RICOH to buy PENTAX

[K10D]

Hot gossip?
No, it's true.

http://www.hoya.co.jp/english/news/latest/d0h4dj0000001fv8-att/d0h4dj0000001fwi.pdf

Best regards

[I @ M]

eeeew, that doesn't sound all that good to me. I wonder where the Tokina alliance falls in with all those entities now?

[darkbhudda]

Read the article on Reuters about it: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/01/ricoh-hoya-idUSL3E7I10G620110701

It does sound like they'll take a more active role in Pentax which could be good or bad. Just as long as they keep producing awesome cameras I'll be happy.

[Tannin]

Quite possibly good news for Pentax. But - as Andrew says - the concern here is for Tokina. We don't want to lose those quite-often excellent lenses!

[swifty]

Yea.. this was certainly unexpected. But not necessarily a bad thing. Ricoh has always had a rep for producing high quality and very photographer centric products.
I wonder if there will be any major changes to Pentax's imaging products with a new owner. It'd be interesting the direction Ricoh takes.

[Kym]

Back in the day Ricoh made K-mount lenses and DSLRs (albeit with a pin that needs to be removed for compatibility)

Not sure if this is good or bad.

http://pentaxdslrs.blogspot.com/2011/07/ricin-purchased-pentax.html Yvon's view


Hi Pentaxian friends.
12.59 AM, California time. Here I am in my bed, reading my emails and surfing the internet on my new iPad 2.I can't believe it...Ricoh just purchased Pentax from Hoya. It's all over the Internet, and you can read the news on other sites listed on the right side of this page.
This comes as a big surprize to me. I didn't see it coming.

Yvon usually gets the good oil early

From Rick .... http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/06/16/hoya-china-idUKL3E7HG15720110616

Maybe Hoya need the capital for this expansion?

More info... Ricoh are much bigger than Hoya, a bit more than 50% the size of Canon and bigger than Nikon.

This has to be good for Pentax. I for one welcome our new overlords :eek: :cool:

[crf529]

I think this is a good thing.

Seem's from the press release the Ricoh have solid direction and want to bring Pentax somwhat to the forefront, in comparison to dwindling somewhere near the back under Hoya's presence. Ricoh probably have the cash to pull it off too.

[Kym]

Ricoh announcement http://www.ricoh.com/release/2011/pdf/0701.pdf


Strategic objectives for Ricoh
The goal of the Acquisition is to establish a firmer presence in the consumer business, which has been a considerable challenge for Ricoh.

Ricoh believes that the borderline between office and home will fade and this will be reflected in a major change in products and services. Ricoh aims to provide more consumer–oriented offerings not only in the field of digital cameras but also video conferencing systems, network appliances, and others, to their customers around the world. The Acquisition is the first step in this direction.

Ricoh intends to maximize the synergy from the merger between Ricoh’s digital camera business and PENTAX Imaging System Business in various ways.
1) Strengthening the digital camera business
- Enhanced interchangeable-lens cameras to meet expected future growth
- Expansion of product lineup and interchangeable lens portfolio

2) Creation of new business delivering added value to consumers
- Creation and development of value-added businesses such as making it easy to view, save and retouch photos.

3) Other benefits
- Possible entry into the image archiving business using medium format digital cameras
- Expansion of security related products

[knumbnutz]

They can start by bringing Pentax in via Ricoh distributors rather than CRK.

FWIW, as long as Pentax is pentax and Ricoh is ricoh then all is good, just dont want to see another Minolta.

I also think Pentax has a far better camera business than Ricoh, so hopefully they will keep it as such.

[Kym]

They can start by bringing Pentax in via Ricoh distributors rather than CRK.

Yes, could be good


FWIW, as long as Pentax is pentax and Ricoh is ricoh then all is good, just dont want to see another Minolta.
Pentax DSLRs for sure, but the compact market is a different game


I also think Pentax has a far better camera business than Ricoh, so hopefully they will keep it as such.
Yes, I would hope so. See the Ricoh announcement above.

[Cage]

I always felt Pentax and Hoya were 'strange bedfellows'.

Here's hoping the Ricoh affiliation will strengthen the Pentax imaging line of products.

Now for starters may I suggest a brilliant yet affordable 500mm f4/5.6 to take advantage of the K5's higher ISO capability.

[Kym]

Or even the build-to-order FA* 600mm f/4 !!!

[Tannin]

One assumes that Pentax aren't stupid. Ditto the money men at Ricoh. Why would they spend waste good money on designing and developing a 500/4 or similar? It would cost a heap to do - because it needs to be in the same image quality ballpark as the truly excellent Canon and Nikon products already on the market - and achieve nothing - because anyone serious enough about wildlife to buy a $10,000 lens is going to be smart enough to buy a Nikon or a Canon one. Nothing wrong with Pentax lenses, I hasten to add, they are generally excellent, and nothing wrong with Pentax cameras either, but they use in-body IS which is known to be inferior to in-lens IS at longer focal lengths, and if you are spending $10,000, you want the best, not the nearest next-best.

Nope. Pentax/Ricoh will play it smart, and aim at targets they can get traction with. Something like a 400/5.6 would be sensible, and anything in the more general-purpose range would go well. I'm not sure where the gaps in the Pentax range are, but I'm talking staples like (e.g.) 70-200/4 and /2.8; 24ish-100ish/4; 15ish-80ish/4-5.6; and 70-300/4-5.6. Pentax need to focus on lenses worth less than two or three thousand - and I bet they do.

[crf529]

One of everything!

[I @ M]

They can start by bringing Pentax in via Ricoh distributors rather than CRK.


