[Arjay Bee]

As for assumptions, people said that Pentax can be like Leica. Here is another assumption: Pentax can't afford to play like Leica because it's user base don't seem to be keen to pay 4000$ for an APS-C.

My reference to Leica is to identify one of a number of camera makers that supplies a niche product - that is the limit to the analogy - pricing puts them in another niche - not a direct competitor to Ricoh cameras at all and so will be able to attract and retain its own cutomer base, further illustrating the point I was trying to make.

completely unrelated business areas are largely irrelevant.

Metaphors are useful for illustrating a point - unrelated industry or not.

[Kunzite]

Metaphors are useful for illustrating a point - unrelated industry or not.

"Proof by analogy is fraud" - Bjarne Stroustrup.

[Pål Jensen]

"
For most people in the current mature camera market the need to upgrade isnt there and so people hold on to current cameras until a replacement, not necessarily an upgrade, is necessary. Market survey data supports this slowdown in upgrade buying behaviour..

Precisely. Pentax is catering for the K-mount user base. Not users of Canon and Nikon lenses. What Pentax need to do is to make the new camera compelling enough so that the users want to upgrade. This explains the lag between the K3 and K-new. Also the position of the KP; both camera owners are potential customers for an upgrade with the K-new....

[gatorguy]

Choices are good. I already said that in my opinion and given the current times, Ricoh risks a lot by developing a mirrorless system now. 3 years ago it could have been the smarter decision. Maybe 3 years from now it will become available a new window for them

In three years it will make even less sense to dive into MILC's.

The market is declining and those remaining mirrorless makers will be fighting over an ever-shrinking group of consumers. None of the camera companies will be able to maintain their current pace of new releases as there won't be enough buyers for the models already built. Not even Canon. There will not be enough buyers to sustain develop of so many new cameras a year. I think Pentax commitment to SLR will look even smarter in hindsight.

Pricing? A race to the bottom will be the nail sealing the coffin for a few of them. Unlike giveaway printers the ink/lens sales won't make up the difference if they continue to be backwards compatible. That's another issue.

Pricing of new models close to cost will not be sustainable, and Pentax will be wise to avoid playing the game Nikon is involved with.

---

Last edited by gatorguy; 07-28-2020 at 03:52 AM.

[Dan Rentea]

In htreen years it wu=ill make even less sense to dive into MILC's. The market is declining and those remaining will be fighting over an ever shrinking group of consumers. None of the camera companies will be able to maintain their current pace of new releases as there won't be enough buyers for the models already built. IMO Pentax commitment to SLR will look even smarter in hindsight.

Maybe. But I can't ignore some similarities with Nokia. They ignored Android system which shifted the phone market up to the point that they had to abandon their platform and lost quite a lot in the process of sticking with the faith in their user base and faith in their platform.

If I had to choose, I would rather see DSLRs put to sleep for good rather than loose a long time player.

---------- Post added 07-28-20 at 10:49 AM ----------

My reference to Leica is to identify one of a number of camera makers that supplies a niche product - that is the limit to the analogy - pricing puts them in another niche - not a direct competitor to Ricoh cameras at all and so will be able to attract and retain its own cutomer base, further illustrating the point I was trying to make.

Leica does mirrorless cameras as far as I know. Also, Hasselblad started to make mirrorless medium fotmat cameras to stay competitive in a changing market, both of them being niche players. It seems that even niche players try to adapt. Fot now, as I said, to me sticking with DSLR is the right choice given the global situation. Someone who has some inside infotmations told me that Canon pushed hard the launch of the R5 and R6 because there is a possibilty to get back locked down in our houses due to coronavirus situation and they wanted to sell as much as they can during this relaxation period the products that were supposed to hit the market at end of March.

Ricoh probably put some money into the new APS-C and if the launch will be pushed next year due to pandemic, won't that affect them even more? I don't think that K-3 II and KP are still relevant in terms of sells for them and K-1 II it's not enough to push customers to stay and to cover their expenses with the development of new cameras/lenses. If the new APS-C will be released next summer, it will be relevant to the users? Again these are questions, assumptions and speculations based on what's happening in this industry.

Here is another question: what if Ricoh decides that keeping compatibility with the old lenses doesn't allow them to expand the features of their cameras and they decide to limit that compatibility? There is an option to do that in order to stay competitive in the market. As much as people see OVF as being the big selling point for a long time to come, I see it gone in 5-7 years because of the generation z which is addicted to gadgets (one reason why Theta sells).

[Kunzite]

Maybe. But I can't ignore some similarities with Nokia. They ignored Android system which shifted the phone market up to the point that they had to abandon their platform and lost quite a lot in the process of sticking with the faith in their user base and faith in their platform.

I would rather see DSLRs put to sleep for good rather than loose a player.

As I just said: "proof by analogy is fraud".

The Nokia analogy isn't more valid than the Kodak one (people often being clueless about what Kodak did, I wonder about Nokia, too...). Pentax isn't a market leader failing to transition towards a disruptive technology; mirrorless cameras don't add the kind of capabilities and versatility to a standard phone, as the smartphone did. We're talking about a small player trying to make DSLRs into a comfortable niche, while the alternative - the mirrorless market - being extremely crowded and difficult to compete on.

But those invalid analogies make us better understand what's the main danger Pentax is facing: propaganda.
People are and will be told how DSLRs will surely die (insert more fake analogies, film vs digital, horse drawn carriage vs modern car), by actors playing with people's emotions to make them fear being left "behind". Can Pentax overcome this, and advertise the advantages of a SLR?
Can they make the SLR cool?

I would rather see at least one camera maker serving the needs of those who want a DSLR.

[Dan Rentea]

As I just said: "proof by analogy is fraud".

The Nokia analogy isn't more valid than the Kodak one (people often being clueless about what Kodak did, I wonder about Nokia, too...). Pentax isn't a market leader failing to transition towards a disruptive technology; mirrorless cameras don't add the kind of capabilities and versatility to a standard phone, as the smartphone did. We're talking about a small player trying to make DSLRs into a comfortable niche, while the alternative - the mirrorless market - being extremely crowded and difficult to compete on.

But those invalid analogies make us better understand what's the main danger Pentax is facing: propaganda.
People are and will be told how DSLRs will surely die (insert more fake analogies, film vs digital, horse drawn carriage vs modern car), by actors playing with people's emotions to make them fear being left "behind". Can Pentax overcome this, and advertise the advantages of a SLR?
Can they make the SLR cool?

I would rather see at least one camera maker serving the needs of those who want a DSLR.

Sorry, I forgot that K1 was released in a "very welcoming" and "relaxed" market.

We can make any kind of analogy and assumptions as long as we don't have the inside informations or proofs to show. Isn't this topic about assumptions and analogies? Or you just presented the business strategy of the last Ricoh management board meeting and I don't saw it so that I can comment based on that information? Propaganda is good for these topics because we have something to talk about. If this stops, being yours, mine or the other coleagues propaganda, it means that the business it's closed and we don't have anything to talk about that fits in the Propaganda threads.

So, call it how you like it. You have zero relevant informations, like the rest of us when comes to what Ricoh should do next. You had inside informations as you said when you told me Ricoh Romania wants to be more customer oriented and they will slowly do something, starting with a new website as a commitement proof. My assumptions back then proved to be more real than your inside informations because there has been 3-4 years and absolutely nothing has changed there. Therefore, please allow me to express my assumptions, wrong or not, as long as I haven't attacked anyone and as long as everybody else is making assumptions in this thread.

[gatorguy]

If I had to choose, I would rather see DSLRs put to sleep for good rather than loose a long time player. :

I don't see a time in the near future where only mirrorless is a realistic possibility so that's not even a consideration is it? You don't have to bury DSLR's to have MILC's and won't in your lifetime IMHO.

