Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-26-2011, 12:35 PM   #376
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
QuoteOriginally posted by fikkser Quote
I agree.

A pentax ff for 2k $ would sell in Sweden and prolly whole EU. The k-5 is currently priced around 2k here. If they would not over price the camera in EU it will sell, I mean, if it can be sold cheaper in the US...
If the K-5 is priced where it is then a FF Pentax would be 1.6x the price but have 80% less sales. The demand for camera bodies over $2,000 is a fraction of the APS-C demand. Pentax would need to keep K-5 sales at the same level to maintain gross revenues.

09-26-2011, 12:57 PM   #377
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
Sony tried and died, and they have a larger user base than Pentax.

An FF sensor cost is indeterminate, but could be as high as US$700 per.
I generally like your posts. But not this one.

IMHO, the sensor cost estimate is way off (some 3x too high) and Sony failed for well known reasons, mostly ergonomics (at that time) and lens options which is still Sony's weak point. Their better glass is rather expensive.

It's a bit like the situation with tablet pcs before the ipad: everybody said they aren't taking off. And then one did it right.

FF just needs somebody doing it right ... there is no technical obstacle or marketing obstacle. Just managers who aren't entrepreneurs.
09-26-2011, 01:32 PM   #378
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Slovenia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 279
QuoteOriginally posted by fikkser Quote
I agree.

A pentax ff for 2k $ would sell in Sweden and prolly whole EU. The k-5 is currently priced around 2k here. If they would not over price the camera in EU it will sell, I mean, if it can be sold cheaper in the US...
OK, just realized that you probably meant $ 2k with that K-5 price in Sweden, because 2k € would simply be ridiculous. Here in Slovenia the regular price for a K-5 body is just below 1k € and the K-5 + 18-55 WR kit is around 1k €.
09-26-2011, 01:35 PM   #379
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
Sony couldn't make a FF that sold well, why is there so much confidence that Pentax can?

09-26-2011, 01:39 PM   #380
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,512
QuoteOriginally posted by fejker Quote
Here in Slovenia the regular price for a K-5 body is just below 1k € and the K-5 + 18-55 WR kit is around 1k €.
Even here in super-expensive Norway the K-5 is around EUR 950 for the body only now (and around 1000 with the 18-55 WR). And that includes 25 % sales tax.
09-26-2011, 02:04 PM   #381
Veteran Member
uccemebug's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 960
QuoteOriginally posted by Ubuntu_user Quote
If Pentax would beat Canon to it, and release a FF body for sub $2,000, say within the next 5 months, I think they might sell quite a few. Actually a lot.
That's where I was leading the question. I saw an OM-1 for sale for $75 (with a lens) on the weekend, and thought, "Surely this form of DSLR can be done in digital?" But then I realized that it would only generate outrage at all of the missing features "What, only 50 AF points? They use *what* codec for video??"

QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
FF just needs somebody doing it right ... there is no technical obstacle or marketing obstacle. Just managers who aren't entrepreneurs.
Welcome to Japan. A discussion you'll found readily taken up by anyone who's worked there or tried to start a business there. 8^)
09-26-2011, 03:01 PM   #382
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,145
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
IMHO, the sensor cost estimate is way off (some 3x too high) and Sony failed for well known reasons, mostly ergonomics (at that time) and lens options which is still Sony's weak point. Their better glass is rather expensive..
No. Sony failed because hardly anyone buy cameras at the price point FF is sold at. Those who do buy Nikon and Canon and 99% of those is completely unaware of Sonys ergonomics.

The idea that FF will ever dominate any market is faulty one for two main reasons. 1) Price compared to smaller sensors. 2) Image quality - the marked doesn't demand better image quality than APS can deliver. You can print large fine art prints from APS.

I would buy a Pentax FF camera in a heartbeat but it will be an expensive niche camera sold in small numbers. The trend in the main market is towards smaller sensors.

Last edited by Pål Jensen; 09-26-2011 at 03:09 PM.
09-26-2011, 03:37 PM   #383
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,545
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Sony couldn't make a FF that sold well, why is there so much confidence that Pentax can?
Because Pentax is not Sony.

