Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-17-2011, 05:16 AM   #31
Site Supporter
andre-mz5's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Eindhoven
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 268
Like Digitalis already said : all brands will eventually vanish.
If 10 years ago you would have said that GM and Ford would go bankrupt people would have said you're insane.

So listen to Digitalis again : pick up that camera and start shooting.
Who knows you migth get a photo that people will still talk about over 50 years !!!

02-18-2011, 08:40 AM   #32
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,010
I wouldn't worry about your camera lenses being usable in 50 years. There's always going to be an adapter available from somewhere. It's likely that cameras as we are now using won't be around in 50 years. If I was young, I would be more concerned that I will have something to take a picture of in 50 years.
02-18-2011, 09:12 AM - 1 Like   #33
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,314
QuoteOriginally posted by andre-mz5 Quote
Like Digitalis already said : all brands will eventually vanish.
If 10 years ago you would have said that GM and Ford would go bankrupt people would have said you're insane.
I don't think this is quite right.

The issue with GM and the burden put on them and other auto makers by the unions and negotiated pensions and benefits has been seen and known for years. I seem to recall something in the early 1990's being reported about this, and I know many many companies realized that the pensions following the post WWII boom were not sustainable in the long term, and began modifying them,.

the fact that GM took this long to fall off a financial cliff they saw miles in front of them is only due to the unwillingness of both sides, albor and management to address the issue properly.
02-18-2011, 11:58 AM   #34
Site Supporter
Bramela's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Newcastle Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,281
50 years???
I would be more concerned about next year or the next 5 years.
With all the signs of the times, the more important question would be....

What, or will the world be in 50 years time?

Don't worry about it, go for your preference in photo gear and enjoy it now.

02-18-2011, 01:46 PM   #35
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bay Village, Ohio USA
Posts: 1,026
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
I don't think this is quite right.

The issue with GM and the burden put on them and other auto makers by the unions and negotiated pensions and benefits has been seen and known for years. I seem to recall something in the early 1990's being reported about this, and I know many many companies realized that the pensions following the post WWII boom were not sustainable in the long term, and began modifying them,.

the fact that GM took this long to fall off a financial cliff they saw miles in front of them is only due to the unwillingness of both sides, albor and management to address the issue properly.

It doesn't really matter WHY GM went bust. The fact remains that, fifty years ago, they were the largest, strongest corporation in the world. That they made bad decisions, just serves as an object lesson for the likes of Canon and Nikon. As I said in my earlier post, at one time, Pentax outsold N & C combined. Was it bad decsions on the part of Pentax management that lost them so much market position? Probably.

Certainly, Pentax was late coming to the digital party. I was away from photography during the 1980's and 1990's, so I wasn't around to witness firsthand, but I've read that they were a little late with their autofocus film cameras, as well, if you don't count the abortive attempt with the ME F.

Right now, N & C managers seem to be making the right moves to stay on top, but who knows if the next generation of decision-makers at those companies will be as sharp as the current ones, of if they will become complacent and let Pentax or an upstart that doesn't even exist today, knock them off the top.

Fifty years ago, Kodak was one of the dominant forces in the photography world. Today, they are struggling to stay relevant, perhaps even to simply survive. They are on the brink of being bought out by competitors or asset-strippers. Interestingly, Kodak engineers are credited with building the first digital camera in their labs.
02-18-2011, 02:27 PM   #36
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
QuoteOriginally posted by noblepa Quote
Certainly, Pentax was late coming to the digital party. I was away from photography during the 1980's and 1990's, so I wasn't around to witness firsthand, but I've read that they were a little late with their autofocus film cameras, as well, if you don't count the abortive attempt with the ME F.
they weren’t late. at least not in the development. they have always been ahead really, what their problem I think always has been, is being late only in marketing what they have been working on. look at the spotmatic, the ME F, the fabled MZ-D. they were the first on the secene… and then they let everyone pass them up. id say ‘late’ probably isn’t the best description. id say ‘too cautious’ is. of course, ultimately that doesn’t change the history, but yea. cautious. too cautious.
02-18-2011, 05:17 PM   #37
Veteran Member
alohadave's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Quincy, MA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,024
QuoteOriginally posted by Student Quote
The reason I am asking is because I'd like to know whether it is worth it to invest in more Pentax lenses in the long run. If they keep making bodies then fine I will be able to use my lenses but if they go bankrupt... Then I will be stuck with wonderful lenses that I can no longer use.
There is thinking long term, then there is thinking ludicrously long term.