Yes, could be good

There is a bit of an assumption here on my behalf but if Ricoh are still being distributed by the same people that they used to be ( their website is down ) then CR Kennedy are the far better option as far as service goes.

This view of mine is based on having dealt with the present? distributor of Ricoh products as a retailer.

[Kym]

http://www.ricoh.com.au/ is up now

[I @ M]

http://www.ricoh.com.au/ is up now

That is the site for copiers etc, not for the camera distributors. :(

[arthurking83]

..... Pentax need to focus on lenses worth less than two or three thousand - and I bet they do.

I dunno whether the moneymen at Ricoh are stupid or not, but the there engineers do seem have a great sense of adventure. And with that they appear to produce some interesting products, albeit for a very small market niche.
Add to that, some semblance of intelligence from the engineers at Pentax(eg. the recent GPS product they've introduced :th3:) and I think we'll eventually see some new products with strange features that may have some uses.


Lets just hope that they don't turn into another Cannikon and start churning out the same boring stuff.

[Kym]

Ricoh are much bigger than Nikon and over frac12 the size of Canon (in terms of gross revenue) - that sort of financial depth will be telling.

[Cage]

One assumes that Pentax aren't stupid. Ditto the money men at Ricoh. Why would they spend waste good money on designing and developing a 500/4 or similar? It would cost a heap to do - because it needs to be in the same image quality ballpark as the truly excellent Canon and Nikon products already on the market - and achieve nothing - because anyone serious enough about wildlife to buy a $10,000 lens is going to be smart enough to buy a Nikon or a Canon one. Nothing wrong with Pentax lenses, I hasten to add, they are generally excellent, and nothing wrong with Pentax cameras either, but they use in-body IS which is known to be inferior to in-lens IS at longer focal lengths, and if you are spending $10,000, you want the best, not the nearest next-best.

Nope. Pentax/Ricoh will play it smart, and aim at targets they can get traction with. Something like a 400/5.6 would be sensible, and anything in the more general-purpose range would go well. I'm not sure where the gaps in the Pentax range are, but I'm talking staples like (e.g.) 70-200/4 and /2.8; 24ish-100ish/4; 15ish-80ish/4-5.6; and 70-300/4-5.6. Pentax need to focus on lenses worth less than two or three thousand - and I bet they do.

I concur with your comments Tannin but my wish was for a 500 (or 600) prime, f4 or f5.6, with better IQ than the Sigma xxx - 500 zooms, at around the $2500- $3000 mark, a sort of enthusiast/semi-pro job, but not a f2.8 behemoth @ $10,000. With their new 645D receiving such good reviews and facing the same shortage of glass as the K series, I'm sure some of the R & D could be shared between the two models.

At the moment the Pentax range finishes at 300mm with not even a T/C to extend it. You would have to be pedantic not to find something to suit your needs up to 300mm, if not with a prime, then from the fairly good range of quality zooms.

[I @ M]

I concur with your comments Tannin but my wish was for a 500 (or 600) prime, f4 or f5.6, with better IQ than the Sigma xxx - 500 zooms, at around the $2500- $3000 mark,

I think many would like such a beast and the nearest alternative would be the Sigma 500mm F4.5 EX DG APO HSM (http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/500mm-f45-ex-dg-apo-hsm-sigma) but even a grey market price seems to be a bit over $4,000.00 :(

[Tannin]

Spot on, Trublubiker! An enthausiast lens - say something broadly similar to the Sigma 50-500 or the Canon 100-400, or better yet something different like a a 400/4.5 or a 500/5.6 - this sort of thing could come in around the $2000-$3500 mark and could find a ready market. It's the $10k stuff that they can't hope to sell.

But I thought Pentax introduced a very nice looking 400/4 a year or two ago? What was that then? An on-paper product that they just made one of to take to trade shows?

[Falcons]

One assumes that Pentax aren't stupid. Ditto the money men at Ricoh. Why would they spend waste good money on designing and developing a 500/4 or similar? It would cost a heap to do - because it needs to be in the same image quality ballpark as the truly excellent Canon and Nikon products already on the market - and achieve nothing - because anyone serious enough about wildlife to buy a $10,000 lens is going to be smart enough to buy a Nikon or a Canon one. Nothing wrong with Pentax lenses, I hasten to add, they are generally excellent, and nothing wrong with Pentax cameras either, but they use in-body IS which is known to be inferior to in-lens IS at longer focal lengths, and if you are spending $10,000, you want the best, not the nearest next-best.

Nope. Pentax/Ricoh will play it smart, and aim at targets they can get traction with. Something like a 400/5.6 would be sensible, and anything in the more general-purpose range would go well. I'm not sure where the gaps in the Pentax range are, but I'm talking staples like (e.g.) 70-200/4 and /2.8; 24ish-100ish/4; 15ish-80ish/4-5.6; and 70-300/4-5.6. Pentax need to focus on lenses worth less than two or three thousand - and I bet they do.

Agree that Pentax probably wont produce a 500mm + lens but am interested in your claim that in lens IS is superior to in camera IS - do you have any info other than canikon advertisng rhetoric to back this statement? Many believe the opposite with long lenses on the premise that the further away from the sensor the IS is the more prone to errors. I haven't seen any hard evidence eitrher way just advertising rhetoric from both camps. Here is a link http://www.slrgear.com/articles/is_olympuse520/IS_Test_Olympus_E-520_SLR_Body.htm to a test done that concluded "While we can't generalize from one camera's test results to all sensor-based IS systems, the performance of the Olympus E-520's IS system certainly demonstrated that there's no inherent reason why sensor-based IS systems should underperform lens-based ones."

As to Tokina I dont see why Ricoh would want to stop receiving revenue from allowing Tokina access to Pentax technology for lenses.

