[Shaarawy]

I guess it so much has to do with the time Pentax launched their 1st digital SLR !
I'm sure not the best to speak about history here !
I only believe that if they've managed to get themselves in the digital world the same time with Canon/Nikon, Pentax would have been having a pretty much comparable market share nowadays!!


Now with the K-3 and the K-5's reputation, Pentax can go up decreasing the gap again.
Only if they quickly considered updating the 16-50mm & 50-135mm for for autofocus speed/accuracy and price too.
I hope they do that any time soon !


Anyway, I know 5 Pentaxians among almost 50 photographers. So if a 10% can be anywhere close to reality, for me it's good enough

[northcoastgreg]

I only believe that if they've managed to get themselves in the digital world the same time with Canon/Nikon, Pentax would have been having a pretty much comparable market share nowadays!!

May be true up to a certain point, but Pentax's problems started well before the digital age. Since the mid-eighties, Pentax struggled to compete with Canon and Minolta, and later Nikon, in AF technology, so that by the time the digital transition occurred, they were no longer a major player.

[roberrl]

I have a feeling that it wasn't just the AF technology that was a problem. The first Pentax I had any contact with was an S1A, there followed a series of amateur level cameras ending up with an ME Super. These were all soundly engineered quality products that felt great in the hand and looked as if they would last forever (and many have) I then took time out from photography so my only contact with Pentax products of the late 80s and 90s has been when I've purchased packages of film kit to assuage my LBA. My goodness these bodies seem tacky, not well engineered and they look as if they wouldn't last into next week. It was a shock for me to discover this as I'd always held up Pentax as a manufacturer of well made and well engineered products. I can well see why consumers back at that time veered toward Canikon.
I think it's fair to say that the current ranger scores pretty well on the well made front but I don't see how we can ever catch the competition up unless we see some loss leader products.
As far as the OP goes, I often work track side at motor sport events ... I'm pretty well the only Pentax user there ... even the long time LX user has finally gone to Nikon.

[FantasticMrFox]

... but I don't see how we can ever catch the competition up unless we see some loss leader products.

That's the whole point - Pentax doesn't have to catch up with the competition. Leica isn't either. Pentax needs to make a profit, if their marketshare would stand at 0.05% and they made a profit, that'd be fine.

And you're suggesting Pentax is behind the competition, which overall it isn't - it leads the competition in its class in certain aspects (build quality, weather sealing, bang for the buck, selectable AA filter), is equal in others (image quality etc.) and finally behind in some (AF and video).

---

Last edited by FantasticMrFox; 12-12-2014 at 01:34 PM.

[kadajawi]

That's the whole point - Pentax doesn't have to catch up with the competition. Leica isn't either. Pentax needs to make a profit, if there marketshare would stand at 0.05% and they made a profit, that'd be fine.

And you're suggesting Pentax is behind the competition, which overall it isn't - it leads the competition in its class in certain aspects (build quality, weather sealing, bang for the buck, selectable AA filter), is equal in others (image quality etc.) and finally behind in some (AF and video).

Pentax and Leica are 2 very different companies in 2 very different positions. Leica products sell at very high prices, in parts because of the name... I highly doubt it costs that much to make a Leica camera. More than your average DSLR, perhaps, but not _THAT_ much. If they sell one, they make the sort of profit Pentax would have to sell tens or hundreds of cameras for. Could Pentax raise the prices to Leica levels? Sure. Would anyone buy them? Nope. A Leica camera is a luxury item, a collectors item, basically a Rolex (not my favorite watch brand by a long shot, but I've picked the most popular one). Pentax has to be competitive by delivering products that people want to buy, that are better than the competitors or offer better value for money.


Remember the Hasselblad cameras that were essentially regular Sony cameras in a fancy dress, selling at obscene prices? That's what Leica is doing (though the cameras are better than that). Pentax can't do it. Nikon couldn't either. Or Sony, Panasonic, Canon, Fuji, ... they all have to deliver value for money, at least to a certain degree (Canon maybe less so, but they can't be obscene in their pricing, unlike Leica).

[eddie1960]

That's the whole point - Pentax doesn't have to catch up with the competition. Leica isn't either. Pentax needs to make a profit, if there marketshare would stand at 0.05% and they made a profit, that'd be fine.

And you're suggesting Pentax is behind the competition, which overall it isn't - it leads the competition in its class in certain aspects (build quality, weather sealing, bang for the buck, selectable AA filter), is equal in others (image quality etc.) and finally behind in some (AF and video).

