|
|
04-13-2017, 05:55 AM
Pentax is not doing a god job and Ricoh isn't making much profit... will they follow the steps of Samsung ?
https://petapixel.com/2017/04/12/bye-bye...-business/ 
04-13-2017, 07:18 AM
04-13-2017, 08:48 AM
I wonder how much losses did the company stock suffer after such reports... one newspaper article and a sizable chunk of your business' value is wiped out? :o
04-13-2017, 09:02 AM
Isn't that the price companies sometimes need to pay, when shares are involved? I think it's already wrong to measure business values with shares - paying customers are value, offering labour in exchange of salary to people is value, every kind of stock shares is fake value, existing only on paper. Aren't people saying, if you have money to play with buy shares? So, money games are simply not representing true value - in my eyes. I don't own shares, needless to say. If I have money to play with, I gonna exchange it for something with glass inside.
Let's face it - no matter what to think of this, there are just too many camera systems on the market today:
Leica: 3 mounts Canon: 2 Nikon: 1 (was 2) Sony: 2 Fuji: 2 Pentax: 3 MFT: 1 (was 2) Hasselbald: 2 Sigma: 1 The world doesn't need 17 different mounts. Quote:Let's face it - no matter what to think of this, there are just too many camera systems on the market today:Now try to tell that to the producers! None of them need cross compatibility because they want to keep the consumers chained to their own systems. (sincerely yours, this is Captain Obvious speaking again  ) Of course as a user, I would've loved to see more universality: for example, 4 or 5 years ago I surmised that out of the (then existing) three APS-C mirrorless systems - Samsung, Sony, Fuji - one could build a really fine lineup of lenses, even though none of those systems was really complete on its own. Then was then and now is now, of course...
04-13-2017, 07:39 PM
Quote:Let's face it - no matter what to think of this, there are just too many camera systems on the market today: Add in the APS-C (because it is actually a different system with the same physical mount) and you end up with even more. Leica: 4 Canon: 3 Nikon: 2 Sony:4 Fuji: 2 Pentax: 4 MFT: 1 Hasselbald: 2 Sigma: 1 Phase One/Mamiya: 1 Total: 24 Actually Phase ONe/Mamiya one is cool because they share the same mount, which is based on the m645 mount from 70s. See camera companies, it is possible after all. By the way, how many defunct mounts/systems that are digital based do we have? Contax had the N mount that is gone now. Samsung NX mount is gone Contax 645 AF mount is gone too, they probably designed that one with digital backs in mind. 4/3 is gone. Nikon 1 What else?
04-13-2017, 08:02 PM
I think Mamiya had more, if you include the film cameras. 6×7 had an own one and the 330 series with double lenses as well. Pentax once made a 110 film DSLR, Mamiya as well a 135 film model, then there are Alpa, Rollei (couple of mounts), Zenza Bronica, Fuji's 6×9 and I'm sure I forgot half a dozen forgotten brands. The list of Klaus forgot Olympus as well...
So? If you were manufacturer, wouldn't you like to protect your new micro-cosmos which is for sure the best there is? Tamron's adaptall T2 project went also into oblivion, I'm still wondering why µ 4/3 manufacturers altogether came to one table to fix that mount.
04-13-2017, 09:57 PM
Mamiya had quite a few more, so did Fuji, Bronica, Contax etc. Most of those died even before digital came. Up until last year or so, we only had the two Contax mounts that were created with digital sensors in mind that died. One can argue that 4/3 has been dead for quite a few years but hasn't that been only recently officially admitted?
|
