Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 21 Oct 2016 (Friday) 14:34
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Are Pentax Mad.

 
Colin ­ Glover
Goldmember
1,363 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 124
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southport nr Liverpool United Kingdom
     
Oct 21, 2016 14:34 |  #1

Let's just say I'm a Canon user. I wont be using Pentax, but I think they've shot themselves in the foot.

I was at Digital Splash in Liverpool on Sunday. I tried the new Full Frame K-1. Great camera, lightening fast AF, comfortable weight, and very tempting if I decide to go FF.

However, I picked up a brochure for it. It's well written, well designed and at a glance looks good. But whilst the text and the tables in it are crisp and sharp, the images are a totally different thing altogether. Instead of being pin sharp, they are low resolution, soft and slightly fuzzy, though not pixelated. This is both for images of the camera itself, and the photos taken by it.

Don't Pentax care about it's UK market? I mean, if you want people to buy your cameras, you'd want the 36 megapixel images it takes to look absolutely amazing (as they probably do printed out properly) and not as if they were taken with a 1.2 Megapixel point n shoot camera. However, this brochure might well put potential buyers off. Pentax UK seem to have put production costs first when they got it printed.

Has anyone else in the UK seen this brochure, and if you have, what are your thoughts? And is the US brochure any different? Are they as good as Nikon and Canon brochures, which don't seem to suffer from this problem?

Regards,
Col.


Canon EOS 70D, Canon EOS 600D, EF-S 18-55 ii, EF 55-200 USM ii, EF-S 75-300 iii, Tamron 28-80, Sigma 70-210. Pentax 50mm, Pentax 135mm, EF-S 55-250, Raynox Macro adapter, Neewer filters (CPL, UV, FLD & ND4), Fuji HS20 EXR (30X zoom ) & cable release, Yongnuo 560 iii & Luxon 9800A manual flashguns for the Fuji, Hama Star 63 tripod, Hongdek RC-6 remote control, Velbon DF 40 www.point-n-shoot.co.uk website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Luckless
Goldmember
3,064 posts
Likes: 186
Joined Mar 2012
Location: PEI, Canada
     
Oct 21, 2016 15:24 |  #2

Honestly, I'm kind of surprised someone is trying to sell cameras by printing physical brochures... How do the photos look on their website?


Canon EOS 7D | EF 28 f/1.8 | EF 85 f/1.8 | EF 70-200 f/4L | EF-S 17-55 | Sigma 150-500
Flickr: Real-Luckless (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
john ­ crossley
Goldmember
Avatar
2,410 posts
Likes: 724
Joined Nov 2009
Location: The Rhubarb Triangle
     
Oct 21, 2016 15:41 |  #3

Colin Glover wrote in post #18163146 (external link)
Let's just say I'm a Canon user. I wont be using Pentax, but I think they've shot themselves in the foot.

I was at Digital Splash in Liverpool on Sunday. I tried the new Full Frame K-1. Great camera, lightening fast AF, comfortable weight, and very tempting if I decide to go FF.

However, I picked up a brochure for it. It's well written, well designed and at a glance looks good. But whilst the text and the tables in it are crisp and sharp, the images are a totally different thing altogether. Instead of being pin sharp, they are low resolution, soft and slightly fuzzy, though not pixelated. This is both for images of the camera itself, and the photos taken by it.

Don't Pentax care about it's UK market? I mean, if you want people to buy your cameras, you'd want the 36 megapixel images it takes to look absolutely amazing (as they probably do printed out properly) and not as if they were taken with a 1.2 Megapixel point n shoot camera. However, this brochure might well put potential buyers off. Pentax UK seem to have put production costs first when they got it printed.

Has anyone else in the UK seen this brochure, and if you have, what are your thoughts? And is the US brochure any different? Are they as good as Nikon and Canon brochures, which don't seem to suffer from this problem?

Regards,
Col.

Do you make all your purchases based on the print quality of the brochures?


Some days I'm the dog, some days I'm the lamppost.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
49,312 posts
Gallery: 155 photos
Likes: 5885
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Oct 21, 2016 16:26 |  #4

All I can say is your post led me to look up the new K1 for the first time, and well, it looks AMAZING!

That's a LOT of Camera for the price!


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nqjudo
Goldmember
Avatar
3,162 posts
Likes: 1024
Joined Apr 2007
     
Oct 21, 2016 16:37 |  #5

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18163247 (external link)
All I can say is your post led me to look up the new K1 for the first time, and well, it looks AMAZING!

