BestBuy is you have to guarantee to deliver a minimum number of units. Box stores evaluate products on a profit per cubic foot per hour basis. If your product won't 'turn' they won't buy it. If you don't deliver promised units (and your 'slot' is empty) you pay a penalty for their lost opportunity. Pentax doesn't have the manufacturing capacity to meet Box Store demands.

However, physical retail, at least in the US, is severely retrenching and is of itself - even chain box retail - possibly a failing distribution model. Every major chain save Walmart and Costco is rapidly closing stores to avoid bankruptcy. Sears/KMart will be finished by year end. BestBuy is next. JCPenney might survive; Target is failing; Macy is collapsing, and so on. There have been 14 failures the last 12 months alone.

Pentax is doing very well as they are, and Ricoh should not invest the $1.5 Billion necessary to make Pentax volume-competitive with CaNikon.

[biz-engineer]

Pentax doesn't have the manufacturing capacity to meet Box Store demands.

Pentax sells on amazon, it's a high volume retailer. Amazon also have warehouses and many Pentax camera in inventory. In EU, Pentax sells via some large retailers of low cost multimedia appliances. However, where Pentax is the least represented in small camera shops specialized in high end cameras. My opinion on this is Pentax strategy is not intentional, it's based on the amount of sales personnel that they have to drive and support their retails channels, since they don't have enough resources to drive and support small shops, they only address the most visible retailers, especially where Canon is kind of the hill. That's the way it is in EU.

[monochrome]

Not the same at all.

Amazon doesn't have minimum delivered volume contracts. They're an ordinary online dealer, just like B&H and Adorama. They order what they need and reorder, as needed. Pentax sells them whatever they can make. K-1 was allocated, for instance. Amazon didn't get all their pre-orders, same as B&H and Adorama. B&M Dealers got 5 or 10 and I bought one walk-in, Day 3.

Walmart requires a company to deliver x units / week for y weeks. If a manufacturer doesn't deliver - for any reason including Acts of God - the manufacturer is assessed a punishing penalty. Manufacturers actually buy insurance against such failures.

US retailing / consumption is different than other western markets.

[Ric]

I had to go to McBain camera while visiting in Edmonton Alberta in order to get a K1 in my hands. It really sold me on a camera I would like to purchase some day. It also gave me a feel for how heavy it is in comparison to its APSC predecessors . I think it was very important to get a feel for this camera. In addition though, brick and mortar stores must be competitively priced with the online offers as was mentioned in a previous post. This may or may not be possible but if those retailers are not competitive, people may just check it out in the store and buy it online.

[RGlasel]

There have been 14 failures the last 12 months alone.

Permit me to go off topic, I also see what you are referring to and it must be a structural change, not related to other economic indicators. It really looks like the general retail landscape is permanently turning 180 degrees, in the space of a dozen months, which is mind boggling to me.

It's ironic that large footprint retail came about because it offered instant gratification for as many sku's as could be found in mail order catalogues of ancient times, yet those large footprint retailers are failing today because instant gratification is no longer what we want. Instead we flip the pages in the insanely inflated mail order catalogue called the Internet to determine what we want and then conduct our shopping over a relatively long period of time. I have been told that car salesmen in Japan make appointments to see clients in their homes and prospective buyers only lay their eyes on a car after a careful consultation with the salesman has determined what model they are interested in. Maybe travelling peddlers will make a comeback.

[Kunzite]

An interestingly positive outlook on the K-1's video. Stills are, of course, impressive.