This will be a good move for the Pentax brand - Ricoh was a serious player in SLR once beforew and is still a known brand, perhaps we will see Pentax taking on the higher end market and Ricoh the budget end. Time wiill tell.

[JM Tran]

Agree that Pentax probably wont produce a 500mm + lens but am interested in your claim that in lens IS is superior to in camera IS - do you have any info other than canikon advertisng rhetoric to back this statement? Many believe the opposite with long lenses on the premise that the further away from the sensor the IS is the more prone to errors. I haven't seen any hard evidence eitrher way just advertising rhetoric from both camps. Here is a link http://www.slrgear.com/articles/is_olympuse520/IS_Test_Olympus_E-520_SLR_Body.htm to a test done that concluded "While we can't generalize from one camera's test results to all sensor-based IS systems, the performance of the Olympus E-520's IS system certainly demonstrated that there's no inherent reason why sensor-based IS systems should underperform lens-based ones."


That is a flawed test for the Olympus.


At this point, we've only tested this one sensor-based IS system, so we can't draw any general conclusions from it. it's possible that sensor-based systems could run into limitations at very long focal lengths, but in the case of the E-520, its performance with a 150mm lens attached (equivalent to a 300mm lens on a 35mm camera, or a 200mm lens on a DSLR with a 1.5x crop factor) was about as good as that of one of the best lens-based IS systems we've tested, namely that of the Canon 70-200mm F/4L IS. And at shorter focal lengths, it did better.

Going forward, it would be interesting to look at how well a sensor-based IS system handles even longer focal lengths, but for the vast bulk of amateurs, a 300mm equivalent is the longest lens they'll use anyway. This isn't to say that we won't test a longer lens on a sensor-based IS system at some time in the future; the point we're making here is that the question is moot for a large percentage of users.

I have been using sensor-based stabilization technology in Pentax and Oly ever since it was introduced nearly 5 years ago, alongside Canon and Nikon's in-lens IS systems. I was not as happy with the sensor stabilization of long focal lengths until I started using Canon's tele lenses.

I can safely say, along with other pros and amateurs - is that in-lens will WORK BETTER WITH LONG TELEPHOTOS - the constant IS adjustments you can see through the viewfinder as the camera and lens moves - is beneficial to the shooter. Whereas a sensor based IS system does not show a 'live' view of the IS in action and you can still see the image shaking until you have taken the shot. That was also mentioned in the test. Now, if that test is to be taken seriously, use more lenses and compare more systems.

Not to mention the stated stop improvements of 2.7 etc, nothing to boast about. It is also a given fact that a sensor based IS cannot match something akin to a 4 stop improvement on the latest IS systems.

[I @ M]

As to Tokina I dont see why Ricoh would want to stop receiving revenue from allowing Tokina access to Pentax technology for lenses.



The Tokina question sprang to my mind initially because Tokina have been manufacturing ( according to them ) for 55 years and they were under the umbrella group of Hoya.
The movements that have taken place recently have seen Kenko take on or absorb Tokina as one company and I think that there is/was a tie up with Slik tripods in there somewhere as well.
From an Australian perspective we now have a bit of a mixed distributor base for products from the same manufacturers with Pentax cameras, Kenko and Slik handled by one company and Hoya and Tokina products held by another company.
Meanwhile the present Australian distributors of Ricoh camera products are another company again which made me wonder where, if any, product rationalisation will end up here down under. :confused013

As for the lens sharing tech between Pentax & Tokina I am not sure which way that went. I have heard a few things about some Pentax lenses having been made by Tokina and rebadged and also the other way where some Tokina lenses were based entirely on Pentax products but as it stands now there doesn't seem to be any logical connection between Pentax and Tokina.

[Irru]

One obvious thing Ricoh will do is supplement their M mount module for the GXR with a similar K mount.
Sharing the Pentax pancake primes between the compact body and the more serious Pentax bodies is ideal. If I were now where I was a six months ago, tossing up between m43 and Pentax - I'd pick Ricoh GXR without hesitation.

Edited for bad wording.

[Kym]

http://photorumors.com/2011/07/01/open-letter-from-hoya-to-valued-pentax-customers-and-partners/


July 1, 2011

Dear Valued PENTAX Customers and Partners,

We would like to hereby inform you that we, HOYA Corporation, have made an agreement regarding the business transfer of our PENTAX Imaging System Business to RICOH Corporation today, July 1, 2011.

The effective date of the business transfer is set for October 1, 2011. The business areas to be transferred as PENTAX Imaging System Business are digital cameras, interchangeable lenses, digital camera accessories, binoculars and security-related products, including R&D, design, manufacturing and sales for those product categories.

PENTAX Imaging system business will be succeeded by a newly established company scheduled on October 1, 2011, and then RICOH Corporation will acquire 100% of its stock right after the establishment.

No operational changes of PENTAX Imaging System Business are anticipated for the time being by making this agreement. All employees will be transferred to the new company accordingly. Also, all current products will continue to be sold with the PENTAX brand name under current operations.

PENTAX, under the guidance of RICOH, will continue with our best effort to grow and evolve our business and partnerships and deliver quality products and services designed for a high level of customer satisfaction.

Again, we appreciate your continued support of PENTAX.

Thank you very much.

Best regards,

Toshiaki Iue,

President

PENTAX Imaging Systems Division

[Kym]

http://pentaxdslrs.blogspot.com/2011/07/hoya-supplier-to-canon-worlds-largest.html


Hi Pentaxian friends.

Hoya Corp , the world's second largest maker of optical glass used in cameras, said on Thursday it would open its first furnaces overseas by the end of the year, diversifying production away from Japan, where power shortages loom.

