[wed7]

Nice data we have there. Pentax did really slow down after their digital FF announcement. Only 2 lenses after that initial 6!,

And from someone who wants to start photography or even aspire to become a professional in the future, it is better to invest into other system than Pentax.

[zapp]

Good start. How to distinguish between updates and new designs. Pentax introduced HD coating to DA lenses which is not the same as new designs. Also take into account the lens base before 2010 to show how much was there originally and how many lenses were added or replaced. And yes please separate by mount and coverage (apsc/ff). Do you count TCs as a lens?
What conclusions can one draw from the table? 6 new lenses in 2020 in Pentax land? *85, 4/70-200, TC1.4, 100Macro, 645 lens.

[biz-engineer]

3. Fujifilm looks like raised their game dramatically.

4. I can’t tell what Pentax’s strategy anymore,

ILC is a "long in the tooth" business because proprietary lens mount add friction to market share. It takes many years for a successful strategy to pay back. There is a delay of about five years before we see strategy impact. Fuji strategy now seem to pay off. Pentax mainly failed to have a five years strategy, they never made any product line with a five years testing period, usually Pentax made one model and if the revenue wasn't right within two years of product release they backed-off. Sony had a 10 years strategy, they kept investing in their lineup for many years, and it final paid off. Pentax had shorter and shorter strategy that eventually became tactic (no strategy at all), falling from number 3 when I bought my first Pentax, to meaningless brand of today.

Companies that are prolific lens-producers (Nikon and Olympus come to mind) have been hemorrhaging cash in recent years, while Pentax, as far as anyone can tell, is not.

That's because companies allow negative cash flow / losses in the short term in order to stay alive in the long term. Pentax doesn't bleed, but they lose market share to the point that it is impossible for Pentax to bounce back. Nikon are bleeding now, but the Z system will get more and more appealing, at which point more people will buy. Making ILC camera is a long term business.

[Madaboutpix]

Another thread that, from the commendable compilation of some figures, has taken the inevitable turn towards unless-Ricoh-does-more-Pentax-is-doomed-and-let's-be-eeyorish-because-the-grass-is-so-much-greener-elsewhere.

Now, would I love to see a higher rate of new-lens releases from Ricoh? I guess so, who wouldn't? Would I want them to enter the quick-and-dirty game in order to get that, or want them to become totally irresponsible about their spending? Nope, I certainly wouldn't. Do I need an F1.2 or even F1.4 option for every major FL? Am I eager to lug around those honking lenses with me all day? Can I afford even to buy a fraction of all the lenses on my wishlist that Ricoh already offers?

Plus, is the grass really so much greener on the, say, Fujifilm or Sony side of the fence? He may not be Roger Cicala, but some of the recent hands-on comparisons done by Li on his Cameraville tube channel left me with the impression that some of the Fujifilm and Sony glass is arguably overpriced and optically less than stellar if pitted against similar Pentax offerings. I, for one, can get pretty excited about the new APS-C flagship in the making, or some items already appearing on the roadmap. And otherwise, I'm shooting gear that still keeps giving and rewarding me whenever I get it out.

---

Last edited by Madaboutpix; 12-27-2019 at 05:29 AM. Reason: Bit more nuance

[Not a Number]

Were 645 and Q lenses included?

[luftfluss]

...but some of the recent hands-on comparisons done by Li on his Cameraville tube channel left me with the impression that some of the Fujifilm and Sony glass is arguably overpriced and optically less than stellar if pitted against similar Pentax offerings.

To be blunt, the Cameraville guy seems incompetent. People here like him because he seems to favor Pentax, but his methodology is poor and inconsistent.

That said, from my own research I have no doubt that the new 11-18 is at least as good as the Fuji 8-16 over their shared range and the 150-450 is better than the Fuji 100-400.

[Madaboutpix]

To be blunt, the Cameraville guy seems incompetent. People here like him because he seems to favor Pentax, but his methodology is poor and inconsistent.
That said, from my own research I have no doubt that the new 11-18 is at least as good as the Fuji 8-16 over their shared range and the 150-450 is better than the Fuji 100-400.

Well, methodological rigour doesn't seem to be his forte nor his stated intention, nor do I have delusions about his level of competence, and I don't necessarily agree with Li's conclusions either. However, the point I was trying to make was that recent Pentax glass fares actually pretty well in comparisons that are based on real-world photographic capabilities, particularly when used on newer expert-level bodies and operated by photographers who know what they're doing.

More bluntly put, Ricoh has already given us quite a bit of competent glass, clearly intent on making every item count, and I'm positive they will do anything within reason to continue on that course.

---

Last edited by Madaboutpix; 12-27-2019 at 07:49 AM.

[luftfluss]

Well, methodological rigour doesn't seem to be his forte nor his stated intention, nor do I have delusions about his level of competence, and I don't necessarily agree with Li's conclusions either. However, the point I was trying to make was that recent Pentax glass fares actually pretty well in comparisons that are based on real-world photographic capabilities, particularly when used on newer expert-level bodies and operated by photographers who know what they're doing.

More bluntly put, Ricoh has already given us quite a bit of competent glass, clearly intent on making every item count, and I'm positive they will do anything within reason to continue on that course.

