|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
04-02-2017, 03:01 AM
|
| |
Theses lenses look more to be a show up of what is possible etc than made for everyday practical shooting for most of Pentax customers.
Well if it work it make sense, I guess having some review showing that Pentax has the best performing lenses of all the FF mounts for example would shake things a bit.
I would still like to see some small ltd lenses in the roadmap through... In particular around 15-25mm and around 120-150mm...
It would also make sense to provide 2-3 DFA plastic wonder, in particular around 85 and in the 20-28mm range. Apparently the existing one perform ok on FF but they could also be rebadged.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-31-2017, 12:17 AM
|
| |
The basic strategy of camera manufacturer is to have cheap camera bundled with kit lens sometime 2 lenses. That where the volume is and you don't make much money with it because people will compare prices. Half of the market approximately will never buy anything else except maybe another camera kit when the old fail. The opportunity at that point is not to upsell theses people with better lenses, they don't get it but to explain how better the high end camera, this tend to work much better. How pixel shift is better, how KP has better high iso. At that point they don't really understand anything as new customers and they all think the camera is important and the lens isn't. So you can sell a KP or K70 to them instead of a K50.
Then a few percent will grow into photography and buy new bodies and lenses. They may finish up with 10K$ invested or more and tied to your echosystem. But the key point is that if you didn't lure them into your echosystem and they got to another echosystem they are quite unlikely to switch.
You can't make a lot on expensive lenses and cameras if you don't get the beginners if your echosystem to begin with. Because the few % will end up buying the 55-300 PLM or a 50mm f/1.8 or a 16-85. And then it become smarter to stay in your brand because you can still use your past investment...
That's why it is so important to have good enough camera and lenses in entry level for people to feel like the brand is nice, but crap enough that they are willing to upgrade. That's not easy, but basically that the job of marketing.
And no, Pentax kits are not with the 55-300PLM. Sure there the 18-135 lens that is true gem but that get bad rep for sharpness from people that don't understand its appeal, but there 2 many case where you get the 18-55 screw drive alone or with 50-200.
THe 55-300PLM is already part of the upgrade cycle. I guess simply because at $350€ and as not being a transtandard a K50 kit would already be $1000, and a KP it would be $1800! Even the 18-135 this is the same issue, often it is already part of the upgrade cycle because it is already $800-1200 for non flaship camera kit to get one. That's expensive.
And that's bad because for most people the 18-135 or a 17-70C are the best overall compromize with also 17-50 f/2.8 from tamron/sigma + any of the 70-300 / 55-300. But that's already too expensive.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-30-2017, 11:41 PM
|
| |
But this mean that if Pentax decide to make a nexw super tele prime, the problem may be that this new super tele doesn't fit your needs neithers: too big or too slow or whatever...
So even if Pentax release a new one, it may not sell to you or others. That's exactly the problem. Pentax can afford to have 33-4 lenses around 35mm for all kind of needs, same for many transtandard with different compromize. But if we need 3-4 super tele prime to cover the different use case that's the problem.
The problem is we have a super tele prime, and you don't want it! The problem is you can use it on an APSC body that mean TC + no vigneting for free, but that not good enough for you.
I perfectly understand why you don't want it, no issue, but it is clear why that a problem for the manufacturer too.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-29-2017, 10:28 AM
|
| |
You don't get it, I have no issue about 600 f/4 that Pentax would make the most money... or any other lens like that. The problem is not me or you. You don't like what I say you, that the market is tiny. This has nothing to do with me liking or not the idea of a 600 f/4. This is about the likelyness of it happening and the opportunity for the brand
Making something like a 600 f/4 is a big issue because you can't afford to have distributors all over the world to have at least one each because just that mean you'll have to make a few thousands and need 20-50 years to sell eveything and by that time the gear would be outdated. If it is only available at Pentax Ricoh website and you can't try it before, this will reduce sales.
That's money spent and engineer time + factory time and warehouse space + additionnal repair service cost... Usually the money shall be spent were there the maximum return on investment.