Really though, two of the big attractions for Pentax shooters is 1. backwards compatibility, and 2. Pentax is designed by actual photographers (this speaks loudly in the areas of ergonomics and UI).

I think Pentax is up to it—to do it right. After all, back in the good 'ol days of film Pentax had something figured out, and I think it's (they're) totally capable of regaining that position. But things have to be done right.

09-26-2011, 04:24 PM   #384
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NC
Posts: 206
QuoteOriginally posted by stanleyk Quote
I remain skeptical about the market for $2500 Pentax body. I have the K5 and all the DA Limiteds, the FA 31, 43, 77, the D FA 100 macro, and the 50-135mm and I categorically wouldn't buy a FF camera unless the body was $1500 or less. I just don't see them making that kind of camera body because 100 or so people on a Pentax forum want one. Maybe Ricoh comes in with a different release strategy, but I think the 645D was their answer to the Canon/Nikon/Sony full frames.

The "so I can use my old lenses" argument is probably not a very persuasive argument for a camera company exec. At least you can use them even if everyone isn't happy with the lack of complete functionality.

As for the rumored new Panasonic, that one looks like a real winner if it's accurate. That said, as a Panasonic user they are woeful when it comes to getting their products to the retailers. I'm still waiting on the 25mm F1.4. Great cameras (the G3 is very good), but terrible distribution.

I think Panasonic and Olympus have the right strategy of not trying to compete directly with Canon and Nikon. They also appear to have made a good judgement call on what a large segment of the market wants. The Q is a interesting idea but too probably expensive.
I've got to wonder about this, too - sensors improve, and if Pentax themselves want us to believe the Q sensor isn't utter crap, the K5 seeing some IQ, DR, etc. comparisons to FFs...what's the market, and how big is it? I'm mostly in agreement with jsherman as well..

There's also the whole ricoh/pentax lineup to consider - Ricoh has the compact market covered, including waterproof like the Optio W*, then the gr and grx. If pentax can sort their quality, marketing, and improve distribution, do they *need* a FF offering, or just the K3? Assuming the 645d is in fact making $, build on it as the FF answer in a v2. Move the Q downstream (in price, as well), and wind up with;
1. A very small number of compacts, ideally 1, possibly 2 at most (allowing for a zoom and a waterproof). Make em cheap. Probably have to keep them as long as competition does, to retain/gain brand recognition as users 'move upwards' later, but keep the options limited. A single superzoom can replace the 'standard compact' easily enough.
2. Q 'jr' (or current Q, a year from now) - entry level mirrorless ILS. < $500 with a usable out of the box lens, ideally ~$400 or less. native lens plus a real functioning (AF) K adapter. (You'll note Nikon did as much for the J1/V1) - mechanical only adapters are ok for legacy glass, not for new DA etc.
3. entry SLR/mirrorless - this is tougher, as it potentially can overlap. $500-$750 depending on options. Mirrorless needs to realistically compete in the mft/nex market, just suck it up, admit it, and build it. You're not going to pull off a 'prestige pricing for more crap' line (example - Q2 for $1500 :-/ ) Perhaps one generation k-r replacement and mirrorless co-existing for one cycle to try to get it right, possibly moving one or the other up or down market/price if needed.
4. K3/K1 - fill in the lens lineup gaps, sort the SDM and QC issues, and keep it as the flagship for most people.
5. FF/645/other? Tough to say here, again. I don't see the 'need' for FF, no matter how many tens of people want one. Make a 645 'light' if need be to cover the FF/price point, and fill in the gaps limiting the 645D today for mostly stills. Fill in the lens gaps and distribution issues on them. Market/advertise worldwide.

1. isn't likely a huge money maker, but it's required, consider it part of advertising. I've used Olympus water/shockproof compact cameras for a while, several generations of them. You can be sure I looked at Olympus before i bought the K5. 2. gets some glamor at reasonable cost, think about the marketing around the v1/j1 - it's not for SLR enthusiasts, but the video and fps capabilities are nice, and even if 80% of users never buy more than one accessory lens, they think they will, and that will factor into their buying. Call it a stepping stone, as they move up towards 3, which is likely where the long term consumer cash in quantity may wind up coming from. 4. = don't lose ground, make the lens lineup competitive, continue in the tradition of the k5 vs 'pro' offerings. Potentially offer a K3 and K3 'plus' if need be, mindful of pricing and competition, K3 'standard' at 1k, k3 '+' at $1500 tops.