The firm, which competes with market leader Ohara Inc , will open a plant in Weihai in China, hoping to take advantage of burgeoning demand for cameras in China, and easier access to raw materials including rare earth lanthanum, a company spokeswoman said.

The plant is set to begin operations in December. Hoya said the cost of the factory is yet to be determined.

Hoya, a supplier to Canon , the world's largest maker of digital cameras...

Does anyone else see a conflict of interest here, or is it just me?
Posted by Yvon Bourque

[Tannin]

^ Nope. Hoya supplies everyone. Hoya is one of the largest glass products companies in the world, they supply stuff to just about everyone. It would be astonishing to discover that Hoya didn't sell some stuff to Nikon, Olympus, Matsushita (Panasonic), and any other company that makes optical products in Japan. Canon is the same as Seagate. Both firms are the market leaders, and both firms generally prefer to invent, design, and manufacture all their components in-house, but both firms are perfectly happy to buy stuff in if it is cheaper, or if they have a shortage of capacity, or for any other good reason. Hoya will sell stuff to Perntax/Ricoh when the time comes, and be perfectly happy to do so.

[Falcons]

That is a flawed test for the Olympus.



I have been using sensor-based stabilization technology in Pentax and Oly ever since it was introduced nearly 5 years ago, alongside Canon and Nikon's in-lens IS systems. I was not as happy with the sensor stabilization of long focal lengths until I started using Canon's tele lenses.

I can safely say, along with other pros and amateurs - is that in-lens will WORK BETTER WITH LONG TELEPHOTOS - the constant IS adjustments you can see through the viewfinder as the camera and lens moves - is beneficial to the shooter. Whereas a sensor based IS system does not show a 'live' view of the IS in action and you can still see the image shaking until you have taken the shot. That was also mentioned in the test. Now, if that test is to be taken seriously, use more lenses and compare more systems.

Not to mention the stated stop improvements of 2.7 etc, nothing to boast about. It is also a given fact that a sensor based IS cannot match something akin to a 4 stop improvement on the latest IS systems.

I am no pro by any means but again even if the test is flawed iit is still a test and not an opinion. All I hear is opinions and no disrespect but if I had the time I could find all the other comments, i have read, from pro photographers who disagree with you and that is also just their opinion. I am just curious as to if there arte any tests that you believe aren't flawed that prove one way or another. To date I can only find opinions and advertorial rhetoric on the issue.

[Falcons]

The Tokina question sprang to my mind initially because Tokina have been manufacturing ( according to them ) for 55 years and they were under the umbrella group of Hoya.
The movements that have taken place recently have seen Kenko take on or absorb Tokina as one company and I think that there is/was a tie up with Slik tripods in there somewhere as well.
From an Australian perspective we now have a bit of a mixed distributor base for products from the same manufacturers with Pentax cameras, Kenko and Slik handled by one company and Hoya and Tokina products held by another company.
Meanwhile the present Australian distributors of Ricoh camera products are another company again which made me wonder where, if any, product rationalisation will end up here down under. :confused013

As for the lens sharing tech between Pentax & Tokina I am not sure which way that went. I have heard a few things about some Pentax lenses having been made by Tokina and rebadged and also the other way where some Tokina lenses were based entirely on Pentax products but as it stands now there doesn't seem to be any logical connection between Pentax and Tokina.

As far as I understand Hoyahas absolutely nothing to do with Tokina other than that they supply glass blanks for lenses (as they do for most lens manufacturers) the reason many believe that Hoya owns Tokina is that THK the US distributor distributes Hoya, Tokina and Kenko products and thus the myth began.

The pentax /tokina relationship is simply Pentax provides basically the recipe for lens formations and receives a payment i assume or royalty, and Tokina then wont produce that lens in a Pentax mount so Pentax has one less competitor for lens revenue.

[Kym]

That is the site for copiers etc, not for the camera distributors. :(

http://www.ricohcameras.com.au/ is also up

[Kym]

Not to mention the stated stop improvements of 2.7 etc, nothing to boast about. It is also a given fact that a sensor based IS cannot match something akin to a 4 stop improvement on the latest IS systems.

The K-5 SR (new) is rated to 4 stops

[I @ M]

http://www.ricohcameras.com.au/ is also up

and so it seems that the parent companies (http://www.tasco.com.au/) site has also been restored

[JM Tran]

All I hear is opinions and no disrespect but if I had the time I could find all the other comments, i have read, from pro photographers who disagree with you and that is also just their opinion.

show me, I am interested in reading their opinions. Did they forget that a sensor IS can never compensate as much as in-lens due to the limitations of the actual sensor moving on the X and Y axis, before it will start to affect the image?

When you have been using the Pentax and Oly in-body IS systems ever since they were introduced, alongside with Canon and Nikon for both work and fun - you can really tell a difference and know what works when and where. I am not someone like the infamous RiceHigh trolling the camera forums conducting tests and crunching numbers.

[Tannin]

Well, Falcons, you might like to refer to the empirical test of what the expert photographers actually use, and what the unquestioned top-quality gear is based on. And, when you look at top-quality systems for sport, long--lens paopparatzi stuf, and wildlife, we discover that 100% of the available systems on the market use in-lens stabilisation, despite the fact that the manufacturers have sensor shift technology at their fingertips, should they care to use it. That's not opinion, it's just cold fact. The only way to explain this without putting on a tinfoil had and resorting to conspiracy theory (secret pacts between giant companies, and the like) is to accept that in-lens works better for long lenses. (I carefully offer no opinion on the value of in-body stabilisation vs in-lens at shorter focal lengths like, say, 40mm - I have seen no real evidence on that either way.)

