giellaleafapmu
Well-known
I happened to read and be part of both the Q and K-01 threads and they look the same: they start with comment on how ridiculous is the price of the two products and how many design flaws they have, then the price goes down (a lot!) and people start actually buying the camera to find that they are actually quite good or even very good products. Is this a marketing strategy, something like getting a 400 US$ camera, put it on the market at 900 US$ and wait to try and get as many "fans" to buy the camera and then lower the price to what it should have been or is Pentax loosing money on every model they make? Just wondering if anyone here is closed enough to that company or to general camera market to answer this.
GLF
GLF
charjohncarter
Mentor
I don't know about a marketing strategy, but I've had far more problems with Canon than with Pentax. I don't see Canon lowering prices though.
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
Mmmh, I don't know much about (new) Canon, I have the (perhaps not usual among aficionados) feeling that all cameras produced now are damn good and that any time we get a bad picture it is solely our fault. I was wondering about Pentax because the price of their products is usually very high when they hit the market and then it goes down quite a bit. That is not what happens with Ricoh's products so I believed that it was just bad pricing or that maybe they were loosing money on their products. For example the K5 has the same sensor of the D7000 (Nikon) and it is actually a bit slower than the D7000 plus there are not near the same amount of lenses and accessories for the Pentax as there are for the Nikon, still when it come out it was more expensive than the D7000! The K-01 was at about the same price as the D7000 but now went down so much that it is probably the cheapest camera with the same sensor! Ok, I stop, that's anti-me this thread, it doesn't really matter, let's just hope that all companies will do fine and we shall still have a lot of gear to take our wonderful pictures with whatever we like!
I just discovered Pentax and I am already worried about the future...that's unhealthy.
GLF
Godfrey
somewhat colored
You're right, it is.
For a time, 2004 to about 2007, I used Pentax DSLRs exclusively. That was long before the K7 and K5 ... the camera I did most of my work with was the *ist DS, and later the K10D. Good bodies, if a little "low end" on build quality. For lenses, the ones I kept on with the system for were the FA and DA Limiteds ... particularly the DA21/3.2, FA43/1.9, and FA77/1.8 Limited. These are very fine lenses, as was the DA14/2.8 and later DA*50-135/2.8 when it surfaced. Their flash system isn't much to talk about, but with that set of lenses (and maybe a couple others available now), it's a good system and makes terrific photographs.
I later worked with Olympus DSLRs. For me, the FourThirds professional bodies (E-1, E-5) and HG/SHG lenses had too many advantages over the Pentax bodies. My last DSLR is still an Olympus E-1 ... love that camera. Fit the very inexpensive 35mm Macro on it, or the 11-22/2.8-3.5 HG lens, and it is still a competitive image maker. I did miss the FA43, however, as that was/is still my favorite of all the Pentax lenses.
Worrying too much about the equipment future, or about the size of the system's offerings, means that you're distracted from the business at hand, which is making photographs. Most of us (me included) have way more photo gear than we really need and would do well to ignore all the notions of more lenses, more bodies, more mPixels and speed to concentrate more on the subject of making quality photographs. That's what makes a difference.
G
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
It seems we have a lot of gear in common. I am also a E-1 fan (got two of them and still use them a lot) and have the E-3, never got to the E-5 and I shall definitively not do it now. As for the rest what to say? I already apologized... Maybe when I shall have the money I shall try the 77mm and perhaps the 15mm f4.0 and that's it. As far as flash concerns I don't worry too much because I use mostly studio flashes remotely via a generic Pocket Wizard trigger so really which system I use is of no concern for me and, yes, you are right the small stupid unprofessional Pentax I got seems to take terrific pictures...well is capable of, the chap getting actually the pictures is me and so there are some limitations in the whole system, but that's my problem not camera's problem!
GLF
Godfrey
somewhat colored
For what?
Too bad you didn't get to the E-5. Of all the DSLRs I owned (Canon, Nikon, Pentax, and Olympus), it was without a doubt my favorite for the work I was doing with my photo business, and a superb performer in every respect.
When I closed the business, I didn't need what it offered any longer (responsiveness etc) and sold it to another friend, running a little business too, and he's loving it. I don't shoot much with DSLRs now, but can't bring myself to let go of the E-1 and a couple of lenses—I like it too much, and it isn't worth much on the market these days. Better to just keep it and enjoy it when I do want to take it out.