Buy what works for you now, and don't worry about the future. The fact is that Pentax is viable now and selling equipment that works. When it no longer does that, you move on.

I know that for me, even if Pentax went out of business, my gear will continue to work, and my ability to take pictures would not be affected at all.
02-18-2011, 09:23 PM   #38
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bay Village, Ohio USA
Posts: 1,026
QuoteOriginally posted by séamuis Quote
they weren’t late. at least not in the development. they have always been ahead really, what their problem I think always has been, is being late only in marketing what they have been working on. look at the spotmatic, the ME F, the fabled MZ-D. they were the first on the secene… and then they let everyone pass them up. id say ‘late’ probably isn’t the best description. id say ‘too cautious’ is. of course, ultimately that doesn’t change the history, but yea. cautious. too cautious.
I'm not disagreeing with you, but I would point out that the ME F was never followed up on, and it wasn't a very good AF system. There was only one lens for it. It is nothing like the one they finally went with, in the SF1 and what they basically use as their screwdrive AF even today.

The MZ-D was never sold, so while it was one of the first prototypes, it didn't help the company very much. It was several years before the *istD was finally released to the public.

Contrast that to the Spotmatic. Yes, it was a first in several ways, and it sold like hotcakes. The Spotmatic is probably what propelled Pentax to market dominance in the sixties. As I stated earlier, hard as it is to imagine today, in the sixties, Pentax outsold Canon and Nikon, combined!

So, yes, their extreme caution held them back. I don't know if it was new managers that lacked courage, or if the old managers held on too long and became set in their ways, but somehow, Pentax lost its competitive edge. They seem to be fighting to get it back, now. I hope they do.

Hoya indicated, when they bought Pentax, that they were not going to dump huge sums of money into the brand, hoping it would take off. They seem to have some good people, making good products and Hoya seems to be willing to cautiously invest money on targeted projects. The 645D, for example, although I think that they realized that the development money had all been spent, and the product was virtually ready to go. They only way to get any of that money back was to actually go ahead and sell the darned thing. It was a success, and now it is available worldwide.

02-19-2011, 09:43 PM   #39
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by noblepa Quote
In the 1960's (approx. 50 years ago), Pentax outsold Canon and Nikon COMBINED.
In the 60s and 70s, Pentax made and sold more SLRs than ALL OTHER camera makers combined.

QuoteQuote:
Hoya is, I believe, a bigger corporation than Nikon, even though Pentax is a much smaller camera maker.
Nikon is a tiny subsidiary of the Mitsubishi group. Consumer cameras are a small slice of Nikon's imaging pie. Canon could dump its camera operations without much affecting their overall corporate finances -- they likely make more on printer ink carts than on cameras. Sony is an even greater example of the same thing. Olympus, Panasonic, Samsung, Fujica, all are in similar situations -- consumer cameras ain't diddly-squat on their balance sheets.
__________________________________________________________

Back to PenHoya (or is it Hoytax?) -- Hoya's conservative strategy somewhat insulates them from boom-bust cycles. Canikonympus gain market share by costly marketing, and by fronting inventory to retailers, which bites their asses when said retailers go belly-up. Canikon took notable hits when Ritz/Wolf filed for bankruptcy. Pentax gains market share by slowly introducing exemplary new models. PenHoya markets mostly online and thus doesn't have inventory sitting on dusty warehouse shelves. Wander through the tourist-gouging photo shops in Chinatown and Fisherman's Wharf in San Narcisco. They push old overstocks, remainders, etc. Many not-the-latest models are offered -- but not Pentax. As noted, Canikony build more cameras than they can sell, while Pentax can't ship bodies and lenses fast enough to meet demand.

