Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-05-2019, 03:48 AM   #16
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North-East of England
Posts: 14,200
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I don't know about the numbers in the initial post. Pentax doesn't have 10 models of ILC currently in manufacture. I imagine they have 3 -- 645z, K-1 II, and KP. Maybe the K70 too, but that's at most 4. The issue is old stock that is still floating around unsold. If you go on B and H, there are only those four for sale new.

The problem for camera brands is that they really did over produce camera bodies in the past and now have unsold product just sitting around. Unless the stores choose to discount it aggressively, my bet is it will continue to be unsold. Who really wants to buy a D610 unless they are getting a fantastic deal on it?
Right. That's exactly what happened with, for example, the original Canon 6D when the MkII came out. It sat around on shelves for a while, even when discounted. It was only when the price dropped to mid-range APS-C level (I think it got as low as GBP 699 here in the UK, compared to the original 1,699 full retail) that the remaining stock was promptly snapped up. Because at that money, whatever limitations it may have when compared to the MkII model and other brand cameras in the same market segment, it was a solid, full frame camera for silly low money. It's amazing how quickly some folks forget all the new "must have" features they insisted they needed when presented with a bargain on out-going tech

09-05-2019, 03:57 AM   #17
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,907
Pentax lacks a K-3 successor and/or fast full frame. It would be easy to put a 24mp sensor in a K-1s that will enable it to shoot at a higher frame rate. Such a camera could also be a successor to the K-3 line. That is a choice to make. Canon and Nikon are not making any moves to replace their high end aps-c offerings (I mean D500 and 7d Mk II) anytime soon. So maybe that market has become too small because of affordable full frame cameras and aps-c mirrorless. Sony, Canon, Nikon are all using the basically same bodies for different level (mirrorless) camera's. That is what Pentax should do too. 1 MF 1 FF and 1 aps-c body in two different options 100/50mp 42/24mp and 24mp same sensor (unless something better is available) but one safox-11 and another safox 14 (skip 13 ).
09-05-2019, 05:59 AM   #18
Banned




Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 9,674
Oeh someone wants more models......well that maybe also sells more units, but at lower levels on average per model range.
09-05-2019, 06:23 AM - 2 Likes   #19
Journeyman Cat Wrangler
Loyal Site Supporter
SSGGeezer's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Maine, U.S.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,230
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
but more software differentiation with licenses on breath (features and software locked performance) and depth (max shutter count software locked)
Have you seen your head doctor of late? Cameras based on software as a service is a concept from the depths of a Lovecraft story. Never, never ,ever will I pay a camera company, especially Sony for this business model.

09-05-2019, 10:53 AM - 1 Like   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,354
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by SSGGeezer Quote
Have you seen your head doctor of late? Cameras based on software as a service is a concept from the depths of a Lovecraft story. Never, never ,ever will I pay a camera company, especially Sony for this business model.
The Black Goat of the Woods with a Thousand Young will get you.
09-06-2019, 01:15 PM   #21
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 12,351
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Camera designs are way too much hardware driven. Such a waste of R&D. There should be less camera models from a hardware standpoint (more uniform hardware, well thought ergo, UI, build quality, and processing), but more software differentiation with licenses on breath (features and software locked performance) and depth (max shutter count software locked), so that the pricing can be flexible and flexible over time. The way camera makers make cameras is changing slowly (Sony showing the way with designing 1 body and reuse the same body for three models), but it is still outdated compared to other products. Pentax (and others) could have one model per sensor format, and three software licenses at three price points depending on the features and performance customers want and how much they are willing to pay.
I believe the backlash would be terrible, and it might kill Pentax for good. I doubt even Sony would do it.

I also don't see the value in doing such a thing. Surely, locking performance in software means the camera would still have the hardware certified for its maximum performance - say, a mirror mechanism capable of its max fps; or the readout and processing speed corresponding to its max fps, max video capabilities and so on.
The effect, IMO, is just crippling your hardware in order to sell it cheaper.

OTOH component sharing is a quite effective cost saving, and has nothing to do with software-crippling your products.
09-06-2019, 01:47 PM   #22
Lens Hoarder
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,371
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Camera designs are way too much hardware driven. Such a waste of R&D. There should be less camera models from a hardware standpoint (more uniform hardware, well thought ergo, UI, build quality, and processing), but more software differentiation with licenses on breath (features and software locked performance) and depth (max shutter count software locked), so that the pricing can be flexible and flexible over time. The way camera makers make cameras is changing slowly (Sony showing the way with designing 1 body and reuse the same body for three models), but it is still outdated compared to other products. Pentax (and others) could have one model per sensor format, and three software licenses at three price points depending on the features and performance customers want and how much they are willing to pay.
In essence you suggest they build all cameras with the most expensive components then disable the capabilities of those very components and sell most of the cameras at a smaller than premium margin. . That’s an insane pricing model. There can’t be enough total volume to offset the component costs. It might have worked for the K1000 (KM Minus) on volume but those days are long passed.
09-07-2019, 07:04 AM - 3 Likes   #23
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 21,141
It would be interesting if car companies worked that way. GM just has three models. "I'm sorry sir, I know this looks exactly like the Silverado, but this particular truck is software limited to a max speed of 45 kph and can only pull 1000 pounds. Actually, if you can save up, for only 4999 we can enable the Silverado features sometime down the road..."

09-07-2019, 07:29 AM   #24
Banned




Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 9,674
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
It would be interesting if car companies worked that way. GM just has three models. "I'm sorry sir, I know this looks exactly like the Silverado, but this particular truck is software limited to a max speed of 45 kph and can only pull 1000 pounds. Actually, if you can save up, for only 4999 we can enable the Silverado features sometime down the road..."
Well Nikon in a way did this with the D700.
D700 2012 Digital Cameras Discontinued

QuoteQuote:
Continu-opnamen van 5 bps (8 bps met optioneel MB-D10 battery pack met EN-EL4a lithium-ion batterij of 8 AA-batterijen).
So the camera could make 5 fps, but with the extra grip it could do 8 fps.

There was a way to go around this (forgot how) and you could trick the camera to do 8 fps without the grip

---------- Post added 07-09-19 at 16:32 ----------

Pentax had this strange thing with the K-01. It could do RAW images only at 1 fps. But when you put it on bracketing it could do 3 frames very fast with altering the light settings in +- 1/3th stop. Also just a software trick.
09-07-2019, 09:55 AM   #25
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 21,141
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Well Nikon in a way did this with the D700.
D700 2012 Digital Cameras Discontinued


So the camera could make 5 fps, but with the extra grip it could do 8 fps.

There was a way to go around this (forgot how) and you could trick the camera to do 8 fps without the grip

---------- Post added 07-09-19 at 16:32 ----------

Pentax had this strange thing with the K-01. It could do RAW images only at 1 fps. But when you put it on bracketing it could do 3 frames very fast with altering the light settings in +- 1/3th stop. Also just a software trick.
The K-01 really couldn't do fast frames per second, even with that trick. Yes, it could do 3 frames quickly, but then the camera would freeze for quite awhile while they were written.
09-08-2019, 03:11 PM   #26
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,487
People think the high prices of cameras are related to the cost of hardware components. Think again.
09-08-2019, 03:16 PM - 1 Like   #27
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North-East of England
Posts: 14,200
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
People think the high prices of cameras are related to the cost of hardware components. Think again.
But that doesn't really make sense... does it? Otherwise, the aperture control mechanism of the lower-to-mid-range Pentax models would have been the same - and as robust - as the so-called flagships. The shutter mechanisms would be the same and have the same ratings. It would have made no sense for Hoya or Ricoh to develop different levels of hardware, even back then, if there was no cost benefit to doing so - surely?
09-08-2019, 03:26 PM   #28
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 346
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
But that doesn't really make sense... does it? Otherwise, the aperture control mechanism of the lower-to-mid-range Pentax models would have been the same - and as robust - as the so-called flagships. The shutter mechanisms would be the same and have the same ratings. It would have made no sense for Hoya or Ricoh to develop different levels of hardware, even back then, if there was no cost benefit to doing so - surely?
It does make you wonder what the difference in component cost is between the aperture control mechanisms of the different models. You would think economies of scale would make it more economical to only use one.