There's nothing wrong with the K5 or what's available from Pentax, a good body that I wish had been available when I was working with Pentax gear. It's much more nicely built than the *ist DS and K10D were. And from what I've seen come out of it from the PDML and other sources, it has a terrific sensor.
G
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
Yep, I heard that a lot but it come out at a time and at a price that made me doubt so finally i never got it. To me the E-1 is impossible to let go because of its shape and its sensor: if Olympus had built the camera specifically for my hands could not have done a better work and despite the 5mpx sensor the pictures it takes are second to none.
GLF
kshapero
South Florida Man
Well it sure enticed me. I sprang for a Q. Can't remember having so much fun. And oh the best camera is the one you always have with you and the Q easily fits in my front pants pocket. Image IQ? Well most of us live with film at ISO 400 and it looks at least as good as that. And the 47mm FOV F1.9 lens is very sweet.
I paid $200 for this.
Shot at 250 ISO
I paid $200 for this.
Shot at 250 ISO
GaryLH
Mentor
To the op..
I think both Pentax and Ricoh marketing is pretty bad.. With maybe the Ricoh being marginally better.
I have been part of two different companies that have been bought by a different company and joined a third company that was in the first year after acquisition. I general, I have found that unless the company really knows what it is doing or the acquiring company is so much stronger and respected then the other company, there is so much in fighting, that u can only hope that the they can get their act together within a year. From a outside spectator with interest in hoping that Ricoh continues the gxr line, the Pentax/Ricoh marriage is now over this hump, but the marketing has not gotten much better.
There are times when I think that average user is a better marketer of their equipment then they are. I bought into the Ricoh gxr system because of user who were out there showing what this camera can do. Same with the guys who are really enthusiastic with regard to the Pentax line, not because of Pentax marketing.
So to the ops other point, I am sitting on a gxr w/ a12 m module right now and currently there is no hint of an a16 update... The Ricoh gxr so,far in mirrorless compact is the best platform outside of Leica for the m/ltm type lenses that I have encountered, so I do not plan to abandon it. The Fuji xp1 and Sony Nex are a close second. I guess what I am trying to say here is that so long as Pentax has a compelling reason to buy in that others do not match, then at end of the day, does it really matter that it may eventually be dead end? The technology curve in digital cameras is constants changing and improving, u need to decide when to buy in. Next year is next year.. The improvements next year do not mean u need to buy in again.
Sorry for the long reply. Not even sure if I came close to answering your question, even in this round about way
Good luck w/ your decision.
Gary
I think both Pentax and Ricoh marketing is pretty bad.. With maybe the Ricoh being marginally better.
I have been part of two different companies that have been bought by a different company and joined a third company that was in the first year after acquisition. I general, I have found that unless the company really knows what it is doing or the acquiring company is so much stronger and respected then the other company, there is so much in fighting, that u can only hope that the they can get their act together within a year. From a outside spectator with interest in hoping that Ricoh continues the gxr line, the Pentax/Ricoh marriage is now over this hump, but the marketing has not gotten much better.
There are times when I think that average user is a better marketer of their equipment then they are. I bought into the Ricoh gxr system because of user who were out there showing what this camera can do. Same with the guys who are really enthusiastic with regard to the Pentax line, not because of Pentax marketing.
So to the ops other point, I am sitting on a gxr w/ a12 m module right now and currently there is no hint of an a16 update..
. The Ricoh gxr so,far in mirrorless compact is the best platform outside of Leica for the m/ltm type lenses that I have encountered, so I do not plan to abandon it. The Fuji xp1 and Sony Nex are a close second. I guess what I am trying to say here is that so long as Pentax has a compelling reason to buy in that others do not match, then at end of the day, does it really matter that it may eventually be dead end? The technology curve in digital cameras is constants changing and improving, u need to decide when to buy in. Next year is next year.. The improvements next year do not mean u need to buy in again. Sorry for the long reply. Not even sure if I came close to answering your question, even in this round about way
Good luck w/ your decision.
Gary
Pioneer
Mentor
I love my Q!!! I don't use digital very much but when I do it is almost always with the Q. It prints to 8x10 beautifully and, if I had a printer that would go bigger, I think I could print even larger with no problem. I still own a few digital SLRs, but they get absolutely no use since I bought the Q. The only digital that gets any use is the M9 and it feels like a monster next to my Q.
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
Sorry for the long reply. Not even sure if I came close to answering your question, even in this round about way
Good luck w/ your decision.
