Ricoh to buy Pentax from Hoya.

[semilog]

It's informative to read Kirk Tuck's musings on how much more he likes using the APS-C Canons versus the FF ones for his professional work.

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2010/08/kirks-personal-review-of-canon-7d-and.html
http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2010/11/my-continuing-love-affairwith-canon-7d.html
http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2010/10/my-take-on-canon-60d.html

Sure, FF DSLRs have their place, but I suspect that they will over time be more and more niche, and that we're already seeing that.

 

[CameraQuest]

Ricoh + Pentax = Ritax ?

 

[rxmd]

Ricoh + Pentax = Ritax ?

I prefer Picoh

 

[veraikon]

Ricoh + Pentax = Cohntax 😀

 

[NickTrop]

To me - again, complete speculation, this is somewhat sad news. It's consolidation - pure and simple, driven (as always) by the market. While it will strengthen two "second-tier" companies, it signals to me that there is not enough demand to support both Ricoh and Pentax in the market. Likely, there will be layoffs at Pentax and what are essentially "Ricoh" cameras (engineered and manufactured by Ricoh) will be branded Pentax. Thus, ultimately, Pentax will virtually "become" Ricoh over time due to greater name recognition, the Ricoh name will be phased out... but the net-net will be one less choice and another of the great Japanese camera makers gone. I may be totally wrong but that's my take if I were to bet.

 

[hxpham]

I was talking to one of my friends (a big Pentax fan) and so we're hoping the GR D IV can somehow stuff a m4/3 sized sensor and hopefully a pancake, folding lens (with help from Pentax's lens development?). That would be a fun camera 🙂

 

[CameraQuest]

To me - again, complete speculation, this is somewhat sad news. It's consolidation - pure and simple, driven (as always) by the market. While it will strengthen two "second-tier" companies, it signals to me that there is not enough demand to support both Ricoh and Pentax in the market. Likely, there will be layoffs at Pentax and what are essentially "Ricoh" cameras (engineered and manufactured by Ricoh) will be branded Pentax. Thus, ultimately, Pentax will virtually "become" Ricoh over time due to greater name recognition, the Ricoh name will be phased out... but the net-net will be one less choice and another of the great Japanese camera makers gone. I may be totally wrong but that's my take if I were to bet.

to me Hoya selling Pentax shows that Hoya was not that successful running Pentax. Ricoh has shown itself a smart marketing force in a tough market.

I am guessing both brand names to continue, and that Pentax marketing and both brands engineering will be the better for it.

Stephen

 

[nanthor]

Pentax has outstanding lenses. The limited series and the DA* zooms all have great shrpness and bokeh. I have the K5 and it's a delight to use and the results rival full frame cameras. For Leica lovers, I think it's the closest look to the Leica look of any DSLR. Hope they don't change much but if a FF DSLR is in their future they have some spectacular lenses to go with it.

 

[NickTrop]

@CameraQuest - I hope you're right. But what you suggest is not something I've seen, really, judging from past history in the camera industry. Seems to me one always goes bye-byes. Remember Konica-Minolta? No more Konica, no more Minolta. Granted, that was a merger but...

Remains to be seen... I have no idea what Ricoh's plans are but I'm bearish on this. I'd further say that this has more to do with market conditions - too many suppliers for too little demad, than Hoya's management of the company. Hoya products are in every brick and mortar and e-tail pro and consumer photography equipment retailer in the world and couldn't raise the profile of Pentax that was cranking out some really good product. Pentax now loses that.

Further - it seems too that, unlike the mechanical cameras of yesteryear, the capital requirements and low margin/high volume nature of the key electronic component - the sensor, favors the electronic giants over the smaller producers. In the mechanical days - gears, motors, capacitors... it could have been the case that the cost playing field was more level and larger producers did not have that much of a (or at least not insurmountable) per unit production cost advantage. So, "back then" more smaller manufacturers could be supported. Again - pure speculation on my part.

 

[gavinlg]

It's informative to read Kirk Tuck's musings on how much more he likes using the APS-C Canons versus the FF ones for his professional work.

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2010/08/kirks-personal-review-of-canon-7d-and.html
http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2010/11/my-continuing-love-affairwith-canon-7d.html
http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2010/10/my-take-on-canon-60d.html

Sure, FF DSLRs have their place, but I suspect that they will over time be more and more niche, and that we're already seeing that.

After reading that it became quite apparent that he merely prefers the 7d to the 5d, not the aps-c format to the full frame format. In fact, he says:

"But just because the 7D has soul doesn't mean it's files are magical. The 5Dmk2 is a much better file producer. When I compare raw to raw in the Lightroom 3 I can see smoother gradations, higher sharpness and more resolution in the 5. With both cameras set to ISO 100 the differences are slight but they are still there. The 7D files are just a little harsher. Harsher? Yes. Harsher. The 5D2 files are smoother and accept manipulation with more grace. All things being equal the 5 wins in every category."

The problem that Pentax have had is that they don't have a halo camera for the masses. The k-5 is nice, but most pro's choose a full frame camera like the 5d or d700, and there are legitimate IQ related reasons why they do this. Why shoot a wedding or a war with a k-5 when all you can get as a wide lens is an f4 21mm equivalent, when with canon and nikon you can use a USM focussing f1.4 24mm that's probably optically more impressive? Pentax don't even have a 50mm f1.4 equivalent for their APS-C cameras. They have a plastic mount 35mm f2.4 (50mm equivalent), but that doesn't cut it if you're using your camera for your job.
There's too many holes in the lens lineup for aps-c.
The funny thing is if they added a full frame k-5 Style dslr to the lineup it would automatically fill a lot of those holes! They'd then have a true fast 14/31/35/43/50/77/100mm prime lineup, and as we know they're all very good lenses!