Meanwhile, the Pentax that revolutionized SLRs a half-century ago is arguably not the same Pentax that exists today. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. But remember that Canon was a bit player until they introduced the EOS system a quarter-century ago. Most other major players then are gone now. Pentax is one of the very few to survive the near-death experience that was the digital transition. And IMHO this shows the strength of a conservative business approach.

What will imaging be like in another half-century? Who focking knows? Maybe we'll all have optical implants, with processing and storage being public utilities. Maybe we'll be surrounded by ubiquitous micro-sensors that feed us whatever imagery we want -- read some Vernor Vinge to sense the repercussions. My cheap little TracFone has more raw computer power than the biggest mainframes of a half-century ago. Digicams are basically computers with lenses, and so are subject to Moore's Law. Whatever future you imagine now will be totally out-run by what eventually happens. Bend over and smile.

So, don't worry about far-future cameras. We may all be mutants by then.
02-19-2011, 10:07 PM   #40
Pentaxian
traderdrew's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Florida
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 570
In the next 50 to 100 years I think you can hold a flying camera and program it to chase after a target as it will fly over and around and take photos and remotely send them back to your 3-D LCD or holographic projection as you give it further instructions.

The next 10 years you will see cameras getting smaller and possibly everything rolled into a single camera or DSLRs that are no larger than the K-5. I'm not sure if the market fully wishes to embrace such models right now which are made by some other companies such as Nikon and Panasonic.

Edit: I was just on the pentax.com website and I see there is an X90. I need to investigate this camera.

I see sensors getting better such as the 4/3rds sensor which is still a bit noisy right now

My 500mm which is equivalant of 750mm because of the APS-C sensor. It could become eqivalent of a 2000mm with some new theoretical DSLRs.

I would be nice if my Pentax could give me the option of cropping my APS-C into a 4/3rds or a micro 4/3rds system as I am using it in the field so I wouldn't have to use teleconverters.

Last edited by traderdrew; 02-19-2011 at 10:20 PM.
02-19-2011, 10:11 PM   #41
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bay Village, Ohio USA
Posts: 1,026
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
What will imaging be like in another half-century? Who focking knows?
I agree.

I have always enjoyed the Pentax cameras I have owned. I enjoy the K10D I have right now. I'm sure I will enjoy the next Pentax camera I buy.

I hereby swear off these rather pointless discussions of "will Pentax survive". I am as guilty as anyone of blathering on, as if I knew what I was talking about.

I'm sorry I succumbed to the temptation to add my worthless opinion to this thread.
02-19-2011, 11:34 PM   #42
Veteran Member
timh's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Wales
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 445
Intrigued by the question, I spent the next decade building a time machine. I am back from the future just to let you know that in 50 years everyone will be dead - so don't worry about camera brands too much. I would avoid Samsung products around 2032 though. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to pop back to 1963 and kill JFK - that should solve a whole bunch of problems.
02-21-2011, 06:53 AM   #43
Loyal Site Supporter
jamarley's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New Jersey
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 409
Resistance (to the future) is futile.
02-21-2011, 08:28 AM   #44
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by jamarley Quote
Resistance (to the future) is futile.
"Futile is as futile does. Assimilation is a box of chocolates." -- Forest Gump of Borg

"You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile. Pull my finger." -- Flatulus of Borg

"Borg we are. Fusiliance is retile. Your ass will be laminated." -- Dyslexic of Borg

"I am Bill Gates of Borg. You HAVE been assimilated. You just don't know it yet."
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!
camera, dslr, lenses, pentax, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tell me the good things of the K5 Rick Clark Pentax K-5 20 12-23-2010 02:44 AM
SMC Pentax F 50mm 1.4...does it even exist? mxlinn Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 10-09-2010 04:14 PM
Does anything like this exist for other Pentax DSLRs? PrimeObjectif Photographic Technique 1 12-27-2009 12:05 AM
Good things about LiveView Eruditass Pentax DSLR Discussion 1 11-09-2009 01:37 AM
Things that Fly - And a tire for good measure cputeq Post Your Photos! 9 05-05-2008 10:49 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:21 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