That's a LOT of Camera for the price!

Yeah but have you seen the brochure? :-P


No photographer is as good as the simplest camera. - Edward Steichen.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,251 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2048
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
Post edited over 2 years ago by Left Handed Brisket.
     
Oct 21, 2016 17:12 |  #6

Luckless wrote in post #18163194 (external link)
Honestly, I'm kind of surprised someone is trying to sell cameras by printing physical brochures... ?

This comment really strikes me as odd.


Anyway, I wonder if they did a short run on a crappy press due to being a new piece of equipment? With a full press run coming later. If all the pics were soft that would be my first thought, but I have no idea what is going on with this camera. If it isn't released yet that may make sense.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Picture ­ North ­ Carolina
Gaaaaa! DOH!! Oops!
9,108 posts
Likes: 144
Joined Apr 2006
Location: North Carolina
     
Oct 22, 2016 07:57 |  #7

Luckless wrote in post #18163194 (external link)
Honestly, I'm kind of surprised someone is trying to sell cameras by printing physical brochures..


Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18163284 (external link)
This comment really strikes me as odd.

Yea, me too. Although some social-media elitists may not understand it, brochures, magazine ads, and more are still legitimate and powerful methods of advertising.

As to the OP, the answer is easy. The Product Development and Marketing departments are separate entities in a company. From experience I can say that sometimes they can't even communicate effectively within four walls.

Pentax's Product Development team created a great product. But Pentax's marketing people are a bunch of incompetent morons. It's that simple.


Website (external link) |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Luckless
Goldmember
3,064 posts
Likes: 186
Joined Mar 2012
Location: PEI, Canada
     
Oct 22, 2016 08:25 |  #8

Brochures are very expensive to do well compared to online media, require physical handling, and cannot be modified after the fact. At trade shows I've been getting more and more business cards rather than brochures, and honestly I'm rather thankful for that. Cards fit nicely in the wallet and are easy to carry for later reference. Brochures? Not so much.

Anyone remotely in the market for buying a digital camera is most likely going to have web access, so it is hard to even justify large physical hand out media with "Well how else would they ever get to see it?"


Canon EOS 7D | EF 28 f/1.8 | EF 85 f/1.8 | EF 70-200 f/4L | EF-S 17-55 | Sigma 150-500
Flickr: Real-Luckless (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
35,895 posts
Gallery: 141 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 4765
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Oct 22, 2016 08:59 |  #9

Pros shoot things like brochures and many other types of print media and print is the standard in both the art and the professional world. If you are only going to put images on the web shoot with an iPhone. So I would find it strange that a company like Pentax wouldn't have put out a better quality printed piece when trying to showcase a new camera.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
welshwizard1971
Goldmember
1,418 posts
Likes: 1027
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southampton Hampshire UK
     
Oct 22, 2016 09:20 |  #10

john crossley wrote in post #18163206 (external link)
Do you make all your purchases based on the print quality of the brochures?

Personally if I'm buying a toothbrush,no, if I'm buying a camera, then if I saw a bad brochure photo then that would form part of the equation yes. If they can't take and print a good photo with it, what makes me think I can? Couldn't care less what the specs in the brochure are if it can't take a good photo, 4.4fps of bad photo's is no good to anyone.


5DIII, 40D, 16-35L 35 ART 50 ART 100L macro, 24-70 L Mk2, 135L 200L 70-200L f4 IS
Hype chimping - The act of looking at your screen after every shot, then wildly behaving like it's the best picture in the world, to try and impress other photographers around you.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,251 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2048
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Oct 22, 2016 09:25 |  #11

Luckless wrote in post #18163722 (external link)
Brochures are very expensive to do well compared to online media, require physical handling, and cannot be modified after the fact. At trade shows I've been getting more and more business cards rather than brochures, and honestly I'm rather thankful for that. Cards fit nicely in the wallet and are easy to carry for later reference. Brochures? Not so much.

Anyone remotely in the market for buying a digital camera is most likely going to have web access, so it is hard to even justify large physical hand out media with "Well how else would they ever get to see it?"

I have produced brochures that are about the size of a mans wallet.

True story!!!


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Colin ­ Glover
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,363 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 124
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southport nr Liverpool United Kingdom
Post edited over 2 years ago by Colin Glover.
     
