In the business world the highest priority is to make profit. Inconvenience to users comes second. If Ricoh has made money in camera business since purchasing Pentax, you can bet some profit would have gone into lens R&D and eventually lead to new lenses. (Not rebadging, mind you.) A couple of years ago when Ricoh revealed that downsizing is going on in the camera business, I know Pentax was in big trouble because when things like that shows up in the company financial report, it already is a hole too big to hide (from upper management).
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Mirrorless - do or die time now
- Thread starter rwl408
- Start date
The worst thing that can happen is Ricoh's business revamp goes so much ahead that your K-mount lens collection gets left behind. It may happen.James O'Neill
Veteran Member
Well the sales figures are there and they are up. You can see what the profit in the business is before exceptional items. The numbers don't lie, but some interpretations do. You don't have anything to support your interpretation (it could still be correct) any more than I have something to support the opposite.
I don't know what the Japanese equivalent of GAAP is but when you a buy a business for more than the value of the tangible assets, you can't keep the goodwill and IP value at what you paid for it forever. We don't know what the write down on property plant and equipment is. But writing that down doesn't tell us if Ricoh can sell cameras at a profit.
James O'Neill
Veteran Member
It probably would. I'm thinking down these lines.
Non-one wants a mirrorless camera out of a dislike of mirrors and prisms, they want one because it is smaller, lighter and easier to live with. You can't make a camera in those dimensions with a mirror ...
So picture some mirrorless Pentax with a small prime lens attached, it needs to be about the same size and weight as Olympus' M4/3 MILCs. You could build a thin body and a K mount sticking out the required distance it has a bigger footprint than the competitors.. So could make the bit that sticks out collapse back into the camera ? It's the only way I can think to avoid a new lens mount and build something more competitive than the K-01.
Alex Sarbu
Forum Pro
It definitely would.
Any downsizing effort could be applied to a full fledged K-mount camera, too. Starting from that, you would have to add the retractable mount system. Adding things won't get you smaller size/weight ;-)
You're giving people too much credit.
I agree; you can't have a DSLR the same size as some of the smaller manual film-era SLR. There is too much stuff inside (and that small manual film-era SLR wasn't as small once you put a winder on it...).
If that's the size you want, having less stuff inside - i.e. a mirrorless - is the solution.
If that's the requirement, the solution is to build a MILC of similar characteristics. It's pretty vague though, as Olympus' m4/3 MILCs vary in size and weight.
As I said, you'd be adding weight and size to the camera instead of saving. If it can work at all. You only have some 25-30mm, and I'm being optimistic here. You need to be able to grab and twist some extender ring. You need to make it sturdy enough for 2-3kg lenses.
FTR, the Helicoid Extension Tube was 26.5mm retracted, and 46.5mm extended. Scale it down, and you'd be able to shave at most 2cm from the front of the camera... and get other components you'd have to relocate.
Sorry, but the saving potential is nil.
Alex
n3eg
Senior Member
I remember saying that in another thread.
As per my original point, kp is a pretty good size.
K-S1 is very small and light.
They are both pretty thin.
K mount Pentax mid range lenses are pretty compact and light. Not to mention a pancake or two.
Are we talking about a centrimetre give or take a few mm?
A mirrorless version of the K-S1 ? How much bigger would that be than a current mirrorless and an evf would reduce the tup hump size too.
I wonder if thats where Pentax is going with this.
If i was selling cameras and gave people a bunch of options and they wanted convenient size for holiday and travel..... a K-S1 sized body with an 18-135 or 16-85 lens apsc DSLR or mirrorless would be an option id put up on a table against the opposition.
It wouldnt need to be much bigger than an A6500.
Cost wise i saw a promo our aussie importer had done with a chain store putting K-S1 and 18-55 out at $399 AUD. He said he would do body only fora fair bit less!!
Remember most people at brick n mortar stores are looking for a cost effective black box with a button that takes good pictures. Mirrorless or not.
