Pentax — a Japanese Leica? Not really ...

Started May 23, 2013 | Discussions thread
Alex Sarbu Veteran Member • Posts: 9,393
Re: Pentax — a Japanese Leica? Not really ...

Tan68 wrote:

I will reply because you have made some comments that  I find interesting...  However, I am not really interested in a protracted exchange with you  ;^)

Alex Sarbu wrote:

Tan68 wrote:

When only Canon had a full frame camera there was no other choice, of course.  If Pentax had released a FF camera then, they would have been the only alternative.  They would have been considered for that reason alone: the only other game in town.  If I had Nikon and wanted FF, I would have had to leave the brand.  I could have decided on Pentax or Canon.

Contax, then Kodak had their full frame DSLRs before Canon (Kodak announced theirs one day earlier than Canon).

I don't think that changes much in what I wrote.  Your comment is almost a non sequitur...

Not exactly. We all know what happened with Contax, right? They used the same sensor Pentax abandoned.

OTOH, Nikon joined late but now they're fully recovered.

Being first, or the only alternative guarantees nothing.

No guarantee.  However, being the only option or the only other option can be nice, don't you think?  It is sometimes called cornering the market.

Of course it could be nice, it depends on many factors though.

Now, it is a little harder for Pentax to become a Nikon because Nikon is already there.  Pentax would not be the only other game and people would have to make a choice between Canon or Nikon or Pentax and I think most people would stop at the first two...  Most people are already with either of those two so they wouldn't be required to leave the brand for FF.

I'd say Pentax should not try to become a better Nikon/Sony/Canon - but concentrating on being a better Pentax. If you want a Nikon/Sony/Canon, go with that company.

Both comments really are sound advice.  There is encouragement before the game and an offer to take a tangent from the discussion at hand.  Still, neither comment really changes much in what I wrote.

Then, I'll add something 'extra' - when the digital race started, Nikon, Canon, Pentax didn't start from the same positions. Pentax had lost much from their days of glory, did not had a small format professional following; they were probably in no position to become a Nikon.

The time for Pentax to be a Nikon was before the D700 and D3.  Maybe they can be a Sony and do FF ILC first.  For FF ILC, I think being first will be important...

Being first will quickly be forgotten, as it happened with digital, SLR, full frame DSLR and so many other types of products.

I don't think that changes much in what I wrote.  Who is first may be forgotten but being first can offer a market advantage and I believe that will be important.  Do you think a market advantage like this is immaterial?

Allow me to disagree. There is a strong competitor (Sony), in a much better position to offer a FF ILC; if Pentax were to somehow be the first, Sony would definitely join the game - cancelling that "market advantage".

You're putting too much weight on what at best would be a temporary situation.


the questions are rhetorical

Rhetorical answers for rhetorical questions


 Alex Sarbu's gear list:Alex Sarbu's gear list
Pentax K-5 IIs Pentax K-1 Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited Pentax smc DA 70mm F2.4 AL Limited Pentax smc DA 35mm F2.8 Macro Limited +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow