[c.a.m]

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.

I've noticed a number of these "horse-drawn carriage" analogies on various forums or blogs. I think you're correct -- they're a trap, into which fall those who fail to think more deeply about the topic. It's easy, but superficial, to compare horse carriages to modern automobiles; in our common everyday lives, we don't see carriages on the streets and motorways, so most folks might conclude that they're only museum pieces. By analogy, they think, the Pentax DSLR concept must also be heading for the bin or museum.

But, a quick search online will reveal a number of modern carriage makers, who produce marvelous vehicles in their niche industry. Robert Carriages in our province of Quebec; Hansen in South Dakota USA, and Glinkowski in Poland all manufacture quality carriages that are priced up to the high $10's of thousands.

The carriage analogy might apply to the Pentax brand, but in the opposite way that the negative naysayers and snipers intend!

- Craig

[iheiramo]

I've noticed a number of these "horse-drawn carriage" analogies on various forums or blogs. I think you're correct -- they're a trap, into which fall those who fail to think more deeply about the topic. It's easy, but superficial, to compare horse carriages to modern automobiles; in our common everyday lives, we don't see carriages on the streets and motorways, so most folks might conclude that they're only museum pieces. By analogy, they think, the Pentax DSLR concept must also be heading for the bin or museum.

We recently bought horse carriage

They still sell for enthusiasts and those who do carriage races professionally. So a niche product, but they still exist. Just like Pentax can exist providing DSLR to enthusiasts who prefer OVF. Maybe analogy isn't wrong, but the interpretation

[Wasp]

I think Ricoh knows a whole lot more anout what they have to think about than you do.

Well, if I had USD1000-1400 burning a hole in my wallet, a new DSLR with an APS-C sensor is unlikely to be be on my shopping list. For that I can choose from any number of brand new full frame MILCs. Looking at an EVF may deprive me of some warm, fuzzy feeling of looking directly at my subject but I am OK with that. Focus peaking and manual focus lenses FTW- that's how I roll.


At the upper end of that range, I could even look at a lightly used K-1. Perhaps Ricoh is competing with themselves in that regard. I've heard that it's a big problem for Apple with their phones. There is a booming market for used iPhones that do not contribute to their bottom line.

[gatorguy]

Well, if I had USD1000-1400 burning a hole in my wallet, a new DSLR with an APS-C sensor is unlikely to be be on my shopping list. For that I can choose from any number of brand new full frame MILCs. Looking at an EVF may deprive me of some warm, fuzzy feeling of looking directly at my subject but I am OK with that. Focus peaking and manual focus lenses FTW- that's how I roll.


At the upper end of that range, I could even look at a lightly used K-1. Perhaps Ricoh is competing with themselves in that regard. I've heard that it's a big problem for Apple with their phones. There is a booming market for used iPhones that do not contribute to their bottom line.

You like mirrorless. There are photographers who do not. A lot of them AAMOF, and some who simply will not buy anything other than an SLR.

That "any number of full-frame MILC's" would be a non-starter for them, just as you assume a $1000 FF mirrorless or the older K1 will be a better overall camera than the K-new and thus wouldn't consider one for yourself. A bit early for those assumptions IMHO but everyone has their opinions.

---

Last edited by gatorguy; 07-28-2020 at 11:08 AM.

[monochrome]

Well, if I had USD1000-1400 burning a hole in my wallet, a new DSLR with an APS-C sensor is unlikely to be be on my shopping list. For that I can choose from any number of brand new full frame MILCs. Looking at an EVF may deprive me of some warm, fuzzy feeling of looking directly at my subject but I am OK with that. Focus peaking and manual focus lenses FTW- that's how I roll.


At the upper end of that range, I could even look at a lightly used K-1. Perhaps Ricoh is competing with themselves in that regard. I've heard that it's a big problem for Apple with their phones. There is a booming market for used iPhones that do not contribute to their bottom line.

OK then. But $1,000 - $1,400 isn’t the K-new price point, so you aren’t a candidate. K-1 is 2016 technology, which was 2013 technology at time of issue. I wouldn’t pay less than $1,800 for a new FF camera.

[Rondec]

Well, if I had USD1000-1400 burning a hole in my wallet, a new DSLR with an APS-C sensor is unlikely to be be on my shopping list. For that I can choose from any number of brand new full frame MILCs. Looking at an EVF may deprive me of some warm, fuzzy feeling of looking directly at my subject but I am OK with that. Focus peaking and manual focus lenses FTW- that's how I roll.


At the upper end of that range, I could even look at a lightly used K-1. Perhaps Ricoh is competing with themselves in that regard. I've heard that it's a big problem for Apple with their phones. There is a booming market for used iPhones that do not contribute to their bottom line.

I think Ricoh is not competing with their own cameras. One of the difference between Ricoh and other brands is how frequently they release new cameras and how targeted those cameras are.

Ricoh releases new cameras every couple of years per camera line -- longer for the full frame line. By the time that the K-1 II sequel comes out, the folks who are currently shooting it will be really excited for a new camera. The same with those who have been shooting with a K-3 II for many years and have been wanting a true sequel (not a KP).

Releasing four or five mirrorless cameras (as Nikon and Canon are doing) at slightly different price points and specifications is much more likely to sell against themselves than what Ricoh is doing. It still feels like these companies (particularly Sony!) have way too many models and a bit of consolidation would give them more stability in the long run. But what do I know?

[pathdoc]

Pentax made the right call because R&D is expensive. If you take your technology in a completely new (to you) direction and it doesn't work, then you either have to be flush with cash to survive the loss you took or you risk going under. Ricoh Imaging knows it doesn't have the resources to survive an unsuccessful leap to Mirrorless, and Ricoh as a greater entity would probably not save them from the axe a second time. Pentax justified their rescue by turning out some damn good gear, however you might choose to measure it against that of others, and making sure that their legendary reputation for legacy lens support remained unbroken.

Canon and Nikon took the mirrorless gamble to compete with Sony and Fuji, and they lost - they tried to jump into a niche that was already well catered for and are currently in the position of trying to sell into a declining market to recoup their R&D. Blame COVID all you want, blame the market, blame the way they handled the whole interconnected R&D/marketing thing, blame the mount discontinuity, whatever - but this is what happened.

Fuji, when they went into mirrorless, wasn't undercutting an existing line of DSLRs they were already selling. Fujica is in the remote past, and they could start with a clean sheet of paper. In addition, they had the good fortune to have done everything right and produced something that a lot of people want. I tried an XT-2 in a store a year or so ago, and I had to admit that if I wasn't already up to my eyeballs in Pentax and happy with what it does for me, the purchase would have been almost automatic. It was tempting as it was, especially with my wife - who knows how much Pentax stuff I own - practically egging me on to buy it.

Minolta made the deliberate decision to cease existing as a camera company; Sony is the technological continuation of that without the brand name. They had the good fortune or good judgement to shift to mirrorless at precisely the right time, and they too offered something that lots of people wanted.

The same thing as happened to Minolta is now happening to Olympus, although it feels like less of a voluntary thing. Minolta got out before they were forced out, although the writing was IMHO already on the wall. Minolta's end felt like an acceptance of the inevitable. Olympus's end has more of a clang of doom about it.

Pentax knows that trying to go mirrorless will break it. Sony, Fuji, Canon, Nikon, Olympus (that stock which remains unsold), Panasonic, and Leica digital are all in that pond now. There's no room for anyone else, and Pentax knows it.

[house]

About horses, carriages, kodak. They are all part of important narratives that maintain a coherent story to support certain economical and political ideologies. As well as ideas about history and progress.

Its quite fascinating to see this heavy idealogical munition applied to minor discussions about camera brands.

For those that have learned these stories from early childhood and see slr vs milcs through that lens will never be able to see it otherwise because it would shake how they see the world.

[MikeMcE]

Hmmmm I recall a totally different reason for Minolta's bye bye, and as a former Maxxum Owner and factory trained technician. Seems the “Wonderful” tech used to ace the AF market was stolen!

[gatorguy]

Hmmmm I recall a totally different reason for Minoltas bye bye, and a former Maxxum Owner and factory trained technician. Seems the “Wonderful” tech used to ace the AF market was stolen!

The Honeywell AF patents?

[luftfluss]

I've heard that it's a big problem for Apple with their phones. There is a booming market for used iPhones that do not contribute to their bottom line.

It's the circle of life. People sell their older iPhones in order to afford the new model. If there weren't a booming market for used iPhones, that would indicate Apple is not selling that many new ones.

[MikeMcE]

The Honeywell AF patents?

Yeppers......major loss of face in Japan.



For getting caught!



https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/business/1992/02/08/honeywell-wins-96...-d99e872edd5b/