Plenty of room for the new Pentax to be a successful, serious camera & lens manufacturer, but I reckon they will be too smart to enter the long lens pro-level market. It is very doubtful that a third player could survive. Sony might have a go at it, if they feel like spending some of that vast pile of money the company has, but they would be most unlikely to succeed, even with their budget.

Nope: the way ahead for Pentax is to target the same market Pentax was so successful in in film days: enthusaists who like quality and value. Despite some along-the-way stupidities like red camera bodies and the absurd Q, on the whole Pentax has done pretty well. I reckon that Ricoh-Pentax will do even better.

[I @ M]

the reason many believe that Hoya owns Tokina is that THK the US distributor distributes Hoya, Tokina and Kenko products and thus the myth began.

I wasn't actually going on the US distribution even if they appear to be closely related, I was referring to their umbrella partnership with Hoya that began back in 1990 (http://www.tokina.co.jp/en/history.html) as I thought that they were pretty much the same company after that. :confused013

It is always a bit hard to follow who owns what from the Japanese side of things.

[Falcons]

Well, Falcons, you might like to refer to the empirical test of what the expert photographers actually use, and what the unquestioned top-quality gear is based on. And, when you look at top-quality systems for sport, long--lens paopparatzi stuf, and wildlife, we discover that 100% of the available systems on the market use in-lens stabilisation, despite the fact that the manufacturers have sensor shift technology at their fingertips, should they care to use it. That's not opinion, it's just cold fact. The only way to explain this without putting on a tinfoil had and resorting to conspiracy theory (secret pacts between giant companies, and the like) is to accept that in-lens works better for long lenses. (I carefully offer no opinion on the value of in-body stabilisation vs in-lens at shorter focal lengths like, say, 40mm - I have seen no real evidence on that either way.)

Plenty of room for the new Pentax to be a successful, serious camera & lens manufacturer, but I reckon they will be too smart to enter the long lens pro-level market. It is very doubtful that a third player could survive. Sony might have a go at it, if they feel like spending some of that vast pile of money the company has, but they would be most unlikely to succeed, even with their budget.

Nope: the way ahead for Pentax is to target the same market Pentax was so successful in in film days: enthusaists who like quality and value. Despite some along-the-way stupidities like red camera bodies and the absurd Q, on the whole Pentax has done pretty well. I reckon that Ricoh-Pentax will do even better.

*removed : this comment was nothing more than baiting, which breaches the site rules : admin *, not disagreeing with you Pentax doesn't make stuff for the camera professions you mentiioned but just because Canikon put their IS in lens doesn't automatically make it better. Once again you are just giving me the usual Canikon do it so it must be better. I just asked if there is a test that backs this up or not you may be right iit may be bette - r just because I don't bliindly accept canikon advertising does not make me a conspiracy nut. Technology is changing all the time and if electric view finders become the norm then the in lens IS system loses its asdvantage of the viewfinder showing the stabilised image.

I am know ricehigh either but there are counter opinions out there one is that the in lens IS distorts the lens formula giving a harsher bokeh this may be a problem for you or it may not but it is someones opinion not a conspiracy theory.

[Kym]

This thread is going off topic and contains a lot of speculation with little facts in some cases.

Everyone, please take a chill pill!

[arthurking83]

...... I haven't seen any hard evidence eitrher way just advertising rhetoric from both camps. Here is a link http://www.slrgear.com/articles/is_olympuse520/IS_Test_Olympus_E-520_SLR_Body.htm to a test done that concluded "While we can't generalize from one camera's test results to all sensor-based IS systems, the performance of the Olympus E-520's IS system certainly demonstrated that there's no inherent reason why sensor-based IS systems should underperform lens-based ones."

.....

Not that someone with Tony's experience and knowledge requires backup(from the likes of me, of all people), but the evidence you were after, Falcons, is right there in front of your nose(in the link to SLR Gear you posted)!!!

Quoted from SLRGear(just below the tabled results with the 50 and 150mm lenses)

One difference we did notice with the E-520 vs. lens-based IS systems we've tested is that it achieved greater shake reduction at shorter focal lengths than at longer ones. Most lens-based systems we've tested trend in the other direction, showing more improvement at longer focal lengths.

Ummmm :confused013
I don't know about anyone else, but the bolded sections (which I made bold) are pretty much self explanatory to me ... lens based systems provide greater advantage at longer focal lengths.

Another important consideration to factor into the mix as well is as focal lengths get longer, limitations begin to creep into the camera based system's ability to provide efficient stabilisation.
This is common knowledge for those that seek it, and SLR Gear also make this statement... immediately before the SLRGear statement quoted by Falcons in her post.
The quoted text from SLRGear, that Falcons posted is in fact referring to focal length(or equivalences) up to 300mm, and not beyond(as Tony claimed).

Now I can't edit the SLRGear article in any way to make it easier to read, but I've tried to make it as easy to find as I could, and I suggest you re read it for yourself.

COMMON KNOWLEDGE FACT #1: lens based IS systems are more efficient at LONGER focal lengths. Camera based systems appear to be more effective at shorter focal lengths.


Not only is Kym right:


This thread is going off topic and contains a lot of speculation with little facts in some cases.

Everyone, please take a chill pill!

... but hopefully now the thread will now get back on track!
(if we want a thread explaining the differences in efficiency between lens and camera based stabilisation systems, then someone would be wise to create a new thread.

[wedgtail]

So with all the news do you wait and see what happens after the new owners come in in October or buy a K5 now:confused013

[Tannin]

Buy now.

[crf529]

The moment Ricoh take over isn't going to change the world, it takes some time for new leadership and direction to filter down to the available product.

