|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
05-24-2019, 09:41 AM
|
| |
I think it’s boriscleto time. Again.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
05-24-2019, 07:31 AM
|
| |
@Trickortreat Dude.
Ever heard of unfunded pension liability? Free cash flow? Consumables versus durable items? EPA? Overcapitalization? (Can you say Nikon?)
You cite as an example the demise of an industry (Film), not a product configuration (Mirror). A better analogy might be whether smartphones will replace imaging devices altogether, including Canon, Nikon, and Sony, your MILC and my SLR, Fuji, Panny and Oly - the whole thing.
Or maybe a couple small niche players will survive that and thrive. Hmmmmm Who might that be?
AFA Pentax, do you know how much of their Gross Revenue was derived from multicoating license fees before Hoya went after the real estate and medical equipment? No? But you can make unsupported, smug, sweeping statements on an internet Forum. So what company bought Kodak’s valuable assets in a hostile takeover and sold the lower ROIC operations for a pittance?
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
05-23-2019, 08:14 PM
|
| |
Pentax and Ricoh experiment with technologies before going all-in with them. - K-01 was a K-30 w/o the mirror, but a new IBIS system and greatly improved* LiveView
- MX-1 had a tilt screen (even if it was a rebadge)
- K-70 and KP had the Accelerator chip before K-1ll
- GRlll has touch screen AF
I really can’t see them putting an EVF on a KP though. The entire electronic architecture is designed to support OVF. I think they’d need to start from the ground up mostly because the real technology advance in MILC’s is in the manufacturing process, not the camera body.
More machine operations, fewer hand operations. It is comparatively easy to design a camera. Designing a camera that can be assembled profitably; buying the machines; managing the supply chain and bringing it all together, profitably - that’s the hard and expensive part. Ricoh cannot afford another K-01
* edited
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
05-23-2019, 03:59 PM
|
| |
Pentax wouldn’t have to pay a dime to license a Sony or Leica mount. You and i, however, would have to pay a prohibitively high price to Sony and Leica for a Pentax camera.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
05-23-2019, 03:53 PM
|
| |
I actually agree with most of the second part. Pentax chooses to be different - maybe be they have to make the best of their situation - but this incessant carping on no MILC and declaration of imminent doom because they are different has become banal.
I well recall 4Q/2008 and 1Q/2009 when the hedge fund managers strutted around New York and London like demigods, proclaiming their superior insight and the imminent doom of all long-only investors and investment managers. Which of course was the top for their style of negative investing - and the bottom for traditionalists.
Can you guess what a classic contrarian would say about the mirrorless camera market today?
The deflation isn’t over yet. At least one overcapitalized company will exit the imaging business in the next 36 months, perhaps as many as three. But MILC’s aren’t the internet or smartphones. They aren’t disruptive, they’re only evolutionary, and only slightly at that. If you want to worry, worry about what 5G will do to the entire industry in the next 5 years. Worry about China putting effort behind their 5G standard and locking out the western alliance .
Interchangeable lens cameras are more likely to disappear altogether than are MILC’s likely to completely displace DSLR’s.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
05-23-2019, 03:36 PM
|
| |
Empty, vacuous chatter unless you can cite sources and give examples.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
05-23-2019, 03:21 PM
|
| |
Use of the expression “ hop on to” frames the entire argument.;)
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
05-21-2019, 09:33 PM
|
| |
I think the critical word in the entire section on returning MILC shooters is “some”. So many people have drunk the mirrorless Kool-Aid that no one hears nuance - or even direct words - any more. Will OVF’s and mirrors die or will the two systems co-exist as tools for different uses? A contrarian would say at this point, given the overwhelming narrative in favor of MILC, the more likely outcome is some people return to dSLR’s.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
05-21-2019, 09:25 PM
|
| |
The thing is, on K-1 I can shoot my 50-ish manual lenses as I would on an adaptered mirrorless, except I use the angled LCD as if it is a waist-level finder instead of an EVF as an eye-level finder.. I use the WLF on my LX from time to time, so what’s the difference? If I need magnified Live View to achieve critical focus (I don’t) I have it in my DSLR. I can spend the $3,000 for a top-flight MILC on a couple * lenses instead.
|