Oct 22, 2016 12:13 as a reply to  @ welshwizard1971's post |  #12

My thoughts exactly. If I do go FF I might be tempted by this, but only because I've used the K1 and it's great. Lightening fast AF. I'm one who likes to hold a brochure in my hand and actually read it. I hold the print close as possible to look at fine detail as well. It's harder on my laptop. But then again I'm Aspergers. I work in sales, and believe you need the best materials to make sales. This brochure clearly is third or fourth rate. If I didn't know a thing about what I sell, I wouldn't be as good as I am. I sincerely hope this is Pentax just using up a bad batch of brochures. However, seeing Pentax don't seem to be doing things the way the camera magazines would like them to do (like buying lots of ad space in order to get really good reviews instead of good ones), so don't get the publicity they probably deserve. Over in the UK, the back page & inside front and back cover are the most expensive, and glossiest, pages to advertise on. Those manufacturers who regularly pay for these spaces get the best reviews. Take Samsung. When they were doing that they were getting 4/5* reviews. Pentax don't do that. And with the bulk of DSLR upgrades being FF, a back cover or inside cover would be just what Pentax needs to recover the ground it lost to Sony, as well as gaining fans from Canon and Nikon..


Canon EOS 70D, Canon EOS 600D, EF-S 18-55 ii, EF 55-200 USM ii, EF-S 75-300 iii, Tamron 28-80, Sigma 70-210. Pentax 50mm, Pentax 135mm, EF-S 55-250, Raynox Macro adapter, Neewer filters (CPL, UV, FLD & ND4), Fuji HS20 EXR (30X zoom ) & cable release, Yongnuo 560 iii & Luxon 9800A manual flashguns for the Fuji, Hama Star 63 tripod, Hongdek RC-6 remote control, Velbon DF 40 www.point-n-shoot.co.uk website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
john ­ crossley
Goldmember
Avatar
2,410 posts
Likes: 724
Joined Nov 2009
Location: The Rhubarb Triangle
     
Oct 22, 2016 14:36 |  #13

Colin Glover wrote in post #18163867 (external link)
My thoughts exactly. If I do go FF I might be tempted by this, but only because I've used the K1 and it's great. Lightening fast AF. I'm one who likes to hold a brochure in my hand and actually read it. I hold the print close as possible to look at fine detail as well. It's harder on my laptop. But then again I'm Aspergers. I work in sales, and believe you need the best materials to make sales. This brochure clearly is third or fourth rate. If I didn't know a thing about what I sell, I wouldn't be as good as I am. I sincerely hope this is Pentax just using up a bad batch of brochures. However, seeing Pentax don't seem to be doing things the way the camera magazines would like them to do (like buying lots of ad space in order to get really good reviews instead of good ones), so don't get the publicity they probably deserve. Over in the UK, the back page & inside front and back cover are the most expensive, and glossiest, pages to advertise on. Those manufacturers who regularly pay for these spaces get the best reviews. Take Samsung. When they were doing that they were getting 4/5* reviews. Pentax don't do that. And with the bulk of DSLR upgrades being FF, a back cover or inside cover would be just what Pentax needs to recover the ground it lost to Sony, as well as gaining fans from Canon and Nikon..

Reviews are based on product testing, NOT advertising space.


Some days I'm the dog, some days I'm the lamppost.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,009 posts
Gallery: 1466 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 9472
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Oct 22, 2016 14:50 |  #14

Pentax make awesome cameras.

The problem is their lens line up.

And for me, well, the used market isn't good, so it's hard to get into without buying new for virtually everything knowing you're stuck with it if you have a change of heart years later.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,606 posts
Likes: 414
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Oct 22, 2016 15:16 |  #15
bannedPermanent ban

Picture North Carolina wrote in post #18163709 (external link)
Yea, me too. Although some social-media elitists may not understand it, brochures, magazine ads, and more are still legitimate and powerful methods of advertising.

As to the OP, the answer is easy. The Product Development and Marketing departments are separate entities in a company. From experience I can say that sometimes they can't even communicate effectively within four walls.

Pentax's Product Development team created a great product. But Pentax's marketing people are a bunch of incompetent morons. It's that simple.

Don't know what 60's company you are referring to that
Segregates product development from marketing, but the products I managed in my 30+ years always had marketing part of the product team...right there with the development team. You'd be amazed at how much value marketing contributes during the development phase.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,040 views & 8 likes for this thread
Are Pentax Mad.
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is MailManX
535 guests, 405 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.