But I will note I have a better understanding of your position now. I had misunderstood and thought you loved DSLR's for certain types of photography, mirrorless for others. You now sound like you're committed to mirrorless which can serve all your personal needs, and which you recommend as the direction for the rest of us to take too since you suggest I get used to using them.

You will be less enamored of Pentax no matter what they do as Pentax will never be Canon, or Sony or Panasonic and ship multiple bodies a year. There's never been a time they've had a dozen current models with, for the most part, quibbling differences between them. In just mirrorless alone Canon has 7 current models. Sony has 7 of their own. Panasonic has another 8 I think. Add a dozen and more from "other". What could Pentax possibly give you in an MILC that would sway you to embrace them instead? That's a very honest question.

The only thing I've seen you mention is a cheap price being essential. Race to the bottom isn't a great plan IMO so is there anything else you have as an argument for why they must develop a mirrorless line? Anything Pentax is uniquely positioned to develop? I suspect there's nothing they could do to attract you so you wouldn't be buying no matter what they could do in mirrorless. Am I correct, and if not what do you think Pentax could add that would potentially make you a customer for their MILC over say Canon?

[normhead]

Maybe. But I can't ignore some similarities with Nokia. They ignored Android system which shifted the phone market up to the point that they had to abandon their platform and lost quite a lot in the process of sticking with the faith in their user base and faith in their platform.

If I had to choose, I would rather see DSLRs put to sleep for good rather than loose a long time player.

---------- Post added 07-28-20 at 10:49 AM ----------



Leica does mirrorless cameras as far as I know. Also, Hasselblad started to make mirrorless medium fotmat cameras to stay competitive in a changing market, both of them being niche players. It seems that even niche players try to adapt. Fot now, as I said, to me sticking with DSLR is the right choice given the global situation. Someone who has some inside infotmations told me that Canon pushed hard the launch of the R5 and R6 because there is a possibilty to get back locked down in our houses due to coronavirus situation and they wanted to sell as much as they can during this relaxation period the products that were supposed to hit the market at end of March.

Ricoh probably put some money into the new APS-C and if the launch will be pushed next year due to pandemic, won't that affect them even more? I don't think that K-3 II and KP are still relevant in terms of sells for them and K-1 II it's not enough to push customers to stay and to cover their expenses with the development of new cameras/lenses. If the new APS-C will be released next summer, it will be relevant to the users? Again these are questions, assumptions and speculations based on what's happening in this industry.

Here is another question: what if Ricoh decides that keeping compatibility with the old lenses doesn't allow them to expand the features of their cameras and they decide to limit that compatibility? There is an option to do that in order to stay competitive in the market. As much as people see OVF as being the big selling point for a long time to come, I see it gone in 5-7 years because of the generation z which is addicted to gadgets (one reason why Theta sells).

Folks, don't allow yourself for one minute to believe this guy is anything but a Canon shooter. If he understood why you shoot Pentax and believed in Pentax, he'd be shooting it.

[Kunzite]

Sorry, I forgot that K1 was released in a "very welcoming" and "relaxed" market.

We can make any kind of analogy and assumptions as long as we don't have the inside informations or proofs to show. Isn't this topic about assumptions and analogies? Or you just presented the business strategy of the last Ricoh management board meeting and I don't saw it so that I can comment based on that information? Propaganda is good for these topics because we have something to talk about. If this stops, being yours, mine or the other coleagues propaganda, it means that the business it's closed and we don't have anything to talk about that fits in the Propaganda threads.

So, call it how you like it. You have zero relevant informations, like the rest of us when comes to what Ricoh should do next. You had inside informations as you said when you told me Ricoh Romania wants to be more customer oriented and they will slowly do something, starting with a new website as a commitement proof. My assumptions back then proved to be more real than your inside informations because there has been 3-4 years and absolutely nothing has changed there. Therefore, please allow me to express my assumptions, wrong or not, as long as I haven't attacked anyone and as long as everybody else is making assumptions in this thread.