Not everyone is a forum geek and has big hangups about the differences. They will compare sensor size, megapixels ........
Apart from video. No comparison there.
K-S1 is very small and light.
They are both pretty thin.
K mount Pentax mid range lenses are pretty compact and light. Not to mention a pancake or two.
Are we talking about a centrimetre give or take a few mm?
A mirrorless version of the K-S1 ? How much bigger would that be than a current mirrorless and an evf would reduce the tup hump size too.
I wonder if thats where Pentax is going with this.
If i was selling cameras and gave people a bunch of options and they wanted convenient size for holiday and travel..... a K-S1 sized body with an 18-135 or 16-85 lens apsc DSLR or mirrorless would be an option id put up on a table against the opposition.
It wouldnt need to be much bigger than an A6500.
Cost wise i saw a promo our aussie importer had done with a chain store putting K-S1 and 18-55 out at $399 AUD. He said he would do body only fora fair bit less!!
Remember most people at brick n mortar stores are looking for a cost effective black box with a button that takes good pictures. Mirrorless or not.
Not everyone is a forum geek and has big hangups about the differences. They will compare sensor size, megapixels ........
Apart from video. No comparison there.
O
OlyPent
Guest
I got the K-S2 for $575 Can. with the kit lens, a bargain, given our flagging dollar value. The KP is $1499. I handled it, and just cannot justify spending almost $1000 more for very little extra gain.
.... talking around and around an old subject:
Which is what we do on forums and both sides of the discussion have many valid points; but
When we talk of camera sales and what the market demands ..... we are NOT talking generally about the guy here on the forums;
We are talking about the average joe walking into a camera shop or shopping on line who still makes up a lot of sales %
They may be swayed by a sales person and the odd review but what are talking about is....
..... effectively a box with a button on it that may take better pictures than their mobile phone or make them feel like they are.
Hence Canon still sells truckloads of lower / older model basic DSLR by their hundreds of thousands!!
There is merits of both types, as we know but essentially they do the same thing and Canon have introduced a smaller sensor mirrorless to keep the market covered even if some think a Sony does a better job ..... Canon have that figured out you see .... just another mass produced box slightly behind their competition that has a button... just by another name (mirrorless) but with the Canon name on it.
So once again it comes down to marketing and slowly bit by bit gaining a % here or there and not a lot to do with mirrorless or not.
If Pentax was to introduce another mirrorless they still need to MARKET it right !!
Selling the X5 at K-mart, doing K-S1 deals in camera shops, pricing cameras right upon release, doing an apsc or FF mirrorless as a cost effective option, kicking some importers fair up the back end!! Being a lot more aggressive....
They have a habit of introducing different and left field designs at far too high prices compared to their main game cameras and doing very little to break into advertising, pro support, brick and mortar store deals...MIRRORLESS or not.
Which is what we do on forums and both sides of the discussion have many valid points; but
When we talk of camera sales and what the market demands ..... we are NOT talking generally about the guy here on the forums;
We are talking about the average joe walking into a camera shop or shopping on line who still makes up a lot of sales %
They may be swayed by a sales person and the odd review but what are talking about is....
..... effectively a box with a button on it that may take better pictures than their mobile phone or make them feel like they are.
Hence Canon still sells truckloads of lower / older model basic DSLR by their hundreds of thousands!!
There is merits of both types, as we know but essentially they do the same thing and Canon have introduced a smaller sensor mirrorless to keep the market covered even if some think a Sony does a better job ..... Canon have that figured out you see .... just another mass produced box slightly behind their competition that has a button... just by another name (mirrorless) but with the Canon name on it.
So once again it comes down to marketing and slowly bit by bit gaining a % here or there and not a lot to do with mirrorless or not.
If Pentax was to introduce another mirrorless they still need to MARKET it right !!