Pentax has done a good job carving a niche out for themselves (it was sort of carved out even pre Ricoh, but Ricoh have really done a good job focusing it. Well made high quality WR cameras for active individuals. the promise of build and WR pretty much excludes them from the loss leader market except when running out a model. Given the more limited production capacity (which has been growing but is not even the unit capacity of canons body plants never mind the lens plants - yet.) Pentax is playing it smnart growing while maintaining profit. getting in the entry level loss leader market is a fools game when you are ranked 11th overall in camera sales. the ranking is much higher once you eliminate the point and shoot category but we still trail badly in general on units) Ricoh I'm sure wants to grow as much as we want them to, they want to do it profitably though and that takes time and good mid and long term planning (which we will never hear about, we will here rumours when items are close to market and nothing else except if we work in a higher function at the company and then we will be bound by non disclosure rules)

[FantasticMrFox]

... and that takes time and good mid and long term planning (which we will never hear about, we will here rumours when items are close to market and nothing else except if we work in a higher function at the company and then we will be bound by non disclosure rules)

I'm seriously considering dumping my aspirations in medicine and neuroscience and switch my degree to economics and business, then get into the Ricoh management and finally revel in all this knowledge about their deeper plans and aspirations ...

[Nicolas06]

Pentax and Leica are 2 very different companies in 2 very different positions. Leica products sell at very high prices, in parts because of the name... I highly doubt it costs that much to make a Leica camera. More than your average DSLR, perhaps, but not _THAT_ much. If they sell one, they make the sort of profit Pentax would have to sell tens or hundreds of cameras for. Could Pentax raise the prices to Leica levels? Sure. Would anyone buy them? Nope. A Leica camera is a luxury item, a collectors item, basically a Rolex (not my favorite watch brand by a long shot, but I've picked the most popular one). Pentax has to be competitive by delivering products that people want to buy, that are better than the competitors or offer better value for money.


Remember the Hasselblad cameras that were essentially regular Sony cameras in a fancy dress, selling at obscene prices? That's what Leica is doing (though the cameras are better than that). Pentax can't do it. Nikon couldn't either. Or Sony, Panasonic, Canon, Fuji, ... they all have to deliver value for money, at least to a certain degree (Canon maybe less so, but they can't be obscene in their pricing, unlike Leica).

Pentax is selling 645Z quite well and theses products have huge margin... Still at their current selling price there no competition.

As if Pentax need to sell hundred bodies or lens... That may be true out of K30 or K50 and DA18-55...

I don't think it apply at all to limited, the Da* lenses, or the whole 645 line up bodies and lenses included.

There also fixed cost to many products to recover the R&D, the design and so own... Pentax is far from being a big seller like Canikon... but compared to Leica they can sprend their fixed cost arround many more sales than Leica.

[agruszka21]

Back on topic. Here's a funny story:
I was shooting a small fashion event tonight as one of just five photographers: two gals with canons, two guys with nikons, and me with my k-3 (read to that whatever you want about my gender). After the show, one of the canon shooters came up to me and asked 'what kind of camera is that?'. Instead of shouting through the loud music, I just held it up for her to see the logo, she said: 'Oh, it's a Pentax...' and walked!
Good thing she wasn't my type

[zzeitg]

Back on topic. Here's a funny story:
I was shooting a small fashion event tonight as one of just five photographers: two gals with canons, two guys with nikons, and me with my k-3 (read to that whatever you want about my gender). After the show, one of the canon shooters came up to me and asked 'what kind of camera is that?'. Instead of shouting through the loud music, I just held it up for her to see the logo, she said: 'Oh, it's a Pentax...' and walked!
Good thing she wasn't my type

Consequently, if you want to ball a (narrow-minded ?) chick, you gotta buy a Canikon

[wilson59604]

Well, at least we're the most satisfied....

According to 2011 JD Power survey results:
"Pentax ranks highest in online buyer satisfaction with a score of 899 (on a 1,000-point scale), followed closely by Nikon (891) and Canon (888). Pentax performs particularly well in durability and reliability; variety of features; ease of operation; and shutter speed/lag time, while Canon performs well in the picture quality factor."

2012 Digital Single-Lens Reflex Camera Online Buyer Report | J.D. Power Autos

[kadajawi]

Pentax is selling 645Z quite well and theses products have huge margin... Still at their current selling price there no competition.

As if Pentax need to sell hundred bodies or lens... That may be true out of K30 or K50 and DA18-55...

I don't think it apply at all to limited, the Da* lenses, or the whole 645 line up bodies and lenses included.

There also fixed cost to many products to recover the R&D, the design and so own... Pentax is far from being a big seller like Canikon... but compared to Leica they can sprend their fixed cost arround many more sales than Leica.

The 645Z is such a Leica like product, but how many of those does Pentax sell, and it's a couple of products, vs. all Leica products. Also, the 645Z has a larger sensor, which are usually more expensive to produce. Finally, the 645Z is a competitive product that is very good value for money compared to it's competitors which can easily cost 3x as much (how well must THEY be earning?).