I didn't say the K-1 was released in a "very welcoming" and "relaxed" market... why are you implying that I did?
For that matter, I really doubt I claimed to have inside information, in a public discussion with you.

I'll repeat - is it the third time? Proof by analogy is fraud.
Analogies are a trap. They're very good at expressing an idea, but often they're used to create an emotional reaction instead of reasoning about the actual subject. DSLRs are obsolete because horse drawn carriages are. Pentax will fail because Nokia did.

I see you didn't notice how I intentionally did not accuse you of anything, but rather observed a problem Pentax - as the DSLR brand - is facing.
And I'm not trying to stop you from posting here; I'm responding to an invalid, PentaxIsDoomed predicting "analogy".

[Dan Rentea]

I don't see a time in the near future where only mirrorless is a realistic possibility so that's not even a consideration is it? You don't have to bury DSLR's to have MILC's and won't in your lifetime IMHO.

I wouldn't kill DSLR line if they can manage to stay competitive when comes to marketing trends. We on the other hand can see that Canon reported that won't release a 5D Mark V, we see niche players like Hasselblad or Leica that started to enter in the mirrorless market also...

But I will note I have a better understanding of your position now. I had misunderstood and thought you loved DSLR's for certain types of photography, mirrorless for others. You now sound like you're committed to mirrorless which can serve all your personal needs, and which you recommend as the direction for the rest of us to take too since you suggest I get used to using them.

You missunderstood me. I loved my 5D Mark IV and I shoot with it along my EOS R, especially when I got out to shoot wildlife because of the OVF which was better than the EVF of EOS R when panning. It also had faster fps with full tracking activated. I suggested that people should play with mirrorless because EVFs improved and because we don't know if a niche player like Ricoh can keep DSLRs alive in the future. Maybe they can, maybe they can't. Playing with mirrorless cameras can't hurt. It's like driving different cars and have fun while doing it.

You will be less enamored of Pentax no matter what they do as Pentax will never be Canon, or Sony or Panasonic. There's never been a time they've had a dozen current models with, for the most part, quibbling differences between them. In just mirrorless alone Canon has 7 current models. Sony has 7 of their own. Panasonic has another 8 I think. Add a couple dozen from "other".

I love to play with any camera because I love photography, I like to be up to date with technologies and from each system I can learn something to put into practice. As long as there are renting options and as long as I have lots of friends using various systems, I love to shoot with everything I can put my hands on.

What could Pentax possibly give you in an MILC that would sway you to embrace them instead? That's a very honest question.

At this moment, given the fact that I started to become interested in video also, it's hard to say. Video aside, if they manage to release an EOS R equivalent with better EVF (refresh rate, not necessary higher resolution), the build quality that we are used to, silent shutter and eye af and if they manage to keep the price difference as it is now between K1 and D850, 5D Mark IV, I would look more closely to Pentax as a possible reinvestment in the brand or as a second system.

I started to see the long term advantages of mirrorless system once 1Dx Mark III was released. I was fascinated about the fact that the flagship Canon camera has a better tracking in mirrorless mode (live view). Then, I saw the video advantage with up to 8 stops of IBIS in the R5/R6, a feature that makes a gimball less necessary for what I plan to do. Then it's the 100% af area with eye af and silent shutter. The eye af made my 5D Mark IV to stay in the backpack at corporate events. Image quality isn't on top of my list in terms of what I want in a camera because there isn't a client of mine who can tell the difference between K-5 II, EOS R or Hasselblad. And I don't look at my images at 100% either. So, my 5D Mark IV was overall probably the best camera I owned, but the eye af of EOS R, the tracking of 1Dx III in mirrorless mode and the 8 stops of IBIS from R5 and R6, with the silent shutter that sometimes was very handy, made me to sell the 5D. One other reason which I think it's on top of my list is the lenses. The new lenses are simply amazing.

I love OVFs, but R6 is quite a bit better on paper than 5D Mark IV at 1000$ less.