Not just the recent glass! Last month I acquired a DA 12-24, took it to my usual testing spot and found it had better flare resistance, less distortion, and better extreme corner sharpness than a much newer UWA from another brand.

[luftfluss]

That's because companies allow negative cash flow / losses in the short term in order to stay alive in the long term. Pentax doesn't bleed, but they lose market share to the point that it is impossible for Pentax to bounce back. Nikon are bleeding now, but the Z system will get more and more appealing, at which point more people will buy. Making ILC camera is a long term business.

Given how small Pentax (the company) is, can we judge it by the standards we use to judge other camera companies?

I guess it is easy for me not to be down on Pentax - I am happy with my K-3 II & K-70 & K-01, I have 30-40 lenses from 12mm to 600mm, a few well-specified legacy lenses and some nice (and moderately-priced) DA glass, and I'm not waiting for... anything. I just have to work on being a better photographer.

Edit: I really should sell a few lenses. I've got too many and it's sort of clouding things.

[bertwert]

Unfortunately, I think when Pentax does give us a wide-ish WR prime, it's going to be large.

Yeah, right now that seems to be the trend.

As a walkaround lens for hiking, the 21 is perfect, I don't need it to be faster, or better razor sharp optics. Just some WR would be nice, especially using it for multi-day trips in the winter.

What would be nice, would be to revamp all the Limited as WR versions - though I'm not sure how practical that is to do. It shouldn't be too hard, especially as they're primes as well. A couple seals - at the mount, where the focus ring moves. round the front.

[mconwxdr]

6 new lenses in 2020 in Pentax land? *85, 4/70-200, TC1.4, 100Macro, 645 lens.

I hope the FF wide angle prime is one of them. It's been on the road map for at least a year now. This is a glaring hole in the lineup.

I am looking forward to the 70-200/4 though, assuming the IQ is better than the 55-300 PLM (I want it for APS-C).

[biz-engineer]

Given how small Pentax (the company) is, can we judge it by the standards we use to judge other camera companies?

For me there are two way of seeing Pentax:
Is my Pentax kit able to deliver high quality images: yes.
Does Ricoh have a sound strategy for Pentax in the long term: I'm not so sure, I belive they only play for short term financial results, I see it in the way they (do not) release new lenses.

[Not a Number]

I don't know if you really draw any conclusions from the data other than the bigger the company the more lenses they release. Doh!

[mikesbike]

One reason for the bigger companies issuing more new lenses is the fact they have more formats to make lenses for.

Pentax has only a few more holes in their lens lineup, and these for FF and for APS-C period. The recent issuance of expensive, top-quality lenses like the DFA 50mm f1.4 (FF) and the DA* 11-18mm f/2.8 (APS-C) shows that Ricoh is serious regarding the 2 Pentax ILC formats they have active. The reason for greater Pentax activity regarding new lenses some years ago is because there had been numerous absences in their lineup which were being populated.

I don't know if an update of an established lens counts. Like the HD versions of the FA 35mm f/2, or some of the DA Limiteds.

[BillO]

I have not bought a brand new Pentax lens since 1996. Even then the models I bought (FA* 600/4 & A* 200/4 macro) had been on the market for some years. I have everything I need and much I don't. The only thing I have been thinking about (for some time now) is selling the 600 & the 200 macro and my Tamron 300/2.8 and replacing those 3 lenses with a F* 250-600 (for convenience and versatility in the field) and an FA* 200/4 macro (for AF) - but they are not new lenses. However, they are better than anything that Ricoh currently make in their classes.

If Ricoh were to change the mount and bring out a full line of new lenses to cover the needs of everyone from the casual snap shooter to the pro they would still not sell me a new lens. At my age, I'm not going to build another full set of equipment, and if for some strange reason I did, I'd go with whoever had what I needed ready to go - the name on the equipment in that case would be the least of my worries, but doubt it would be "Pentax".

Since I do own K-mount lenses, I am interested in new bodies I can use with them. Since I shoot mostly wildlife I am mostly interested in APSC format. I'm looking forward to the (hopefully) upcoming APSC flagship - but if it does not improve substantially on the K-3 II Ricoh will have likely lost any opportunity to do business with me again. I'll just dip into the used market until they are shoveling dirt over my coffin.

Pentax are not the only kid in the game as far as lenses go either. While not a full-time pro, I have made a good deal of money with my camera. Most of that was using a Tokina ATX Pro 28-70/2.6-2.8 to shoot motorcycle racing. It has paid for itself 100's of times over. I bought that lens over the FA* 28-80/2.8 because I needed a lens right away and it was both more available and fit my budget at the moment. Sure, the Pentax lens is(was) better, but would I have earned more using it? But let me tell you, the build quality on that Tokina is awe inspiring. The punishment it has endured over the years has been tremendous and it barely shows signs of use. Don't use it much any more as I no longer do that kind of photography, but it has earned my respect and a place in my showcase.


I have pretty much every Pentax item I have ever bought since the mid '70s. I love the stuff, but since THK took over, and then Ricoh, things on the lens side have just not inspired me. Yeah, I know some isolated nice stuff has been produced, but none of it nice enough for me to toss what I have in favor of them.