[JM Tran]

same amount of whinging and crying was done by ppl on the net when Hoya took Pentax under its umbrella not long ago....wah wah wah!

p.s - I use Pentax for work too and get called a Canikon fanboy in this thread.....oh the humanity!

[crf529]

p.s - I use Pentax for work too and get called a Canikon fanboy in this thread.....oh the humanity!

Don't stress, just the canikon fan-bois try'na bring ya down to their level ;).

[Falcons]

same amount of whinging and crying was done by ppl on the net when Hoya took Pentax under its umbrella not long ago....wah wah wah!

p.s - I use Pentax for work too and get called a Canikon fanboy in this thread.....oh the humanity!

Geez I have copped everything on the chin that you guys have thrown at me and been told by site owner that I am baiting - all I asked was there hard solid evidence that in lens IS is superior to body IS - (it seems that at FL greater than 300mm in lens IS wins - but does that mean that a company such as Pentax or Sony or Olympus should they dare to enter this market can they not produce a lens with inbuilt IS and simply turn off the in body IS??)

As I have said I copped it all on the chin but JM Tran I would never refer to you as a Canikon Fanboy - sorry I used the term.

Not sure what Pentax future is now though was about to buy a DA70mm but am now hesitant as to whether I am better off going to canikon. The K5 is awesome (and I was hoping for a new model soon to update my K7) but will they now have the R&D to keep up with Canikon now or will Ricoh go for different market with Q type mirrorless cameras?

[JM Tran]

Geez I have copped everything on the chin that you guys have thrown at me and been told by site owner that I am baiting - all I asked was there hard solid evidence that in lens IS is superior to body IS - (it seems that at FL greater than 300mm in lens IS wins - but does that mean that a company such as Pentax or Sony or Olympus should they dare to enter this market can they not produce a lens with inbuilt IS and simply turn off the in body IS??)

As I have said I copped it all on the chin but JM Tran I would never refer to you as a Canikon Fanboy - sorry I used the term.

Not sure what Pentax future is now though was about to buy a DA70mm but am now hesitant as to whether I am better off going to canikon. The K5 is awesome (and I was hoping for a new model soon to update my K7) but will they now have the R&D to keep up with Canikon now or will Ricoh go for different market with Q type mirrorless cameras?

No I think you should buy the DA70 and stick with Pentax for its marvelous primes!

I used to own the DA70 paired with a K20D when that first came out and really really enjoyed it for studio shoots, preferred it over a 5D I had back then. I couldnt afford an FA77 and it was quite hard to find in Adelaide so I had to settle with the DA70. Also had the DA40 as well for street shooting and it was possibly the most pocketable lens and camera package back then for any DSLR.

Theres a few Canon full frame guys who have modified the 5Ds to be able to fit the FA31 - one of the best ever primes made for 35mm - and the FA77 as well. I dont believe Canon or Nikon has anything as good as those prime lenses in similar pricing. So stick with Pentax and use their strongest point - amazing primes.

[arthurking83]

......

Not sure what Pentax future is now though was about to buy a DA70mm but am now hesitant as to whether I am better off going to canikon. The K5 is awesome (and I was hoping for a new model soon to update my K7) but will they now have the R&D to keep up with Canikon now or will Ricoh go for different market with Q type mirrorless cameras?

I really don't understand why anyone would suddenly develop a sense of trepidation simply because the manufacturer of their camera brand suddenly developed a new case of ownership.
Who ultimately owns the brand should have no real consequence to the workings of your current gear, and if the K5 was truly an awesome camera, then it should provide this level of awesomeness for a few more years yet.

I can understand how one MAY believe that just because a new owner has entered into the fray there is a high likelyhood that new 'hybrid' product may eventuate in the near future, but I highly doubt that the current lineup of products is simply going to evaporate overnight!
I'm sure there will be both K5 and K7 successors respectively for a good while yet as the base technology is already there.

The question of whether Pentax will eventually go with a Q type mirrorless system should be of no consequence to the decision of purchasing a new K mount lens today.
History tells us that these mirrorless cameras are initially a new breed of toy for a given manufacturer and that the technology(ie. EVFs) may filter through to the SLR type camera system(as is rumoured for the Sony A700 successor).


Once again ... do as Tony(Tannin) says! ... "buy now"!

[Falcons]

God I would love a FA77mm I am in love with the pixie dust but cant justify the extra cost over the DA70.

Never really been concerned who owned Pentax before but Ricoh only paid 120 millio0n US$ for it (some houses cost more than that) and have now taken on a payroll and the marketing of a new unproven system in the Q camera as well as significant investment in R&D for a continued lens devpt of the 645D (( That is a significant camera to buy and without lenses it is a pretty expensive paper weight.) and the need to bring out a successor to the K5 not to mention new lenses. Buying a company so cheaply lends a lot of credence to the theory Pentax will be booted around as a tax loss between the Japanese companies till it no longer has a use. I siincerely hope Pentax/Ricoh release a kick ass DSLR and more of the stellar lenses itr is known for but for the first time I am a little dubious but time will tell.

[Tannin]

You really shouldn't call people fanboys without (errr .. dare I say it?) ... hard evidence. But, with that said, I could perhaps be said to be a bit of a Pentax fanboy - although I shoot Canon because I'm a bird photographer and Canon have the best long range bodies and lenses (when I switched from Nikon to Canon in 2004, Canon was really the only option for birding, but that has changed now), I nevertheless have a huge respect for Pentax gear, to the point where I own two of them despite only having Canon bodies. (Well, they have Tokina badges, but the 10-17 and the 35mm macro are both Pentax designs, and te 10-17 in particular is a very sweet one indeed.)