The only thing I've seen you mention is a cheap price being essential.

With the majority of Pentax users saying the same when comes to Pentax cameras vs. Nikon, Sony or Canon cameras, then yes, it is (again, in my opinion) a better selling point than OVF.

Race to the bottom isn't a great plan IMO so is there anything else you have as an argument for why they must develop a mirrorless line? I suspect there's nothing they could do to attract you so you wouldn't be buying no matter what they could do in mirrorless. Am I correct, and if not what do you think Pentax could add that would make you a customer for their MILC over say Canon?

If they pack their cameras with tons of features like they do now, then by my part they can sell them cheaper and cheaper. Have you look at the K-New thread where almost everybody expects D500 af level since Ricoh mentioned that the new APS-C will be the best one to date? Everybody has high expectations. It's just they reveal them only in topics like that one. In topics like this everything is perfect.

---------- Post added 07-28-20 at 03:01 PM ----------

I didn't say the K-1 was released in a "very welcoming" and "relaxed" market... why are you implying that I did?
For that matter, I really doubt I claimed to have inside information, in a public discussion with you.

You said that the competition is big in mirrorless. I just responded to that affirmation telling with quoting marks that the same fierce competition has Pentax in DSLR market, starting with Sony who put pressure on all companies and finishing with Canon and Nikon. Remember that K1 was launched and survived to 5D Mark III, D810, D850 (the most balanced DSLR to date) and to mirrorless competition despite entering late in this market.

I'll repeat - is it the third time? Proof by analogy is fraud.
Analogies are a trap. They're very good at expressing an idea, but often they're used to create an emotional reaction instead of reasoning about the actual subject. DSLRs are obsolete because horse drawn carriages are. Pentax will fail because Nokia did.

Based on what do you think these discussions are? Based on assumptions and analogies that even you mention from time to time when suits you.

I see you didn't notice how I intentionally did not accuse you of anything, but rather observed a problem Pentax - as the DSLR brand - is facing.
And I'm not trying to stop you from posting here; I'm responding to an invalid, PentaxIsDoomed predicting "analogy".

I haven't acused you of anything. I said that your inside informations you had were not as good as my predictions and time just confirmed it when comes to Ricoh Romania. It's this an accusation? It's actually a fact that is provable.

You say you're observing things. I observe things too and I expressed my observations, with analogies and assumptions. It's the same when you take your umbrella when you see at meteo that it may rain. You assume it's going to rain. Same with analogies that works from one year old kids who have to eat something they don't like so that they become strong like Popeye and up to old guys like us, bored as hell, as it seems.

[Kunzite]

With the majority of Pentax users saying the same when comes to Pentax cameras vs. Nikon, Sony or Canon cameras, then yes, it is (again, in my opinion) a better selling point than OVF.

A good part of the reason why Pentax stayed back technologically is because they attempted to be cheap. That's not a better selling point. That's how they'd kill themselves.

[Kunzite]

I haven't acused you of anything. I said that your inside informations you had were not as good as my predictions and time just confirmed it when comes to Ricoh Romania. It's this an accusation? It's actually a fact that is provable.

No, is not a provable fact (and there's no Ricoh Romania, as you know). And this is getting quite personal, don't you think?

[Dan Rentea]

A good part of the reason why Pentax stayed back technologically is because they attempted to be cheap. That's not a better selling point. That's how they'd kill themselves.

It's this an assumption? Or a fact? I can't decide...

---------- Post added 07-28-20 at 03:12 PM ----------

No, is not a provable fact (and there's no Ricoh Romania, as you know). And this is getting quite personal, don't you think?

Nothing personal. It's the difference between assumptions and facts. I'm not accusing you because you believed the good intentions of Ricoh Romania or whatever you like to call the company who brings Ricoh in Romania and sell them by themself and to other stores. You assumed they will help Pentaxians by getting involved. It never happened.

[Parallax]

Enough!

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/409718-important-m...oderators.html