Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-29-2010, 09:52 AM   #76
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Italy
Posts: 174
QuoteOriginally posted by nosnoop Quote


and majority of users do NOT want FF!
watch this polls:
Poll Results: If You Were Pentax, What Would You Do Now?
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/86159-what-would-y...il-pentax.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/80928-would-you-buy-pentax-ff-6.html

07-29-2010, 09:52 AM   #77
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,197
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
Take a look at the age demographic in camera clubs and who attends photography sessions. We have 70 plus members in the local club, but it seems to include exclusively those in their 40's and older.
You're very right about this. My running joke is that I was the youngest person in my camera club when I joined at age 26. And now, 30+ years later, I'm STILL the youngest person in the club!
07-29-2010, 10:02 AM - 1 Like   #78
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
QuoteOriginally posted by nosnoop Quote
You are EXACTLY right!
I have always maintained that majority of users don't care about sensor size...
and majority of users do NOT want FF!
They did not "want" more than 3.1 MP's either. Or 15x zooms in a compact.

What's your point? This is a democratic vote?

Consumer demand is driven by the capacity to supply using available technology in an economic manner. If FF can become more economically feasible (and it will), then you WILL want FF. IN fact, good marketing will even get you willing to pay more for that privilege (like $600 vacuum).

I am simply describing the workings of the consumer goods market as it is, not as you imagine it.
07-29-2010, 10:07 AM   #79
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
The younger generations are out there happy with simple point and shoots, cell phones, and seem to be spending their more serious time either gaming or shooting video with $200 machines for Youtube. Its not that they won't shoot still pictures occasionally, its just that it will won't be a serious hobby for as many in the future.
The baby-boomers are willing to spend serious money on cameras, the next generations - not so much.
,
That's a nonsense over-generalization. There is some phenomenal use of expensive new, hi-fi tech by young people, more than I could ever have dreamed of when I was their age (I am so jealous).

You answered your own query about camera club attendance. They meet online, through Flickr groups and YouTube and Facebook. They gain knowledge more privately but through a much broader socially interactive base. They have access to more technical data than we could have ever hoped for 20 years ago.

Baby Boomers only spend more now as they have more disposable income. It has nothing to do with altered cultural attitudes towards photography. Not to mention than most of the world is still in its Baby Boom, with that generation only just now coming of age. The market is 10X larger than the US.


Last edited by Aristophanes; 07-29-2010 at 03:12 PM.
07-29-2010, 10:27 AM   #80
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,299
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
They did not "want" more than 3.1 MP's either. Or 15x zooms in a compact.
Oh yes, they do! They sure do. If you don't see that, you are out of touch with what consumer wants. The mega pixel race is completely driven by the myth that the higher the pixel count, the better. Consumers WANT higher mega pixel camera. And if you frequent camcorder forums, you will see time and time again people asking why their HD camcorder zoom range is so much more limited than their SD camcorder.

QuoteQuote:
What's your point? This is a democratic vote?
Consumer demand is driven by the capacity to supply using available technology in an economic manner. If FF can become more economically feasible (and it will), then you WILL want FF. IN fact, good marketing will even get you willing to pay more for that privilege (like $600 vacuum).
But that's the thing - FF is NOT in the mind of consumers, and very few people know about it, and even fewer can actually SEE or appreciate the benefit. You need huge marketing just to educate people about the subtle advantages of FF!
There is little economic sense to do so, when there are so many more features that consumers can identify with, and does not need huge marketing dollars to hype the benefit.

"People WILL want FF" is basically your dream. This may or may not happen.
Even in your own words, it may not happen:
QuoteQuote:
I see 2 tech issues and 1 economic issue stalling the inevitable FF advance:
So it is not "inevitable" at all.
IMHO, it will not happen, as manufacturers have little incentive to invest marketing dollars to hype a feature that the uninitiated would have a hard time seeing the difference.
07-29-2010, 10:51 AM - 1 Like   #81
Veteran Member
Asahiflex's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,754
Nosnoop, you keep talking about the consumer market. Don't forget that this audience is already served by other brands. The consumers who buy a Canon or Nikon (or a Pana/Sony/Oly EVIL for that matter) because they have seen or heard a commercial featuring a product of that brand, and only because of that. This audience is also served by Pentax through the magnificent K-x.