09-09-2019, 01:03 AM   #29
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,487
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
But that doesn't really make sense... does it?
Yes it does makes sense, especially if you consider that the supposedly cheaper solenoid costed a lot more of damaged the reputation for Pentax. And I tell you that the reason of failure of solenoids in Pentax cameras isn't due to the cost of solenoid but the failure of Pentax reliability testing when introducing that new part in camera designs. Typical engineering/quality process failure: the purchaser found a new solenoid cheaper, Ricoh/Pentax decided to go for the new part without taking the time to test it's durability. Do you think they would have decided to save $2 and have lots of cameras fail in the hands of customers after 10K photos? How would that work with a K1 or a 645Z kind of cameras? Reliability has nothing to do with cost, some components cost only 1 cent and are extremely reliable. Bottom line is, reliability is a thing and cost of hardware is another thing. There are components that cost $1 cents and last 11 years average without failure.

Anyway, given smaller volumes and higher prices of cameras in 2019 (higher prices because of lower volumes), the approach of the past of saving $2 on parts doesn't make sense anymore. Saving money on unit cost of hardware doesn't work in 2019, saving money on R&D clearly increase the bottom line, because the most unit cost of cameras happens to be caused by (Units sold)/(R&D+SG&A)

Last edited by biz-engineer; 09-09-2019 at 01:15 AM.
09-09-2019, 01:40 AM - 1 Like   #30
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North-East of England
Posts: 14,200
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Yes it does makes sense, especially if you consider that the supposedly cheaper solenoid costed a lot more of damaged the reputation for Pentax. And I tell you that the reason of failure of solenoids in Pentax cameras isn't due to the cost of solenoid but the failure of Pentax reliability testing when introducing that new part in camera designs. Typical engineering/quality process failure: the purchaser found a new solenoid cheaper, Ricoh/Pentax decided to go for the new part without taking the time to test it's durability. Do you think they would have decided to save $2 and have lots of cameras fail in the hands of customers after 10K photos?
With respect, that wasn't my point... Hoya didn't know that solenoid was going to be a reliability issue. Presumably, it chose the components for its Pentax cameras based on suitability for the designs and cost. $2 may not make much difference to the price of a camera, but when it's one of (say) thirty components with similar savings, that's sixty bucks per camera. At sales of ten thousand units, that's six hundred thousand bucks - ten peoples' salaries - paid for, right there...

So, whilst I agree that component testing for reliability and durability should be better, I don't believe it's practical (nor likely) for camera manufacturers to use top end components in every model and control functionality and performance through software, even taking the savings of volume pricing into account. Where they can, they're going to save on on individual components, materials and design aspects because that all quickly adds up on a model-by-model basis.

Just my opinion, of course
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
apsc, bps, camera, camera models, d700, dslr, ff, fps, grip, hardware, lots, makers, market, mft, mirrorless, model, models, people, photo industry, photography, post, sales, software, thousand, trick, units
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-1 Dial mode problem (all models or early models only)? jcphoto Pentax K-1 5 02-20-2017 05:45 PM
For Sale - Sold: LOTS and LOTS of Pentax Stuff - K-01 still available - MUST GO! DRabbit Sold Items 11 09-22-2014 03:06 PM
Price of older models after introduction of new models? sterretje Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 01-22-2010 10:22 PM
Cars, lots of and lots of cars. melander Post Your Photos! 2 06-30-2009 04:28 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:21 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top