Gary
Well, sure it does get to the point that...probably I am right. I also agree that people using certain products are better at marketing than the original company sometimes. I was amazed for example to see this on a Pentax forum:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/PENTAXQ/ZURPENTAXQ-VERT400.JPG
and a picture of the camera without a lens where the sensor can be seen to be really tiny in the Pentax page (now I can no longer find that picture)!
GLF
Pioneer
Mentor
I am not slamming Pentax. I love and use their products every day. But Pentax has never been well known for their marketing prowess. If you are interested in marketing then Canon is your player. There is a reason that Canon overcame Nikon's lead in the pro market. I sometimes think Pentax would have been smarter to continue to work with Honeywell, or another US company to help market their goods rather than going off on their own.
Ricoh and Pentax seem to be two peas in a pod because another thing that Pentax is known for is developing and producing a stunning product, then abandoning it and moving on. The GXR is a recent Ricoh example but I actually think that Pentax is better at it. The LX is probably the most famous, but the PZ-1p is another famous example. More recent is the K-01, which I am afraid will be dropped in another year or two, if it actually lasts that long. I think the Q was headed in that direction but it seems to have caught on despite the terrible marketing campaign. At the last Photokina they introduced an updated body, a new lens and finally came out with the promised K to Q Mount Adaptor. It may also end up on the garbage heap of history, but it will be a shame if it does happen.
Pentax produces some terrific products but it really relies on viral marketing to make anything happen.
Ricoh and Pentax seem to be two peas in a pod because another thing that Pentax is known for is developing and producing a stunning product, then abandoning it and moving on. The GXR is a recent Ricoh example but I actually think that Pentax is better at it. The LX is probably the most famous, but the PZ-1p is another famous example. More recent is the K-01, which I am afraid will be dropped in another year or two, if it actually lasts that long. I think the Q was headed in that direction but it seems to have caught on despite the terrible marketing campaign. At the last Photokina they introduced an updated body, a new lens and finally came out with the promised K to Q Mount Adaptor. It may also end up on the garbage heap of history, but it will be a shame if it does happen.
Pentax produces some terrific products but it really relies on viral marketing to make anything happen.
FA Limited
missing in action
anytime i hear Pentax, it tugs at my heartstrings a little, i used pentax for about 3-4 years and they definitely had fun lenses (look at my nickname). and now with this FF "confirmation", things will definitely get more interesting. how i wish i could have used the FA limited lenses on a FF digital body. the MZ-S of which i had two was such a great design, if they could only put a FF sensor into it.
http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/bodies/prototypes/MZ-D.html
http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-confirms-full-frame-plans-at-cp.html
yet Pentax through what seems like lack of resources could never do it. i think it made sense, they couldn't even get their autofocus or autoexposure on their digitals working properly (tbh I don't know the K-5II is like), or supply lenses that the community was starving for, is APS-C or FF really that important?
the past few years they have been going for a special niche with the cheapest weathersealed DSLRs and lenses, things like the Q, coloured cameras and it seems like it has been working for them. although i hate that they used the name MX on a point and shoot. pisses me off.
what i think is also hurting them now for new adoption is the ridiculous lens pricing with the new MAP policy. i was thinking of maybe jumping back in with the DA Limiteds, but one look at those prices and there's really no point. and even if they make a FF body, where will the lenses come from? the old FA lenses although nice will probably not hold up on 24 MP sensors and yet they will be in short supply. it's like the 645D where second hand prices shot through the roof because of a lack of supply. what fuji is doing now with the X series, that should have been pentax...
http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/bodies/prototypes/MZ-D.html
http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-confirms-full-frame-plans-at-cp.html
yet Pentax through what seems like lack of resources could never do it. i think it made sense, they couldn't even get their autofocus or autoexposure on their digitals working properly (tbh I don't know the K-5II is like), or supply lenses that the community was starving for, is APS-C or FF really that important?
the past few years they have been going for a special niche with the cheapest weathersealed DSLRs and lenses, things like the Q, coloured cameras and it seems like it has been working for them. although i hate that they used the name MX on a point and shoot. pisses me off.
what i think is also hurting them now for new adoption is the ridiculous lens pricing with the new MAP policy. i was thinking of maybe jumping back in with the DA Limiteds, but one look at those prices and there's really no point. and even if they make a FF body, where will the lenses come from? the old FA lenses although nice will probably not hold up on 24 MP sensors and yet they will be in short supply. it's like the 645D where second hand prices shot through the roof because of a lack of supply. what fuji is doing now with the X series, that should have been pentax...