lens prices ???

Hi, I've been noticing along with everyone else the price hike of Pentax lenses. Is it just Pentax that have hiked prices so much in so short a time ? The reason I ask is because the only lens I have been considering buying new is the Sigma 17-70. A couple of months ago at £199 it seemed a good bargain. The cheapest I can find it now is £245 ! So have ALL brands increased so much in price ?

DERYN

They've all increased quite significantly (camera prices too), due to the Yen/Pound exchange rate. Got to wait for the economy to pick back up! Although you can bet they'll be slower to come down than they were to go up...

Hi and thanks for that.

Being a Pentax user I am only familiar with Pentax lenses and so I wasn't sure if all brands had risen.

I did enquire about a sigma 17-70 in classifieds a couple of times. Perhaps if I put a wanted ad ?

I've commented before that if lens prices were lowered more people would buy them increasing profits surely above what they are now 'cause people are resisting buying ?

DERYN

Only if the increase in sales outweighed the reduced proit margin on each lens.

I can make the same argument that the increased profit margin on the new prices will outweigh the reduced number of lenses sold.

The answer is of course I have not a clue which is correct, it all depends on how elastic the Pentax lens purchasers' wallets are.

I know there is a specific issue of UK prices (nothing new there !), but this seems to be a general catching-up of retail prices to the increased costs manufacturers have bourne over the last couple of years. Indeed all lens manufacturers seem to have put their prices up recently.

Pure speculation here, but I am sure there is also pressure from Hoya : price the goods at a level that will make a certain return, and if the sales and profit fall as a result, then re-organise and concentrate on what can be sold to produce the required returns.

Sigma also increased their prices by quite a substantial amount just after Christmas, Pentax are just playing catchup ... rather too enthusiastically if you ask me.

We have seen quite a few very big changes in the last 18 months that have shocked those who thought that the previous ten years of low inflation and steady growth were the norm.

One thing I believe we will not see so readily again is the relentless price falls of new (electronic) technology. Going forward I think margins will have to be preserved and the consumer will have to pay more.

Dare I say we may have to "save up" for a new camera in the future.

I sold 3 or 4 lenses to upgrade my K10D to a K-7.
Saying that I have since had second thoughts, bought a DA* 50-135mm (at the old price) and have just now seen a used Sigma 180mm DG EX Macro for sale for a reasonable price. (which actually is more second hand than it was 4 months ago brand new).

Just going back to the point of reducing margins to increase sales, by and large this does not work. Financially it can be a disaster. You are buying turnover, which is no good. You need profit.

I have seen two companies at least, from close experience, disintegrate through the low margin approach. No point selling things if you don't make a profit on them, you're just kidding yourself.

I agree John. Often the reduced margin/increased sales route is intended to or will result in one or more names in the industry pulling out of the business they are in.

The current lens game of putting prices up may well have the same result when someone realises there are too many products for not enough consumers, but it seems to me a more honest approach.

Sorry if this view makes me unpopular.

I worked for a company that was taken over. The game plan seemed to be to introduce a new catalogue and reduce prices to compete with the "big boys" but unfortunately the number of customers remained the same.

Hence we just charged our existing customers less money, lost money even quicker, and of course you can guess the outcome.

I pointed out this to the CEO and the reply was a mysterious, "Yes, I know." "So why are we doing it?" just got a shrug as a reply, so go figure that one.

I think often in these cases the answer is that to do nothing is not an option. If the shareholder is not seeing a return they want or growth they want, they will demand change.

As you rightly point out increased sales is "change", but will probably not lead to the one that the shareholder desires. Putting prices up to protect margins is a do or die approach, easier to do when it appears to be industry wide, but with I believe an inevitable result.

Canon and Nikon are obviously in the strongest position here, and of the rest the ones that will do well/ok will be the innovative ones with imaginative products. The public has to "want" to pay the higher prices. With the forums abuzz with the K7 maybe Pentax have got this one right ?

Maybe so - I think SRS and the others are not having much of a problem selling K7s.

I think a good example of this is from the motor industry. When BMW created MINI and produced a motoring icon in a modern guise.

The press loved the car but always pointed out that it was over-priced. The public however said sod the price, and bought it in droves.

Admittedly this was in the period of easy money, and sales have of course recently taken a nosedive, but it goes to show that quality/inovation/fun products can command a premium.

The current climate is not an easy one to adopt this strategy, but Pentax has (a bit like mini/MINI) a history/nostalgic association that it must use to it's advantage. I was saddened to see the recent news about the closure of the Pentax museum. This could have been part of a marketing strategy ! I hope the accountants dont pull any more stunts like that.

But for Pentax to succed as a "premium brand" minority DSLR manufacturer it needs to get not only the product and marketing spot on, but also after sales and quality control. The latter two have had some question marks recently.