But... the well-informed and advanced users, while still inclined to buy products of the aforementioned brands if those suit their needs, are the ones that Pentax wants. Selling fewer products with a bigger margin is what Hoya wants. Don't forget that the overhead costs of spawning shitloads of cheap DSLR's/EVIL's are huge. Maybe it's not so bad for Pentax to keep in its niche? I don't see the point for Hoya to aggressively enter the fierce consumer market if they can earn more than enough by selling well-designed, good-quality cameras (at a little premium). I like to think of Pentax as the Japanese (upscaled) Leica company. For the more advanced users who enjoy photography with superbly crafted tools, not the plastic mass "products" for consumers.

Back to FF: as a brand targeted to the enthusiast amateur Pentax SHOULD come out with a FF model. Forget about "competing" with the 5D MkII, Nikon D700 et al. It's not about competing, it's about Pentax as a whole. Forget talking about "market share", because even with 5% the number of 5D MkII's sold worldwide, Hoya might earn shitloads of money with a FF model. Marketing dollars are not needed, such a model will sell well all by itself (like the 645D does).

Please let's give Pentax the chance to stay like Pentax and not like the next "just another" cheap consumer brand you can buy at your local Walmart.

Meanwhile, I will cherish my K-7 a little more

Last edited by Asahiflex; 07-29-2010 at 11:19 AM.
07-29-2010, 03:21 PM   #82
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
QuoteOriginally posted by nosnoop Quote
Oh yes, they do! They sure do. If you don't see that, you are out of touch with what consumer wants. The mega pixel race is completely driven by the myth that the higher the pixel count, the better. Consumers WANT higher mega pixel camera. And if you frequent camcorder forums, you will see time and time again people asking why their HD camcorder zoom range is so much more limited than their SD camcorder.
They did not WANT them unless they were marketed to, spurring demand.

For all the sales of digital compacts in the last decade, it still pales to the massive # of sales of instamatic and pocket cameras in the golden years of popular mass photography when Canon and Nikon were amongst the top 10 advertisers in the world.

All tech industries are full of pundits saying what people do not WANT, like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, both putting their feet in their mouth anticipating the market like that.

They were wrong, and so are you.

QuoteQuote:
But that's the thing - FF is NOT in the mind of consumers, and very few people know about it, and even fewer can actually SEE or appreciate the benefit. You need huge marketing just to educate people about the subtle advantages of FF!
There is little economic sense to do so, when there are so many more features that consumers can identify with, and does not need huge marketing dollars to hype the benefit.

"People WILL want FF" is basically your dream. This may or may not happen.
Even in your own words, it may not happen:

So it is not "inevitable" at all.
IMHO, it will not happen, as manufacturers have little incentive to invest marketing dollars to hype a feature that the uninitiated would have a hard time seeing the difference.
Oh, it will happen whether or not there is demand. Canon will create demand. They will take profits from their sunk cost APS-C development, transfer capital from APS-C, and then put FF into increasingly lower price points as a competitive edge. The economy of scale will grow in their favour, and their return on investment will spark a new cycle of consumer buying the next best and greatest. Do we "need' smartphones? No. We have 5,000 years of civilization before that. Bottled water? No, municipal water systems and a clean glass has been good for 50 years.

Pray tell, when every Nikon and Canon DSLR looks the same, how will they be able to up the ante? They've got an APS-C body that can accept an FF image circle already.

This is is retail product economics 101.

Last edited by Aristophanes; 07-30-2010 at 05:02 AM.
07-29-2010, 04:20 PM   #83
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,299
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
They did not WANT them unless they were marketed to, spurring demand.
This is not true. The mega pixel race is not created by the manufacturers. It was simply playing to the consumers mentality. Unlike features such as FF where the masses do not understand the benefit when they see it listed on the spec sheet, things like mega pixel count and HD video features would sell the camera without effort from the manufacturers.

QuoteQuote:
Oh, it will happen whether or not there is demand. Canon will create demand.
And as usual, you act like God and you totally believe that you know the future.
For me, I only look at the reality.
At this point, there is little demand for FF - and that's the fact.
At this point, FF still costs a lot more than APS-C sensor, and that's the fact.
EVIL/Mirrorless is fastest growing segment with strong demands - and that's also the fact.

QuoteQuote:
They were wrong, and so are you.....
This is is retail product economics 101.
[slap forehead] Of course, you know the future... right?
At this point, your product economics 101 makes no sense at all.

07-29-2010, 04:55 PM   #84
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 499
QuoteOriginally posted by nosnoop Quote
For me, I only look at the reality.
At this point, there is little demand for FF - and that's the fact.
At this point, FF still costs a lot more than APS-C sensor, and that's the fact.
Reality? Here's reality: There's plenty of unsatisfied demand for FF with a PK mount, and that's a fact too. Just check some of the discussions and polls on this forum. Your perception of "demand" is based on the relative lack of competition that has kept the prices artificially high, and the "demand" is inversely proportionate to the price. As the price comes down (as it will continue to do), the FF market will increase in size, and will do so at the expense of "less than half frame" APS-C cameras. Your perception doesn't seem to be supported by any hard data, other than non-indicative Japanese sales figures, so how do you know how much "demand" there is or isn't?! They can't keep the Nikon D3S on the shelves at $5,200 a pop, and you think there's no demand?!

A small player like Pentax is much better off competing in a small volume/high margin segment like FF than it is in the "commodity" market that is APS-C or EVIL.

The demand for FF will also ramp up as the manufacturers ramp up their marketing campaigns - look at the success they've had selling a poor compromise like APS-C with a little marketing! Selling something clearly better will be a breeze! All it would take is pictures of FF viewfinders next to APS-C viewfinders, and suddenly the aspirations of millions of dSLR owners will be raised...
07-29-2010, 06:06 PM - 1 Like   #85
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
QuoteOriginally posted by nosnoop Quote
This is not true. The mega pixel race is not created by the manufacturers. It was simply playing to the consumers mentality. Unlike features such as FF where the masses do not understand the benefit when they see it listed on the spec sheet, things like mega pixel count and HD video features would sell the camera without effort from the manufacturers.
Nonsense. Utter nonsense. Consumers were NOT writing letter to Canon CEO saying "More megapixels please." Manufacturers could get the per unit cost down and simply marketed under the ancient mantra "more is better".

FF is more sensor area. Same logic, Identical marketing campaign. It worked gloriously for SUV sales for 15 years (and few people really "needed" an SUV to buy milk at the corner store).

One can easily see the benefits of an FF marketing campaign. "Our sensor is 50% larger than Nikon's." It's been done forever from detergent to turkeys.


QuoteQuote:
And as usual, you act like God and you totally believe that you know the future.
No. I know economics and marketing.

QuoteQuote:
For me, I only look at the reality.
At this point, there is little demand for FF - and that's the fact.
If you build it, they will come.

QuoteQuote:
At this point, FF still costs a lot more than APS-C sensor, and that's the fact.
EVIL/Mirrorless is fastest growing segment with strong demands - and that's also the fact.
So? Most EVIL's are m43, NEX is APS-C but was designed to accommodate FF.

It will only cost more until the cost/benefit will make the EVIL FF a better deal than the EVIL smaller sensor.

Remember 4 years ago Nokia's bold statement that people would pay $10,000 for smartphones? Then Apple came out with their sub-$1,000 iPhone, with the price still dropping and the feature set constantly improving (if not the reception)?

This is just the simple history of consumer electronics.I did not know I need a farting app on the iPhone until someone convinced me it was the cool thing to have. If they'll pour discretionary income into farting apps, they'll buy into FF a whole lot easier.

I'm not God, but I know deus ex machina.
07-30-2010, 12:10 AM   #86
emr
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by MPrince Quote
I never have understood why people keep holding their breath for a FF Pentax when Pentax has never given any indication that FF is under consideration.
This is an argument that comes up again and again in the FF discussions. While it's obviously true, I think that's being used misleadingly. Has Pentax years ago told they'll be some day releasing a 14.6 MP camera (K20D & K-7)? Has Pentax back then announced they'll include video in their DSLRs? No. The technology and market changes and a camera manufacturer can be expected to walk the path. If one has invested significantly in Pentax gear, he/she has the right to expect the brand to stay competitive and up-to-date. And while a FF camera doesn't work miracles, it is IMO reasonable to expect Pentax to follow the bleeding edge - if only in their own applied niche way and with a delay.
07-30-2010, 04:24 AM   #87
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,197
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
If you build it, they will come.
Sorry, but...no, they don't always. If you knew as much about marketing as you claim, you'd know that.
07-30-2010, 04:29 AM   #88
Site Supporter
Groucho's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 401
QuoteOriginally posted by asw66 Quote
Nicely put, but I'm inclined to take the opposite view. As I opined earlier in this thread, "good enough" is probably in your pocket right now, in the form of a cameraphone that you consider to be free. (It's not really, but it seems that way of course.)
For some people, that is "good enough" - they just want to be able to put a picture on Facebook or whatnot, and a cameraphone is the easiest way to do it, despite being by far the worst quality. Even for DLSRs, most of what we have is "good enough" - with each new Pentax I buy, I am less excited about the new one. I bought the K20D and the K-7 - but the K-7 is good enough that I may skip the next body. (Unless there is a real and sizable jump in high ISO performance.) Heck, I can look back on the photos I took with my *ist DL and still be very happy with the image quality.

QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
They'll want both. Convenience and FF are not mutually exclusive. You've used faulty logic. APS-C and Sony's new E-mount both already accept FF image circle so you don't need to be "big and heavy" to get there. Tape decks and LP's sold alongside each other for decades. HDTV came out and the Ninitendo Wii stayed at 480. it's not always substitutive; in fact, rarely is.

And who makes 4x6 prints? Last I noted, photo printing was in decline as well. We're looking at HDTV and 27" monitor displays soon, and increasing fidelity on small LCD's/OLED's. Small sensors will get better, hit a wall (already have on MP's vs. ISO) and then the only outlet to accommodate superior display resolution will be a larger sensor. It's not a matter of if, but when.
Good grief! Your first paragraph doesn't make any sense, yet you keep beating the drum of "APS can take FF image circle." Well, duh. ANY sensor FF or smaller can take an FF image circle. You're doing a straw man argument. We can also mount MF lenses pretty easily and even LF if you feel like it. The point is, the body MUST be larger and heavier to accommodate a FF sensor.

Furthermore, you NEED bigger lenses to get equivalent image ranges. Again - if I went full-frame, I'd have to replace my 50-135mm F2.8 with a 70-200mm F2.8 (there's not even a weathersealed one available, so I'd be losing out already, and if there were, it'll probably be a lot more expensive.) Yes, I could have the camera crop to APS-size - but then why bother doing FF??? Heck, my ancient Takumar 300mm becomes a 450mm on my DSLRs - mount it on a FF and there goes a lot of the reach. This is not an opinion, but a fact!

You also keep ignoring that FF can not comfortably accept lenses designed for APS. My nice small 10-17mm will not show a full 10mm image on a FF sensor.

QuoteOriginally posted by nosnoop Quote
Oh yes, they do! They sure do. If you don't see that, you are out of touch with what consumer wants. The mega pixel race is completely driven by the myth that the higher the pixel count, the better. Consumers WANT higher mega pixel camera. And if you frequent camcorder forums, you will see time and time again people asking why their HD camcorder zoom range is so much more limited than their SD camcorder.
True - just when we thought the megapixel race was dying down, look at cell phones. It's taken as gospel that an 8mp camera is better than a 5mp one, which is certainly not true. The 3mp camera in my eNV3 definitely takes better shots than the 5mp one in my wife's Droid. (But both are awful. )

QuoteQuote:
"People WILL want FF" is basically your dream. This may or may not happen.
True - again, remember the film: 110, disc, Polaroids - people want small size and convenience.

QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
They were wrong, and so are you.
You know, you really come off as a jackass when you say things like that when people don't agree with your opinion. Your bad attitude instantly invalidates any other point that you make.

QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
I'm not God, but I know deus ex machina.
Apparently you don't, as that has nothing at all to do with what we're talking about. We're not in a crisis and there's no photographic God coming to save us. Try knowing what a phrase means before tossing it into a debate.
07-30-2010, 04:59 AM   #89
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
QuoteOriginally posted by Groucho Quote
. The point is, the body MUST be larger and heavier to accommodate a FF sensor.
No bigger and heavier than the Sony NEX. The E-mount can support a FF image circle.
07-30-2010, 05:01 AM   #90
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
QuoteOriginally posted by TaoMaas Quote
Sorry, but...no, they don't always. If you knew as much about marketing as you claim, you'd know that.
It's already built. People buy FF and there is proven demand right here on the forum. There are a number of Pentaxians who have 2 systems to support FF and APS-C, and with Pentax not in the game, that's $$$ not going to Pentax, but to Nikon or Canon.
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!
body, crop, division, ff, lenses, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, sensor, sensors, sony, users
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wild rumor: Canon and Sony fighting over Pentax? rawr Pentax News and Rumors 56 09-05-2010 05:10 PM
Pentax is due for a new body soon... jct us101 Pentax News and Rumors 90 07-31-2010 02:28 PM
Will Sony supply the Sensor for future bodies? Reportage Pentax News and Rumors 10 06-22-2010 06:47 PM
Potential Pentax user Terry Cliss Welcomes and Introductions 3 02-14-2008 01:20 AM
Potential new Pentax user AlexL Pentax DSLR Discussion 30 08-26-2007 04:33 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:36 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