 

[JayM]

I really wish they'd do full frame at some point too. The backwards compatibility with old lenses would rock if it wasn't for the APS-C sized sensor.

I want lenses I can use inside and out but at focal lengths that are actually useful to me. I really enjoyed starting with a KX but at this point I don't really get along with a camera system that essentially only has telephoto lenses.

I really don't care about sensor size issues except for their affect on focal length. If they made a 35mm 1.4 and a 24mm 1.4 I could see getting along with them maybe...

 

[semilog]

...and yet, if you read what Tuck has to say, he does most of his professional work with the APS-C cameras. Ultimate IQ is not everything, especially when the differences are small.

 

[gavinlg]

...and yet, if you read what Tuck has to say, he does most of his professional work with the APS-C cameras. Ultimate IQ is not everything, especially when the differences are small.

Yes, because he prefers the 7d body and ergonomics to the 5d mkII body and ergonomics. The 5d is notoriously basic. The 7d is (ergonomically) the nicest non-grip canon DSLR. He also mentions that his specific use for his dslr's is basically lit portraiture at iso100 and mid-consumer zoom f8, and that for anything high iso or shallow DOF or critical IQ he uses the 5d mkII.

Imagine if the 5d mkII had the 7d ergonomics.... That's the kind of thing that pentax could really pull off!

 

[dreilly]

Why shoot a wedding or a war with a k-5 when all you can get as a wide lens is an f4 21mm equivalent, when with canon and nikon you can use a USM focussing f1.4 24mm that's probably optically more impressive? Pentax don't even have a 50mm f1.4 equivalent for their APS-C cameras. They have a plastic mount 35mm f2.4 (50mm equivalent), but that doesn't cut it if you're using your camera for your job.

I wouldn't be against a full frame Pentax DSLR, but I do need to clarify: Pentax has the 14mm f2.8 (21mm or so eq.) that's a pretty darn good lens. And for a "fast fifty" it does have the 35mm f2 FA lens, which is really pretty darn good, too. So it's not as bleak as you suggest even if either of those lenses is not perfect. Again I think the missing link is even wider, the lack of the 11-16mm f2.8 Tokina that every other major system has access to.

What will happen to Pentax's cooperation with Tokina under this move?

 

[gavinlg]

I wouldn't be against a full frame Pentax DSLR, but I do need to clarify: Pentax has the 14mm f2.8 (21mm or so eq.) that's a pretty darn good lens. And for a "fast fifty" it does have the 35mm f2 FA lens, which is really pretty darn good, too. So it's not as bleak as you suggest even if either of those lenses is not perfect. Again I think the missing link is even wider, the lack of the 11-16mm f2.8 Tokina that every other major system has access to.

What will happen to Pentax's cooperation with Tokina under this move?

Nikon and Canon make 24mm f1.4's that are optically fantastic, and a similar size as the da 14mm. They also make 20mm f2.8's. The pentax 35mm f2 isn't made anymore - it's not listed on the pentax websites. On an aps-c camera that equates to a 50mm lens with f2.8 depth of field - miles off what a f1.4 lens can offer. Canon has the 50mm f1.2L which is a fantastic optic. Nikons 1.4 50 is very good too.

See what I mean?

 

[coelacanth]

Lots of DSLR talk here, but I'm looking forward to seeing GXR / GR-D side of development out of this deal.

 

[kdemas]

I think this could lead to interesting things on both sides of the business Sug. Should be interesting!

Lots of DSLR talk here, but I'm looking forward to seeing GXR / GR-D side of development out of this deal.

 

[shadowfox]

Look, that's just nonsense.

It's based on the K7. When the K7 was released, was there another compact, weather-sealed, prosumer APS-C on the market? (No.) And do *any* of the competing Canon or Olympus cameras give you IS with legacy glass? (Again, No.) And did both Canon and Nikon subsequently come out with prosumer cameras that have an awful lot in common with the K7 form factor, and were called the something-7? (YES.)

So I suppose you could say that the K5 is derivative, but it's derivative of the K7, and N anc C both followed. Sheesh. And again, I'm not a Pentax fanboy. In fact the only Pentax DSLR I ever bought (K20D), I returned.

FYI, E-5 has 1.15x mag. viewfinder. Has been frozen, thawed, thrown into mud, cleaned up in a shower, etc. And yes, it has in-body image stabilization.

A company like Olympus does not follow other manufacturer's design or features, they invents those. Sometimes they succeed, sometimes those flop on the market. But Olympus is not a me-too company.

A company like Ricoh, who came up with the first modular lens + sensor camera, they are also another example of a company that is not "me-too".

That's how I see it. More power to you if you think the world of K5/7.

As an aside, why get worked up, semilog? this is just a forum discussion.
You are welcome to be the one who *always* make sense, I have no problem with that.
For the most part I enjoy reading your posts. 🙂

 

[Gary E]

All I want to know is will they make the Pentax limited lenses in M mount for their GXR. 😉

 

[rxmd]

Ricoh could have produced K-mount GXR modules with or without buying Pentax, the K mount licenses are available royalty-free.

Something will have to go. Ricoh has four interchangeable-something camera lines now - Pentax Q, Pentax K DSLRs, Pentax 645 Medium format, and the Ricoh GXR.

The Q is too new, and the due diligence for the merger has been going on for a while; if they wanted to ditch the Q, it would never have hit the market, they'd just have dumped it and laid off the Q engineers. So the Q is here to stay. Maybe they'll make a small-sensor Q module for the GXR, it shouldn't be major trouble.

For the 645D the future looks rather grim now, I guess.

And I don't think they'll ditch their own GXR only to get a foothold in the presently rather unrewarding DSLR market. So the future of the Pentax DSLRs depends on how many different interchangeable-something systems Ricoh think they need in their portfolio.