Selling the X5 at K-mart, doing K-S1 deals in camera shops, pricing cameras right upon release, doing an apsc or FF mirrorless as a cost effective option, kicking some importers fair up the back end!! Being a lot more aggressive....
They have a habit of introducing different and left field designs at far too high prices compared to their main game cameras and doing very little to break into advertising, pro support, brick and mortar store deals...MIRRORLESS or not.
sfa1966
Senior Member
A great line, and so true. :-D Thanks for the smile.
I have one too and , although I wouldn't have it as a sole camera in preference to a DSLR , it does have its place in my overall system , as a backup body to my K-3 and as something more compact and unobtrusive which I can use on occasions where I don't want to be carrying a big 'pro' looking camera or just want to take something along on a family outing but don't want a huge bag of kit .
What I do find is that , partnered with my DA Limited lenses , I have a very comprehensive and compact system which I can pick and choose from , using the same batteries and flashes as my K-3 , and indeed the ability to use any of my K Mount lenses , from the earliest SMC-M lenses to my larger AF lenses if needed .
--
With kind regards
Derek.
LOL.. you won't buy any $2000 FF mirrorless camera anyway. Not to mention FF lenses.
Alex Sarbu
Forum Pro
Nonsense.
DSLRs will exist as long as people like myself will continue to buy. And Ricoh Imaging joined the professional market years ago (hint: medium format).
Does it matter who made it up?
Alex
Alex Sarbu
Forum Pro
Alex Sarbu
Forum Pro
Stop with the "alternative facts".
Only 2 of the D FAs are Tamrons. The other 3 - 70-200, 150-450, 28-105 - are Pentax designs; and more Pentax-designed lenses are planned.
They didn't.
It didn't happen.
You're making up stuff.
Alex
miles green
Veteran Member
Seeing that they have a monopoly on the sensor market, and that they don;t sell their high-end sensors to other companies (12mpx, 42 mpx bsi, stacked sensor from A9).
Pentax, Fuji and probably Nikon exist only because Sony is wants them to, so they can sell (old tech) sensors to them. They'll slowly squeeze the market. Sony might keep the smaller players alive as they do now, or maybe they will buy out the companies/brands or their factories as their market share grows. I think Pentax is better off doing what they do now, which is offering superb OVF cameras at competitive prices, and lenses with character.
Canon is more independent, more mature with lenses and pro support. But far behind in sensor tech...
Pentax, Fuji and probably Nikon exist only because Sony is wants them to, so they can sell (old tech) sensors to them. They'll slowly squeeze the market. Sony might keep the smaller players alive as they do now, or maybe they will buy out the companies/brands or their factories as their market share grows. I think Pentax is better off doing what they do now, which is offering superb OVF cameras at competitive prices, and lenses with character.
Canon is more independent, more mature with lenses and pro support. But far behind in sensor tech...
Sony's camera business and sensor business are different entities and each has to run its business the way it should be - to make the most profit possible. Yes, Sony's camera business gets a leg up on the new sensors but it doesn't mean Sony can dictate other companies who rely on Sony's sensors. If your theory is true, then Ricoh should just throw its hands up and quit. But apparently it isn't because Ricoh is determined to make "high added value (camera) products".
Changes are in order. Whatever Ricoh has been doing didn't work.
Don't bet against Canon. Canon is catching up in sensor technology and it has the volume too.
LightBug
Senior Member
Very good points Miles. I wonder why Fuji did not go FF mirrorless? Is it because they knew Sony would not tolerate another competitor in the same space? Why Nikon never had the 42MP FF sensor? If anyone pursued FF mirrorless would it
Sony is basically the King maker now, and it seems to want to make itself the King in FF mirrorless.
Joey
Last edited:
Fuji focus on APSC because they believe it's a better compromise for size/weight without compromising image quality.
And frankly unless you want ultra thin dof they have pretty much proved their point.
I hope Pentax will catch on Fuji one day for fast apsc prime, limited are nice but I shoot mostly in low light.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum