More on Pentax interviews

[philbarton]

We seem to have outgrown the old one, so allow me to add this interview, where even in January 2008 Pentax had no idea what a "niche" was - they were looking for a 15 percent share by 2009. That ain't no "niche" - it would be a battle with Olympus and Sony.

Give Bunnell credit for getting in there and changing their direction, as it was too long in coming.

January interview:

http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=689112

I can't paste from it, but as you can see, the Samsung deal obviously spurred some of the management to look for an increased share from the combination. It's about the 4th paragraph down.

One cannot change the past, but I really think that Bunnell did a "save" here; as the brand really needed focus and direction. I'm sure he's said that himself a number of times.

Original source of that link:

http://www.ok1000pentax.com/

British Journal of Photography: These folks don't exactly draw a conclusion that the K20D is using the sensor chip that might have been the brains of an earlier incarnation of the 645D, but what you do get is a lot of thoughtful insight into comments made by Hiroshi Onada, Pentax Europe's main man, at the Pentax Dubai press event. Pentax is looking to achieve 15% of total DSLR sales in the market by 2009, with 3 levels of DSLR cameras, including a yet unannounced top-tier. That's a big step over where they are now, but it's starting to look like it will be possible if this momentum keeps up.

More on market share for all makes:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-9882670-39.html

In this chart, Pentax is 1/10th the size of Canon in the total camera market.

 

[philbarton]

(This was from Let's Go Digital, one of their blocked links)

(John Carlson is the Imaging Systems product manager)

A few key points I'd like to raise ...

"Question : You also have an entirely new line of lenses, such as the light sensitive version. Will this line continue?

Answer : Yes, you can count on that. We are now showing three SLR lenses that will get introduced later, hopefully this year. We have a 17-70 mm one that is considered as a replacement for the 16-45 mm but offering an SDM engine (the built-in silent auto focus engine, BDM). And we have the extreme light sensitive 55mm and the 60-250 mm. Certainly if you read the forums, people are very excited about that lens and users wanted to have it sooner. But we wanted to spend more time on the two zoom lenses we have launched recently."

(That's the reference to the NON-screw-drive lens series)

"Question : They do look like professional lenses. It actually makes me expect a top model too.

Answer : Yes they are professional lenses. We have done this in the past too for analogue cameras. Neither then was it our core business. The lenses we have announced recently do meet the demand of the user. The advanced photographer and a few professional ones will start using these lenses. However, in combination with the K20D."

(That's why I raised the point about not making people buy at least the K100D Super, and produce the lenses "non-screw-drive" in the first place)

Question : You don't offer a real entry-level model or a professional one. You claim there is not enough market demand on the top level. So may we expect an introduction on the entry-level market? A Pentax K2000D or something like that?

Answer : I don't know. At present we are absolutely satisfied with the line we are offering. It is hard to say what's in the pipeline. It's likely to happen but you could also place the cameras too close in the same segment, something we'd like to avoid.

(I would not count on anything, personally, until 2009 PMA)

Question : You don't offer a real entry-level model or a professional one. You claim there is not enough market demand on the top level. So may we expect an introduction on the entry-level market? A Pentax K2000D or something like that?

Answer : I don't know. At present we are absolutely satisfied with the line we are offering. It is hard to say what's in the pipeline. It's likely to happen but you could also place the cameras too close in the same segment, something we'd like to avoid.

(So much for an endless series of primes)

 

[philbarton]

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m5072/is_18_30/ai_n25468320

RPA Inc. in Santa Monica is the new advertising agency for Pentax Imaging Co., a brand with a great history but not much market share.

From the 1950s to the 1970s, Pentax pioneered camera technology by introducing single-lens reflex mechanisms, flash units and in-camera light meters. However, in the digital age competitors such as Canon, Nikon and Olympus have eclipsed Pentax in sales.

Last year Pentax completed a merger with another Japanese company, Hoya Corp. The new management announced its goal for "accelerating future growth" while acknowledging stiff competition in the sector.

RPA plans an integrated campaign of print, online, collateral and event marketing. The account has an estimated budget of $10 million.

 

[philbarton]

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=28233195

To me, it's the exact opposite. A pro body is meant to lock someone
into a lens mount, and the majors have FAR more choice in lenses,
particularly ring-USM and VR/IS in the lens for those long and heavy
lenses wildlife shooters want. These people make major investments
in broad product lines.

So the K10D, K20D, etc hasn't locked people into the K mount? Why do you say that a pro body is designed to lock someone to a lens mount? Any reasonable investment in bodies and glass lock the user to that system, as selling alot of gear usually means a sizeable loss to change systems. Not many people can afford that hit.

===========

Cameras under a grand are considered to have a 2-3 year lifespan, as a newer model will offer more, at a lower price. Buying a camera that inexpensive, and owning one or two lenses, will not get the maker "lens mount lock".

Someone who spends 2 or 3 grand will also buy a range of more expensive lenses; and that's when the "lens mount lock" happens. That's one reason Pentax has more expensive lenses - buying one locks you in tighter. A $200 lens never retained loyalty.

Pentax has "brand loyalty"; not the same thing. Their lens heyday was the M42 SMC's, which are the same marketing principle as we see now.

Look at Pentax' own words per the second thread post:

"Question : They do look like professional lenses. It actually makes me expect a top model too.

Answer : Yes they are professional lenses. We have done this in the past too for analogue cameras. Neither then was it our core business. The lenses we have announced recently do meet the demand of the user. The advanced photographer and a few professional ones will start using these lenses. However, in combination with the K20D."

====================

That tells me they expected someone buying a $700 SDM lens was supposed to buy the body-only K20D; whereas the K200D comes already with the Level-II nice lens. He is making a direct refence to the high-end M42 SMC's we all enjoy.

 

[tweedle]

The strategy is not new. Hoya have not implemented a new
strategy when it comes to Pentax as a niche player. It is years old.
Hoya contribution is in management and marketing strategies.

You, Lance and others suggest that Pentax had a business plan of being a niche manufacturer/marketeer for a long while already. This self-percention has also been named 'The Pentax Way' or 'The Pentax ideals' around here.

To me, there seems to be quite som discrepancy here - between what might have been a a self perception by managers or followers/users on the one side and what strategy was actually carried out on the other.

Personally, I see no dedicated niche strategy having been implemented so far. What I see is a lot of short-term decisions to get by her-and-now. Beefing up sales with extra features, discounts. Leaving no earnings, no sustainable business perspective.

There's ideals and there's actions. If the two don't meet, then the actions will unfortunately set the course.

 

[philbarton]

(I said)

Pentax would be banking on legacy owners moving up, and no doubt
they're watching K20D sales closely - in terms of "legacy" owners vs.
non-legacy. My guess is that K200D is getting the non-legacy market.

Not every K10D owner will move up to the K20D, because it is just an update, and isn't offering a substantial improvement, but many would upgrade to say a K1D because of the better features and functions that would be on offer. A big difference in the two scenarios.

=================

Don't let Pentax hear that. They thought the sensor would prompt some 1st D and other 6.3 MP people to buy the K20D; but they forgot about the usual Pentax pricing, and the competition.

The K1D (thus far a figment) is another story. Some Pentax people will move up, and many won't. That's been the experience. I doubt that the 6.3MP-ers will go for it.

The K1D would be going up, performancewise, against the well-established D300 and maybe even the Mark III, with full lines of pro lenses. IMO, literally no one with a major investment in the brand leaders, and earning a living with them, will suddenly bolt for the PK mount - if they don't already own PK.

Sony has already run into this with their expensive Zeiss lenses - one reason their 24 MP camera is on the way out. I doubt that they'll get existing pro's, but more and more people are moving up to DSLR's because of the low prices, so who knows? The starting point is below $1000, and their are LOADS of good cameras at that level.

Canon just added to the mix:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0806/08061002Canon1000D.asp#press

Smart; grabbing the "1000D" designation. Note this very critical point - they have high-level cameras to "inherit" features from, including the fine Digic-III:

"With the lightest body of any digital EOS camera, the EOS 1000D incorporates a range of technologies used in Canon’s professional EOS-1 series cameras, including the DIGIC III image processor, and Live View mode. For straight-from-the-box shooting, the EOS 1000D is available with a Canon EF-S 18-55mm IS lens – which includes 4-stop image stabilisation, ensuring superb performance even in low-light conditions."

Now, look what Pentax said at PMA:

"Question : A top compact is not on its way as I take it? Why not?

Answer : Correct. There is only limited demand for it. I would like to see it though, they are perfect cameras. I am a real photo enthusiast, I take my Pentax K20D everywhere I go, and before that I did the same with my Pentax K10D. I would really love to own a compact that is able to reach that quality. I never stop pushing our designers for it."

(The Pentax DSLR's are amongst the heaviest in their class)

 

[philbarton]

The strategy is not new. Hoya have not implemented a new
strategy when it comes to Pentax as a niche player. It is years old.
Hoya contribution is in management and marketing strategies.

You, Lance and others suggest that Pentax had a business plan of
being a niche manufacturer/marketeer for a long while already. This
self-percention has also been named 'The Pentax Way' or 'The Pentax
ideals' around here.

To me, there seems to be quite som discrepancy here - between what
might have been a a self perception by managers or followers/users on
the one side and what strategy was actually carried out on the other.

Personally, I see no dedicated niche strategy having been
implemented so far. What I see is a lot of short-term decisions to
get by her-and-now. Beefing up sales with extra features, discounts.
Leaving no earnings, no sustainable business perspective.

There's ideals and there's actions. If the two don't meet, then the
actions will unfortunately set the course.

===========

Please note Pentax Europe talking up a 15 percent share in the post that began this thread. Pentax is creating a "niche" by eliminating the slow movers, and pushing weatherseal and in-body IS to save money on lenses.

Meanwhile, the majors have very inexpensive stabilized/motorized lenses; while Pentax wants $700 for THEIR last-gen screw-drive SDM.

Guess where the buyers go. Check what I just posted on the Canon 1000D.

Check Google News:

http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/5371/hands-on-canon-eos-rebel-xs1000d.html

This is slotted BELOW the XSI; so they're going after entry-point DSLR buyers. THIS is why Pentax has to go "boutique".

 

[tweedle]

Smart; grabbing the "1000D" designation. Note this very critical
point - they have high-level cameras to "inherit" features from,
including the fine Digic-III:

The Digic III is to be found in every Canon camera, even the cheapest p&s. A rather high degree of effeciency, since Canom manufactures some 30 mn cameras a year - and they developed the Digic III engine themselves.

However, the professional models carry more Digic III's, serialised in some way. The 1000D probably doesn't. So much for the stardust from the professionals.

 

[philbarton]

Smart; grabbing the "1000D" designation. Note this very critical
point - they have high-level cameras to "inherit" features from,
including the fine Digic-III:

The Digic III is to be found in every Canon camera, even the cheapest
p&s. A rather high degree of effeciency, since Canom manufactures
some 30 mn cameras a year - and they developed the Digic III engine
themselves.

However, the professional models carry more Digic III's, serialised
in some way. The 1000D probably doesn't. So much for the stardust
from the professionals.

=========================

You must be too young to recall the small-block Chevy, which could be easily rated for different HP based whether a 2-bbl or 4-bbl carb, and other tricks like the compression ratio. It was a great block that served Chevy over many different models.

You also may not have noticed that you can put additional 512MB chips in your own PC to increase memory.

It STARTS with the fact that the Digic-III, itself, is an advanced 2007 sensor - and in order to gain efficiency, you'd put them in parallel, not series.

"DIGIC III is also being used in Canon's latest (as of 2007) Digital SLR cameras. The Canon EOS-1D Mark III uses dual DIGIC III processors to achieve a capture rate of 10 frames per second at 10.1 MP (with a maximum burst of 110 JPEG images, depending on the speed of the attached storage). The Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III also uses dual DIGIC III processors to achieve a 5 frames per second at 21.1 MP."

=======

When you START with a good core unit, and then pass it DOWN to cheaper models, you run the risk of cannibalizing your own higher-model sales. Each cheaper model becomes a de-tuned (another "auto" word) of the one before, with a selling point of more and more approaching the form factor of a megazoom - but of course without that wide focal length single lens.

Pentax has more to apologize for in using a version of the elderly SAFOX, and putting it into bodies costing twice the cost of their cheaper DSLR ones on a body-to-body basis. SAFOX dates back to ANALOG bodies in the earlier versions. Perhaps, the Volvo 240 is the metaphor, with a 27-year model run.

http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/AF/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIGIC

The DIGIC III Image Processor is the latest (as of 2007) version of Canon's proprietary DIGIC technology, supposedly delivering superior image quality, more responsiveness and an extended battery life compared to its predecessor. DIGIC III provides a speedier interface to the SD memory card for the Canon PowerShot G7 and G9, SD750, SD800, SD850, SD900, SD 1000, A560, A570 IS, A590 IS, A650 IS, A720 IS, and S5 IS. It also provides higher definition for their LCD monitors. DIGIC III also provides new Face Detection AF/AE, which finds and will track all the faces in the frame and sets the most suitable focus point, when the shutter button is depressed half-way. Exposure and flash are controlled to ensure proper illumination of both the faces and the overall scene, eliminating the common problem of darkened or overexposed faces. The system will also revert to the AiAF system if the subject is either not detected or not deemed to be a subject (based on the iSAPS database). The latter is useful at tourist spots where there may be many people around who are not supposed to be the subject of the picture. iSAPS Technology is an entirely original scene-recognition technology developed for digital cameras by Canon. Using an internal database of thousands of different photos, iSAPS also works with the DiG!C III Image Processor to improve focus speed and accuracy, as well as exposure and white balance.

(All of which Pentax would like to have).

 

[janneman02]

"DIGIC III is also being used in Canon's latest (as of 2007) Digital
SLR cameras. The Canon EOS-1D Mark III uses dual DIGIC III processors
to achieve a capture rate of 10 frames per second at 10.1 MP (with a
maximum burst of 110 JPEG images, depending on the speed of the
attached storage). The Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III also uses dual DIGIC
III processors to achieve a 5 frames per second at 21.1 MP."

The DIGIC III Image Processor is the latest (as of 2007) version of
Canon's proprietary DIGIC technology, supposedly delivering superior
image quality, more responsiveness and an extended battery life
compared to its predecessor. DIGIC III provides a speedier interface
to the SD memory card for the Canon PowerShot G7 and G9, SD750,
SD800, SD850, SD900, SD 1000, A560, A570 IS, A590 IS, A650 IS, A720
IS, and S5 IS. It also provides higher definition for their LCD

Phil reviewed four recent DIGIC III P&S.

Two got highly recommended with the now famous "just" attachment (another canon copies pentax), and two only gor recommended.

It is not the DIGIC that makes the Canon dslr good, it must be something else, the use of DIGIC III in the anouncement of the EOS 1000D is probably just marketingtalk
--

The difference between genius and LBA is that genius has its
limits.

• Janneman ( adaptation of the Kings quote from Albert Einstein)

 

[philbarton]

Phil (Askey) reviewed four recent DIGIC III P&S.

Two got highly recommended with the now famous "just" attachment
(another canon copies pentax), and two only gor recommended.
It is not the DIGIC that makes the Canon dslr good, it must be
something else, the use of DIGIC III in the anouncement of the EOS
1000D is probably just marketingtalk.

===========

I don't get the point of your last sentence - how can the presence of something be "marketing talk"? It's the basis of the design and their shared modular systems. That would make weatherseal just "marketing talk" as well; rather than a valuable feature.

Digic allows for parallel processing, on the order of a dual-core or quad-core PC chip. More channels; more processing speed. Unless something is going on we're unaware of, SAFOX is single-channel, like the original Pentium.

Where they can "detune" is in the number of AF points; and they reduced that from 9 (40D and XSI) to 7 with the 1000D (every time I type that model number, somehow I think Pentax missed an opportunity). The Mark III 1D(S), as I recall, has 45 points, tied to two processors. I have no idea if there's an upper limit to the design. Each release level of DIGIC added a considerable amount of software, so the processing capacity and speed must be increasing as well; or they could not handle that extended multi-face recognition, and everything else I noted as capabilities.

Dimitrov's explanation of SAFOX is valuable, because it tells you just how old the base system is - Windows 98, more or less, to me.

http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/AF/index.html

" ... Out of this image-, phase-shifting the computer calculates the number and direction of rotations for the auto focus motor. It is not possible to stop right now from a full speed focusing to the exact point. So the speed is reduced before the right focus point is reached. The computer of the camera subdivide the number of turns to reach the right focus point. A photo interrupter in the lens count the impulses and send it back to the camera. The camera compares the actual value with the rated value. A certain steps before the rated value is reached the speed of the auto focus motor is reduced. ... "

(That's why it's slow - it cannot hit the optimum point and stop - this is in effect an analog system, going past sharp focus, backing up, and so on (i.e., "hunting". Since it was found in analog cameras, that makes sense. This would seem to indicate a problem in particular with low light making focusing more difficult for ANY camera; and even with action in brighter light; since SAFOX lacks the predictive focus capabilities built into more modern systems, and the subject is moving, so focus has to "follow" as best as it can. The new Canon actually has LARGER AF points, because there are fewer of them. Low-light sensitivity drops, but since each point is larger, it might follow an "active" subject even better within that point.)

 

[janneman02]

Phil (Askey) reviewed four recent DIGIC III P&S.

Two got highly recommended with the now famous "just" attachment
(another canon copies pentax), and two only gor recommended.
It is not the DIGIC that makes the Canon dslr good, it must be
something else, the use of DIGIC III in the anouncement of the EOS
1000D is probably just marketingtalk.

===========

I don't get the point of your last sentence - how can the presence of
something be "marketing talk"? It's the basis of the design and
their shared modular systems. That would make weatherseal just
"marketing talk" as well; rather than a valuable feature.

Yes, I agree on that but stating that it is the same processor that is in their top-models and not mentioning the fact that is also the processor that is in some "recommended" P&S is the marketing talk. It is presenting the facts that would make a product look good, not ALL the facts. It does make sonse ofcourse.

--

The difference between genius and LBA is that genius has its
limits.

• Janneman ( adaptation of the Kings quote from Albert Einstein)

 

[cycoj]

Smart; grabbing the "1000D" designation. Note this very critical
point - they have high-level cameras to "inherit" features from,
including the fine Digic-III:

The Digic III is to be found in every Canon camera, even the cheapest
p&s. A rather high degree of effeciency, since Canom manufactures
some 30 mn cameras a year - and they developed the Digic III engine
themselves.

However, the professional models carry more Digic III's, serialised
in some way. The 1000D probably doesn't. So much for the stardust
from the professionals.

=========================

You must be too young to recall the small-block Chevy, which could be
easily rated for different HP based whether a 2-bbl or 4-bbl carb,
and other tricks like the compression ratio. It was a great block
that served Chevy over many different models.

You also may not have noticed that you can put additional 512MB chips
in your own PC to increase memory.

It STARTS with the fact that the Digic-III, itself, is an advanced
2007 sensor - and in order to gain efficiency, you'd put them in
parallel, not series.

"DIGIC III is also being used in Canon's latest (as of 2007) Digital
SLR cameras. The Canon EOS-1D Mark III uses dual DIGIC III processors
to achieve a capture rate of 10 frames per second at 10.1 MP (with a
maximum burst of 110 JPEG images, depending on the speed of the
attached storage). The Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III also uses dual DIGIC
III processors to achieve a 5 frames per second at 21.1 MP."

=======

When you START with a good core unit, and then pass it DOWN to
cheaper models, you run the risk of cannibalizing your own
higher-model sales. Each cheaper model becomes a de-tuned (another
"auto" word) of the one before, with a selling point of more and more
approaching the form factor of a megazoom - but of course without
that wide focal length single lens.

Pentax has more to apologize for in using a version of the elderly
SAFOX, and putting it into bodies costing twice the cost of their
cheaper DSLR ones on a body-to-body basis. SAFOX dates back to
ANALOG bodies in the earlier versions. Perhaps, the Volvo 240 is the
metaphor, with a 27-year model run.

Now why do you compare the imageprocessor on the Canon (Digic) to the AF system on the Pentax? Pentax imageprocessor is PRIME, and was introduced with the K10D AFAIK, supposedly it's improved with the K20D. Now Canon's AF system is called BASIS (BAse Stored Image Sensor) and I seriously doubt that they use them in parallel, doesn't work. Also BASIS as been their AF system since they first introduced AF so about the same age as SAFOX.

 

[cycoj]

Phil (Askey) reviewed four recent DIGIC III P&S.

Two got highly recommended with the now famous "just" attachment
(another canon copies pentax), and two only gor recommended.
It is not the DIGIC that makes the Canon dslr good, it must be
something else, the use of DIGIC III in the anouncement of the EOS
1000D is probably just marketingtalk.

===========

I don't get the point of your last sentence - how can the presence of
something be "marketing talk"? It's the basis of the design and
their shared modular systems. That would make weatherseal just
"marketing talk" as well; rather than a valuable feature.

Digic allows for parallel processing, on the order of a dual-core or
quad-core PC chip. More channels; more processing speed. Unless
something is going on we're unaware of, SAFOX is single-channel, like
the original Pentium.

Where they can "detune" is in the number of AF points; and they
reduced that from 9 (40D and XSI) to 7 with the 1000D (every time I
type that model number, somehow I think Pentax missed an
opportunity). The Mark III 1D(S), as I recall, has 45 points, tied
to two processors. I have no idea if there's an upper limit to the
design. Each release level of DIGIC added a considerable amount of
software, so the processing capacity and speed must be increasing as
well; or they could not handle that extended multi-face recognition,
and everything else I noted as capabilities.

Dimitrov's explanation of SAFOX is valuable, because it tells you
just how old the base system is - Windows 98, more or less, to me.

http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/technology/AF/index.html

" ... Out of this image-, phase-shifting the computer calculates the
number and direction of rotations for the auto focus motor. It is not
possible to stop right now from a full speed focusing to the exact
point. So the speed is reduced before the right focus point is
reached. The computer of the camera subdivide the number of turns to
reach the right focus point. A photo interrupter in the lens count
the impulses and send it back to the camera. The camera compares the
actual value with the rated value. A certain steps before the rated
value is reached the speed of the auto focus motor is reduced. ... "

(That's why it's slow - it cannot hit the optimum point and stop -
this is in effect an analog system, going past sharp focus, backing
up, and so on (i.e., "hunting". Since it was found in analog
cameras, that makes sense. This would seem to indicate a problem in
particular with low light making focusing more difficult for ANY

You again show how little you know about things, the basic AF system is the same for all SLRs. The Canons do exactly the same thing. Except, they don't even check if they are in focus. They just calculate the point and move there.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic2/241524

"In one "look," it calculates the distance and direction the lens must be moved to cancel the phase differences. It then commands the lens to move the appropriate distance and direction and stops. It does not "hunt" for a best focus, nor does it take a second look after the lens has moved (it is an "open loop" system)."

Also it uses the DOF as tolerance:

"As a result of this tolerance (within the depth of focus or within 1/3 of the depth of focus), the camera can place the actual plane of focus at random anywhere within the tolerance range, and not necessarily at the same place each time."

Now that all doesn't really sound that great either. However Canon seem to be quite good at otherwise we'd here lots of complaints about missed focus.

BTW I don't think any screwdrive cameras can hit one point and stop. You destroy the lens. I don't know if USM can do it, maybe could be the main reason why they are faster.

 

[philbarton]

Phil (Askey) reviewed four recent DIGIC III P&S.

Two got highly recommended with the now famous "just" attachment
(another canon copies pentax), and two only gor recommended.
It is not the DIGIC that makes the Canon dslr good, it must be
something else, the use of DIGIC III in the anouncement of the EOS
1000D is probably just marketingtalk.

===========

I don't get the point of your last sentence - how can the presence of
something be "marketing talk"? It's the basis of the design and
their shared modular systems. That would make weatherseal just
"marketing talk" as well; rather than a valuable feature.

Yes, I agree on that but stating that it is the same processor that
is in their top-models and not mentioning the fact that is also the
processor that is in some "recommended" P&S is the marketing talk. It
is presenting the facts that would make a product look good, not ALL
the facts. It does make sonse ofcourse.