Pentax have lagged in certain areas (given the huge R&D budgets Canikon have to play with, that should not surprise) and done some silly, pointless things (Q is a current example) but have nevertheless remained a genuine innovater. For example, my Canon 7D has a raw/JPG switch for one reason and one reason only - because Pentax thought of it! If I was doing more general photography (not birding and not wanting pro-standard gear) I'd quite likely be using Pentax. The brand is most certainly a viable choice for hobbyist use, and in certain fields, professional use too.

I note your concerns about the new owners, but Ricoh is at least a camera company, and they have bought Pentax specifically to get hold of the cameras (all the other stuff that Hoya wanted, Hoya has kept) - so chances are that they will reboot that camera manufacturing operation and try to get it running well again so that thy have some return on their investment.

Buy with confidence, Falcons! They are great lenses, and pretty decent bodies too. If you want to go birding, switch to Canon (or if you honestly don't care about the money, Nikon does birding well too once you get into the 5 figure price bracket), and if you need other specialist lenses then the same applies, but failing those (fairly uncommon) eventualities, I see absolutely no reason why you wouldn't want to stay with one of the greatest names in photography.

[Falcons]

My appolagies for using the term fanboy and any hurt it may have caused. Camera brands are a funny thing, I am agonising over losing my Pentax but really had no problems going from Holden to Ford and now back to Holden.

Oh and to put to rest any other confusion I have checked again and I am definetly a He not a she - Just thought a Pic of my Girlfriend as an Avatar was a lot more attractive than my ugly mug. (And I like looking at her)

[Lance B]

Having used both systems shake reduction extensively, ie Pentax and Nikon, I find there is little difference in Pentax's SR and Nikon's VR up to about 200mm. The problem is, there are very few readily available lenses over 300mm for Pentax but having had both the FA*300 f4.5 and the DA*300 f4, my findings are based on those lenses being the longest I had. With the shorter focal lengths under 200mm, there is basically no difference in handholdability, ie both systems regularly can give 4 stops with good technique.

With my Pentax gear, using a K-7 (and K20D), which I used up until May last year I was able to quite easily get 3 stops SR up to 200mm and generally up to 300mm. If I was really careful I might snag 4 stops at 300mm sometimes and more often at 200mm and quite regularly at anything 100mm and under. This is free standing and not braced against anything.

However, with my Nikon gear, using 200mm (70-200 f2.8 VRII) on DX (APS C) 4 stops is relatively easy and with 300mm f2.8 VRII (on DX) I can normally get 3 stops quite easily and 4 stops sometimes, so a tad better than with my Pentax gear.

The trouble is, when shooting animals/birds/people/sports, it's not so much you that is the issue, it's the subject that becomes the issue as their movement is almost as bad as camera movement. Take this shot, not braced against anyhting and free standing shot at 1/25sec 270mm on DX (APS C) which is the equivalent of 405mm on FF, so a full 4 stops of handholdability. As you can see, the bird itself is quite sharp, but there is ever the slightest movement of the birds head.

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/131853863/original.jpg

However, with this next shot at 340mm and 1/60sec, so about 3.1 stops of handholdability, there was absolutely no movement of the subject and it is tack sharp and again I was not braced against anything.

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/131919299/original.jpg

When I shoot birds/animals/sports/people, I try as best I can to shoot at 1/focal length for FF and 1/focal length x 1.5 for DX (APSC) regardless of VR/SR. Of course, this depends on what these subjects are doing and what I want to achieve. However, I will try to go a lower shutter if the light is too low, and there is high DR (so I use the lowest ISO for best DR) and subject movement is minimal and if I can I will brace against something or use a monopod.

So, to sum up and this all depends on technique and what you are abe to do, but for me up to about 200mm on DX (APS C) there is very little difference between the two systems as both can get 4 stops usually and 3 stops readily. At 300mm and 3 stops, Nikon may have a slight advantage of maybe getting 4 out of 5 keepers and Pentax maybe 3 out of 5, and over 300mm I cannot say about Pentax as they don't have readily available lenses, but based on the diminishing effectiveness of SR, I would say that it would possibly be less the further up the focal length you go, but this is purely speculation.

There are advantages and disadvantages of both systems as I see it. The in lens VR can help as it shows you that VR is working by the fact that you can see the movement stop in the VF, but in practice, the SR confirmation icon in the VF from Pentax still worked well enough. With Pentax's system every lens has SR whereas with Nikon you need to purchase specific lenses which can add cost, weight and size to the mix. I would hate to think how those pancake lenses and FA and DA Linited lenses would go if they tried to add in lens VR! So realistically speaking, if you want a compact system with small superb lenses like the FA and DA Limiteds etc, small bodies and don't shoot over 300mm, don't need FF, like the excellent ergonomics then Pentax is a superb way to go. But if you want to expand your horizons to go longer lenses, pro system flash, want FF (as well as APS C) then Nikon or Canon is probably the answer.

The fact that Ricoh has purchased Pentax may actually be a good thing, IMO.

[Falcons]

Sorry to take this off topic again but since we are talking long Focal lengths I thought perhaps some of you may be interested to see what can be achieved with long focal length Pentax glass (it iis out there but not readily available) I think this guys work is awesome

http://www.marclangille.com/Nature/Hummingbirds-1/3643150_cLdW5#1323563452_vPcMFL4

Perhaps if Pentax do bring out more quality glass in the longer focal lengths we will see more Pentax birders perhaps.

[xjjohnno]

Marc Langhille does get excellent results. Whoever the manufacturer, longer lenses do get seriously expensive, so in camera image stabilisation becomes quite useful for those of us without bottomless wallets and a predisposition to using preloved lenses for our bird photography.