Canon has the cinema cameras as cash cows (why Pentax wouldn't want to compete there is beyond me... IMHO if they wanted to they could, both in terms of bodies as well in terms of lenses. Fast, well made primes? In other words cinema lenses.)


Canon performs well in the image quality factor? lol?

[LensBeginner]

The 645Z is such a Leica like product, but how many of those does Pentax sell, and it's a couple of products, vs. all Leica products. Also, the 645Z has a larger sensor, which are usually more expensive to produce. Finally, the 645Z is a competitive product that is very good value for money compared to it's competitors which can easily cost 3x as much (how well must THEY be earning?).


Canon has the cinema cameras as cash cows (why Pentax wouldn't want to compete there is beyond me... IMHO if they wanted to they could, both in terms of bodies as well in terms of lenses. Fast, well made primes? In other words cinema lenses.)


Canon performs well in the image quality factor? lol?

Regarding the last phrase: my thoughts exactly... how user's perception can be off at times!

Regarding the "cinema" issue, video done right isn't only having a couple of very good primes...

[Nicolas06]

The 645Z is such a Leica like product, but how many of those does Pentax sell, and it's a couple of products, vs. all Leica products. Also, the 645Z has a larger sensor, which are usually more expensive to produce. Finally, the 645Z is a competitive product that is very good value for money compared to it's competitors which can easily cost 3x as much (how well must THEY be earning?).

That the question... In car it is the same. Many think that if you sell luxury car you may make more money and be more successfull. Overall from statistics your margin is not better with luxury cars than average cars. You still need to innovate and your clients will not tolerate any problem from your product.

One might find that some luxury car maker perform quite good, but as do other... And some like volkswagen (literary the car of the people, and that go from Nazi time when hittler wanted affordable car for everybody) but they cover all large spectrum of vehicules with: Seat, Volkswagenn, Skoda, Bentley, Audi, Buggatti, Lamborghini, Porsche, Ducati, Scania or Man.

As for the MF competitor, my understandings is that theses guys simply don't have enough sale to innovate. They do have crappy AF, crappy ergonomics... On the opposite, Pentax just needed to reuse the components of K3 with just a bigger sensor and got something overall far better than the other could provide for 3 time the price. I would not bet for theses competitor to be still there in 10 years if they don't make innovative products.

[kadajawi]

Regarding the last phrase: my thoughts exactly... how user's perception can be off at times!

Regarding the "cinema" issue, video done right isn't only having a couple of very good primes...

Ergonomics and controls are important for video, and a solid codec that can hold up well to grading. Even if that codec is a high bitrate MJPEG... Something that Pentax was capable of in old cameras. The Cx00 line from Canon IIRC doesn't even support 4K and costs a lot... And is successful. Add a SR system that can be adjusted in its behavior and strength and Pentax might have an interesting product (that can in turn influence their DSLRs and mirrorless cameras).

---------- Post added 13-12-14 at 13:13 ----------

That the question... In car it is the same. Many think that if you sell luxury car you may make more money and be more successfull. Overall from statistics your margin is not better with luxury cars than average cars. You still need to innovate and your clients will not tolerate any problem from your product.

One might find that some luxury car maker perform quite good, but as do other... And some like volkswagen (literary the car of the people, and that go from Nazi time when hittler wanted affordable car for everybody) but they cover all large spectrum of vehicules with: Seat, Volkswagenn, Skoda, Bentley, Audi, Buggatti, Lamborghini, Porsche, Ducati, Scania or Man.

As for the MF competitor, my understandings is that theses guys simply don't have enough sale to innovate. They do have crappy AF, crappy ergonomics... On the opposite, Pentax just needed to reuse the components of K3 with just a bigger sensor and got something overall far better than the other could provide for 3 time the price. I would not bet for theses competitor to be still there in 10 years if they don't make innovative products.

There are studies on which car maker earns how much per car... And guess what, luxury brands are doing really well. Why do you think many car makers want to move upscale? Offer luxury products? Ford, Renault, Peugeot, Citroen (DS subbrand), VW, ...

Also, what I've read was that the 645Z is nice, but no competitor to Hasselblad and Phase One. They have better shutters, flash stuff etc. Those cameras are beyond my means and needs, but anyway despite being so much more expensive people still buy those brands. Surely not just because of the name.

It seems like Hasselblad/P1 have some advantages over Pentax and vice versa. For example a 1/500 flash sync speed vs 1/125. That's quite a difference for some. Looks to me like the Pentax is more a competitor to the big Canikons. FF high MP cameras for landscape, while the HassiOnes are more towards studio shooters who need good tethering and high flash sync speeds.