=========

No time now; but I would need to see if Askey's remarks all pertained to DIGIC-III, and how many AF points the body came with. This is a modular-type system; and just as a car will perform better with different tires, the DIGIC processor is not the only element dictating performance - the firmware also gets into it.

A dual-channel DIGIC would beat single channel; and the accompanying firmware is likely upgraded as well. That's why Intel pushed dual core, or more.

When I do that, I'll post what I find.

 

[Joseph Tainter]

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m5072/is_18_30/ai_n25468320

RPA Inc. in Santa Monica is the new advertising agency for Pentax
Imaging Co., a brand with a great history but not much market share.

Doesn't Ned live in that area? I wonder if he has worked with them before.

Joe

 

[*isteve]

What Ned says applies to the US. 10% from the current position would be a major change. Pentax have very poor penetration in NA.

What Pentax Europe says applies to Europe. The niche brand has worked well so far and is doing better. In key European markets (esp France) Pentax has excellent market share

My experience of the UK is that they are already fairly advanced in terms of changing their distribution strategy (Intro 2020 now runs 90% of distribution to major stores with some "leadership" stores buying direct, presumably so they can be used to try out new ideas and deal structures). 15% is probably a big ask, but Sony and Oly are not nearly as strong here and Pentax is MUCH more prevalent than it was even 2 years ago.

Also the Jessops monopoly is crumbling which is good for the (Pentax loving)smaller independent camera stores and very bad for Canon which practically owns Jessops and has already tried to bail them out financially once.

If Pentax think that the 2 products they have are enough to create a stable niche then they are wrong. Both will be obsolete in 12 months. They have a job to do to establish their brand identity, build the cameras and create a marketing and pricing strategy to suit. I dont think the K20D was ever intended to be more than a stopgap to be honest and the K200D could be upgraded (with live view and more buffer) allowing a cheaper camera to slot in underneath.

But one thing is for sure, Ned speaks for the US and Onada San speaks for Europe but the overall corporate position is speculation and noone has the least idea about sales in Asia which is a huge market (and less affected by the US recession).

We seem to have outgrown the old one, so allow me to add this
interview, where even in January 2008 Pentax had no idea what a
"niche" was - they were looking for a 15 percent share by 2009. That
ain't no "niche" - it would be a battle with Olympus and Sony.

Give Bunnell credit for getting in there and changing their
direction, as it was too long in coming.

January interview:

http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=689112

I can't paste from it, but as you can see, the Samsung deal obviously
spurred some of the management to look for an increased share from
the combination. It's about the 4th paragraph down.

One cannot change the past, but I really think that Bunnell did a
"save" here; as the brand really needed focus and direction. I'm
sure he's said that himself a number of times.

Original source of that link:

http://www.ok1000pentax.com/

British Journal of Photography: These folks don't exactly draw a
conclusion that the K20D is using the sensor chip that might have
been the brains of an earlier incarnation of the 645D, but what you
do get is a lot of thoughtful insight into comments made by Hiroshi
Onada, Pentax Europe's main man, at the Pentax Dubai press event.
Pentax is looking to achieve 15% of total DSLR sales in the market by
2009, with 3 levels of DSLR cameras, including a yet unannounced
top-tier. That's a big step over where they are now, but it's
starting to look like it will be possible if this momentum keeps up.

More on market share for all makes:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-9882670-39.html

In this chart, Pentax is 1/10th the size of Canon in the total camera
market.

--
Steve
When I can master technique I'll be a photographer.
When I can realise a vision I'll be an artist.
When I get paid I'll be a professional.

 

[RPulley]

Phil (Askey) reviewed four recent DIGIC III P&S.

Two got highly recommended with the now famous "just" attachment
(another canon copies pentax), and two only gor recommended.
It is not the DIGIC that makes the Canon dslr good, it must be
something else, the use of DIGIC III in the anouncement of the EOS
1000D is probably just marketingtalk.

===========

I don't get the point of your last sentence - how can the presence of
something be "marketing talk"? It's the basis of the design and
their shared modular systems. That would make weatherseal just
"marketing talk" as well; rather than a valuable feature.