[reaction]

Well, Hoya was expected to do wonders with Pentax with the extra cash. THey didn't so le'ts hope Ricoh have a good go at it.

[Lance B]

Sorry to take this off topic again but since we are talking long Focal lengths I thought perhaps some of you may be interested to see what can be achieved with long focal length Pentax glass (it iis out there but not readily available) I think this guys work is awesome

http://www.marclangille.com/Nature/Hummingbirds-1/3643150_cLdW5#1323563452_vPcMFL4

Perhaps if Pentax do bring out more quality glass in the longer focal lengths we will see more Pentax birders perhaps.

Yes, Marc is a wonderful photographer and I've had many dealings with him over the net and email. This was before I switched from Pentax to Nikon. For birding, one of the lenses he uses is the 250-600 f5.6 which is no longer available from Pentax, which is a shame as it is a superb zoom range. If Nikon had one of these I might be tempted to get one! :) He also has the FA*300 f2.8 which is also no longer available.

[knumbnutz]

I dont think pentax/hoya did so bad either.
The K5 is a superb camera and probably and argubly the best APSC size DSLR. And then there is the 645D. If you had the cash or the will, you would have it ?
They improved and made it profitable and saw in lots of little goodies that the other brand still have to dream about like the startrail gps.
Most people complain about it doesnt have full frame or long lenses, but in reality its probably never going to have FF and 300mm/F4 maybe it. But you never know and sigma make some fine lenses that fit like the 50-500mm so there are options and you can skip FF and go 645D.
Cheers Neil


Well, Hoya was expected to do wonders with Pentax with the extra cash. THey didn't so le'ts hope Ricoh have a good go at it.

[robz]

So, do I go to town today and seriously look for a K5?
or
wait to see what Richo might do?
:rolleyes:

I might see what price I can bargin for:cool:

[Lance B]

So, do I go to town today and seriously look for a K5?
or
wait to see what Richo might do?
:rolleyes:

I might see what price I can bargin for:cool:

The K-5 is a superb camera. My suggestion is that you try it out to see if it is intuitive to use and that the ergonomics suit you as you need to be able to use the camera easily and intuitively which will mean that you will get the photos you want and that you will enjoy using it. If you enjoy using it, then you will take it out to take photos rather than leave it at home because it is a chore to use. As for Pentax being taken over by Ricoh, I do think this is a good thing as Ricoh is very much in the photography business and obtaining Pentax is a way for them to get into the DSLR market which I believe they needed to get into.

If you do not need a completely professional camera system, ie professional flash and professional long lenses etc, and do not use longer than 300mm (Pentax's longest lens) then the K-5 will be a fantastic camera for you. :)

[Bennymiata]

I've owned a couple of Pentax cameras, the latest a K-x, and I have the greatest respect for them - even though I now use Canon.

I think Hoya did some very good things with Pentax, and they showed some guts too by releasing coloured K-x's at first, then bringing colour to most of their subsequent models as well as getting into medium format and making it almost affordable.
If you have seen the windows of some Japanese camera shops, with rows of multi-coloured K-x's, in so many colours that we didn't get here, they looked fantastic, and the cameras sold like hot-cakes too.
While the new K-5 is an enthusiast camera (and a very good one), the volume sellers are usually the lower grade SLR's, which don't sell anywhere near as many as the point and squirts, so as most of their SLR sales are the lower models like the K-x etc., then it really doesn't make economic sense for Pentax to try and compete with Canikon for expensive, specialist lenses.
Most of their customers set their cameras to full auto, look through the viewfinder and hope for the best.
I'm not denegrading anyone that has a K-7 or K-5, just saying that the volume models are generally the lower grade models like Canon's 1100 and Nikon's 3100, and I doubt that more than 50% of these owners would ever venture past their kit lenses, as would be the case for the majority of Pentax sales.

In marketing, you pick your market and chase it.
Using a scattergun approach can be disaster for smaller companies.

[crf529]

I somewhat agree and disagree. I'd think most people who pick up a DSLR and lock it to auto, do so with the much more visible Canikon line.

[robz]

Well, I paid more than i wanted to but less than I expected.:eek:
It certainly feels smaller than the K10 but not uncomfortable. Perhaps a few new controls to learn but all quite instinctive having used the K10 for a few years.
I think the transition will be quite straight forward
It should arrive at the shop Monday and with the upcoming trip overseas, it will bring the price down further.

I don't think I got much understanding from the rest of the family though.. 'Why do you want another one?"

Obviously the answer is 'cos it will do the job I need it to do, the K10 unfortunately could not'

[robma47]

I hope it is for the better hope they produce some great lenses

[Falcons]

Initiallly I was quite concerned about the takeover, but I saw a photographer out the other week who had a K5 hanging around his neck and a couple of Niikon D3x hanging from his hips - used the Nikons out of frustration of Pentax not gouiing full frame. But he is currently buying a copy of all Pentax FF lenses as he is pretty confident that Ricoh will go FF. Who knows but i am feeling more confident in getting a DA70mm now (or maybe a FA77mm if the Aussie dollar keeps rising).

[K10D]

Initiallly I was quite concerned about the takeover, but I saw a photographer out the other week who had a K5 hanging around his neck and a couple of Niikon D3x hanging from his hips - used the Nikons out of frustration of Pentax not gouiing full frame. But he is currently buying a copy of all Pentax FF lenses as he is pretty confident that Ricoh will go FF. Who knows but i am feeling more confident in getting a DA70mm now (or maybe a FA77mm if the Aussie dollar keeps rising).

Already buying the FF Ltd's (just in case). I am also using a D700 for FF. The 77mm is the latest acquisition and is a rock solid lens.

Best regards