Full Version: Pentax D FA* 50mm f/1.4 - development annoucement
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
(07-04-2018, 09:58 AM)Kunzite Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-03-2018, 06:46 PM)davidmanze Wrote: [ -> ]Well I believe you for sure..if by that you mean that Hoya refused to invest while looking for a buyer?.....no company is going to destroy a business that it hopes to sell, Hoya didn't want to spend out all the investments knowing the return would be three or so years later......
 .although looking and reading through, I could find nothing relating to the details other than an attempted block of shares, some "save pill" share scheme which allowed existing share holders to buy shares at low market prices to increase the value of the company....then the takeover..... the track is hard to follow.............
                                               ...........will you settle for saved once.  LOL?

  If only you being right meant that Pentax will soldier on..........
Yes, you can say that Hoya refused to invest while looking for a buyer. They were always talking about cost cutting, downsizing and their ever-precious margins - no hint of long term thinking there.
And we can see how, after the 2008 spike - lenses prepared by Pentax Corporation - the lens development slowed to a grinding halt. They even canceled existing projects like the DA* 30mm and the long telephoto.
That left the Pentax line largely neglected. Still with film-era lenses, still with SDM micro-motors on the "top" lenses, with screw drive on many others, still with no FF. Far from saving, Hoya left Pentax in a sorry state.

OTOH Ricoh took over on 1st October 2011 - this is the 7th year of ownership. The market started to decline right after that and strategies have to be adjusted; but it's past time to see some speed. (Are you reading this, Ricoh? We're still here, ready to support said 'speed' with our money).

The only saving that took place was for Ricoh to take over from Hoya. Otherwise I'm afraid Pentax would truly be dead.
But without Hoya, this saving would not be necessary.

  I just wanted to ascertain your definition of Hoya  "trying to destroy Pentax"
    You know that is not the realistic motive......... the motive was one of acquiring the "juicy cuts" of Pentax whilst leaving the skeleton, the camera division up for tender. 
     Investment would have just been Hoya wasting it's money......... given their decision to split the company.
    Sadly such is the way of large corporations...buy outs ....share holders meetings......annual dividends....divisions of companies......shredding etc.

  Any public company trading on the stock market is vulnerable to a takeover....having an overall share majority helps, but that is not always easy..and Hoya did what many a corporation might do...........however unpleasant that may be and it was!  ... I don't see it as Hoya setting out to destroy Pentax, but rather to selfishly further it's business.

   Corporations in general are not the nicest of beings, Sony is out to dominate the camera industry........I'm sure it's not for the love of Nikon!
To be accurate, I said "Hoya almost killed Pentax" (and I'm talking about our Pentax, the Imaging Systems Business at it was known then - but I never said this was their motive.
Of course their motive was to get the medical division. Of course the SPARX' motive was a short term financial gain or something of that sort.

Don't forget, what I'm arguing against is the idea that somehow Hoya saved Pentax from near-certain death. They did the exact opposite.
Well I'll go along with that then! Initial boost to Pentax followed by pulling the carpet from under their feet, not nice!

Samsung probably didn't like the taste ether no doubt!
Are you trolling, by chance?
My least favourite modern word....ugh!

Reminds me of childrens favourites on saturday morning........."I am a troll fol de rol" etc............."and I'll eat you up for my dinner"...

Remember that one? Or a bit before your time?
Your least favourite word, and my least favourite behavior.
I mean fancy discussing Pentax on a Pentax forum.........what a sauce??

.........there should be a law against it!
Are you discussing, or dissing Pentax - I wonder?
I don't think I've put this link already.
It's the first second review I've seen for the D FA* 50mm f/1.4:

The automated translation is awful. The lens is amazing.

And this review is back:
It's an excellent lens, that's great, but dunno how much it would sell, it's bulky, expensive, and nothing but a 50mm prime
Tokina did the same already, their 16-28f2.8 is an awesome lens, yet it's not selling well, I expect this one to have the same fate.
Personally, this weekend I have been using the medicore Sony 16-50 on Sony A6000 while keeping the very good Canon 15-85 plus 7D2 in the car... My tokina 16-28 is amazing yet I am using by far more frequently canon 10-18 on crop body.
A huge bulky and expensive prime usually has a hard time attracting customers unless it does something really special, which is not the case of a 50f1.4 lens regardless of its image quality
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9