Yes, I agree on that but stating that it is the same processor that
is in their top-models and not mentioning the fact that is also the
processor that is in some "recommended" P&S is the marketing talk. It
is presenting the facts that would make a product look good, not ALL
the facts. It does make sonse ofcourse.

=========

No time now; but I would need to see if Askey's remarks all pertained
to DIGIC-III, and how many AF points the body came with. This is a
modular-type system; and just as a car will perform better with
different tires, the DIGIC processor is not the only element
dictating performance - the firmware also gets into it.

A dual-channel DIGIC would beat single channel; and the accompanying
firmware is likely upgraded as well. That's why Intel pushed dual
core, or more.

When I do that, I'll post what I find.

Is there a particular reason that anyone here on the PENTAX forum would give a rats a$$ about Canon's Digic processor?

I cannot understand your constant shilling for Canon on the PENTAX forums. Worse, your shilling is often mis-informed and technically incorrect showing that most of what you post is simply regurgitated statements of others about things you know little about.

Take your Canon propagandizing over to the Canon forum where it belongs.

Ray

 

[*isteve]

Please note Pentax Europe talking up a 15 percent share in the post
that began this thread. Pentax is creating a "niche" by eliminating
the slow movers, and pushing weatherseal and in-body IS to save money
on lenses.

Meanwhile, the majors have very inexpensive stabilized/motorized
lenses; while Pentax wants $700 for THEIR last-gen screw-drive SDM.

Both of which are in a different class optically. There have been plenty of complaints about these "cheap" IS lenses already. If its so cheap why havent they made them for years?

While we are on the subject, ALL of their weather resistent lenses are expensive as are most of their top end IS lenses. By contrast they havnt upgraded their consumer range much over the last few years years and none of their standard to short-tele primes have IS. That hardly makes one weedy little plastic kit lens much of a response to the in-body IS that Oly, Sony and Pentax ALL offer right now that works on all their lenses, even those from 3rd parties.

Guess where the buyers go. Check what I just posted on the Canon 1000D.

Yes, most buyers go to Canon? Why is that a problem? How many million more times are you goint to repeat this irrelevant fact? Who cares?

If I drove an Alfa Romeo (which I did) why would I care about all the Toyotas on the road? Normal Toyota buyers would never consider an Alfa - and then there is all the negative spin (terrible reliability, poor build quality etc) that was absolutely not my experience. But people who like Alfas would, conversely, never look twice at a Toyota.

Canon build good, inoffensive cameras that suit a lot of people who like taking pictures. They are just like Toyota. They build ultra cheap runabouts and they even build luxury models. Buyers feel secure because, well, its such a SAFE decision isnt it?

They do not suit me. I hate the handling, I hate the prices of decent lenses, and I hate the fact that I cant get a sealed body for less than £2000 or a decent lens for less than £500. Note I said decent.

Pentax do suit me admirably, and they suit a sizeable minority of us. If it was marketed correctly then they may well increase the size of that minority but more importantly they would establish their unique value and ensure the stability of the niche. And as Pentax already know, Pentax buyers are far more likely to buy extra glass than anyone buying a low end Canon, especially the new one.

Check Google News:

http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/5371/hands-on-canon-eos-rebel-xs1000d.html

This is slotted BELOW the XSI; so they're going after entry-point
DSLR buyers. THIS is why Pentax has to go "boutique".

Lordy, thank heavens for that.
--
Steve
When I can master technique I'll be a photographer.
When I can realise a vision I'll be an artist.
When I get paid I'll be a professional.

 

[*isteve]

Is there a particular reason that anyone here on the PENTAX forum
would give a rats a$$ about Canon's Digic processor?

I cannot understand your constant shilling for Canon on the PENTAX
forums. Worse, your shilling is often mis-informed and technically
incorrect showing that most of what you post is simply regurgitated
statements of others about things you know little about.

Take your Canon propagandizing over to the Canon forum where it belongs.

Ray

On the other hand, dont.

Dear Phil, you have done far more to put people off Canon than anything else I know around here. If Canon are paying you to put people off buying a Canon thats fine with me
--
Steve
When I can master technique I'll be a photographer.
When I can realise a vision I'll be an artist.
When I get paid I'll be a professional.