I don't think whatever you say this is on 600 f/4... And it is not like theses are the only lenses that we could think of: official FF 200 f/2.8 and 300 f/4 lenses (DFA, not DA), a 300 f/2.8, a 100-300 f/4, 200-400 f/4, 150-600, 135mm f/2, 70-200 f/4, 24-105 f/4 24-200, 28-300, 15, 20, 24, 28, 35mm... Once you covered all that for FF, revamped all the SDM lenses for APSC, added an APD lens, 1 or 2 with tilt shift, you also grown the 645 echosystem, you expended maybe to mirrorless etc... You may finally find yourself in a situation where 600 f/4 is the best move...
Currently if you are in Pentax and want a 600 f/4 in K mount, your best luck is to look for it used. If you want it new and shiny you may wait 5, 10, 20 years for it, or maybe even not get it at all. Never. If you don't go buy it where it is available, it is admiting you don't need it that much anyway. Not willing enough to find one used or to buy one at Nikon or Canon with a body to match.
You'll complain but that you, not me that miss the lens... That you not me that complain we need it but don't get it and have to live without it because you don't take the obvious decision to get what you claim you want.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-29-2017, 10:08 AM
|
| |
Again long lenses like that are not what most pro use. You friends are maybe all pro or not even, just enthousiasts. There many practice in photography and theses very long prime lenses targe a very specific practice at the expense of being expensive and heavy.
The thing is it quite difficult to make a living photographing wildlife and the few sports where it can make sense are not that many and even sometime sponsored by the brand.
Worse for wildlife the best shots are often made at shorter focal length...
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-28-2017, 11:59 PM
|
| |
Nobody buy theses lenses you know... And as being the best way to grow a company or not, this is a ridiculous claim. You can make lot of money targeting any kind of market.
The least problem of Pentax is the lack of a 600 f/4.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-28-2017, 11:54 PM
|
| |
We don't speak of a $500 lens but more of a $8000-$15000 lens. The kind of lens that alone cost more than all the other gear you have combined.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-28-2017, 03:21 PM
|
| |
Let's remember that people are perfectly able to get a 600 f/4 and manage perfectly average cropped pictures of ducks/sparrows/squirels at high from their backyard all the year ;)
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-28-2017, 03:17 PM
|
| |
The whole thing about risk mitigation and switching maybe?
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-27-2017, 12:25 PM
|
| |
Counting the typical price of such lenses, the logic is to select the lens then check the body that is compatible. Your problem is then solved.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-26-2017, 03:18 AM
|
| |
On DSRL, yes, on mirrorless, no there great WA, not too big, high quality and not as expensive as the FF equivalent. Sure the most expensive FF may stay better but for double price body and double price lens, that's to be expected...
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
03-01-2017, 02:04 PM
|
| |
Some things are expensive, some others are not.
Using the new coating => cost = 0 because you need it for other lenses anyway.
Changing the diaphragm / making the lens APD => 0 investment in R&D, cost is the added inventory, but if you need a new batch anyway, that's near 0.
Changing the body / quick shift / adding WR => cost is small, 0 investment in R&D, cost again is mostly added inventory. For WR it may depend of design but 55-300 shown it can be done.
Different AF motor => new focussing group = full lens redesign = a different lens = Quite Expensive but if the lens sell well that's no issue except you have limited resource for that or you need to outsource.
So giving us DFA ltd with quick shift, better coating, new body, WR and rounded apperture blades is no issue. Like the HD DA as long as we keep screw drive. and that is justified if you want to produce a new batch of the lenses anyway and also want to modernize the line.
But there much more to the R&D to the final price of lenses. There the expected volume. Maybe the 55-300 PLM cost in R&D is more than the new DFA50 f/1.4 or a totally new DFA31, but the 55-300 will sell many order of magnitude time more. So the R&D cost per unit is much lower.
There also the price of manufacturing the lens, the target quality/finish, the work involved. I think that the FAltd may need lot of work and that may be also part of their old design. Reality is the current factories are not optimized for theses lenses. Too old design, not optimizations and a design that likely prioritize ultimate quality over cost of manufacturing.
Finally, you typicall sell for as much as you can. Part of the game is to ask for a high price when the thing is quite new. As long as people buy it, why not?
Changing the AF technology is the same as creating new lenses. Theses new lenses may be DFA limited, they may even share the same focal length, design philosophy etc... They not behave the same. Maybe they be better, maybe worse, they'll be different.
|