I'm not sure where the grx sits in there - it's either a 3rd offering covering 4. or simply the only second one + K3/K-next. Obviously, add a K-mount, one capable of AF. Add an AF capable K mount for the Q/Q2/mirrorless, with a cheaper manual only. You've then got 3 lens lineups - Q/mini. KAF-3 for 'everything else' but for the 645D, with any ILC and the GRX capable of mounting K lenses, preferably with full AF. Potentially more lenses sold, obvious upgrade paths from 2-4 in lens investment, and most markets covered.

Bang for the buck and a clean/reasonable upgrade path needs to stay in the mix. Pricing more things like the Q, or k5 pricing vs D7000 - if they want to grow, better watch the msrp and drop it slightly/keep it at better or equal quality and save a few $ until the market share improves.
09-26-2011, 04:30 PM   #385
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
We don't know how much each FF costs. What we do know is that the $6,500 D3 sells well but the $2,000 A850 exited the market. Both sensors came from Sony.

Clearly the volume of a lower price point FF has less profit than a high-end offering. As they say, the FF market is not very elastic. The moment body prices edge towards $2,000 the # of potential purchasers drops 20-fold. The volume is likely not there for any manufacturer and realistically, only Canon or Nikon have the user base to swing the market.

Without volume demand there is no incentive to increase fab capacity. To do so is high risk, low return. Until APS-C demonstrably tops out FF volume sales are not going to get prices below $1,600/body where they need to be. The first company there takes a major capital loss. That's hard to justify when most new sales come from the proven smaller sensor demand.

I do suspect Canon to be refi at low rates on fab capacity. That's all I've read. When that come online is anyone's guess. Lots of vaporware.
09-26-2011, 04:31 PM   #386
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by Ubuntu_user Quote
Because Pentax is not Sony.

Really though, two of the big attractions for Pentax shooters is 1. backwards compatibility, and 2. Pentax is designed by actual photographers (this speaks loudly in the areas of ergonomics and UI).

I think Pentax is up to it—to do it right. After all, back in the good 'ol days of film Pentax had something figured out, and I think it's (they're) totally capable of regaining that position. But things have to be done right.
Was the Sony then not backwards compatibility?
Pentax might make the best camera ever but if they don't sell any...
Many already have invested in Nikon or Canon fullframe, it will cost a lot of money to jump ship, beside that the FF market is also much smaller.
09-27-2011, 12:09 AM   #387
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: West Coast , Sweden
Posts: 467
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
If the K-5 is priced where it is then a FF Pentax would be 1.6x the price but have 80% less sales. The demand for camera bodies over $2,000 is a fraction of the APS-C demand.
We don't know how big that fraction is in Pentax land.

In this thread it says that K-5 have twice the number of pics than the K-r on flikr. How many would a resonably priced Pentax FF have? All we know is that we can't judge that by how the FF offerings from CaNikon do.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/159752-pentax-flickr-s...50k-k-5-a.html

Besides, if we expect mirrorless to gain much in the entry level segment, where does that leave K-mount in a few years if Pentax just carries on with current models? Who would buy a K-r in 5 years? Who are expected to upgrade to a K-5 when no one buys into the systems entry level segment?
09-27-2011, 01:57 AM - 1 Like   #388
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
QuoteOriginally posted by rtpguy Quote
1. A very small number of compacts, ideally 1, possibly 2 at most (allowing for a zoom and a waterproof). Make em cheap. Probably have to keep them as long as competition does, to retain/gain brand recognition as users 'move upwards' later, but keep the options limited. A single superzoom can replace the 'standard compact' easily enough.
Well I would say stop with those cheap camera's. Make a line of excellent compacts with a bigger sensor and a great lens and don't sell any crap camera's in future. So nothing under 200 euro in my idea.
09-27-2011, 03:00 AM   #389
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
Without volume demand there is no incentive to increase fab capacity.
You like to reason by the "what is now", not the "what could be".

So, let me say this much at least.

At geizhals.at, Germany's leading price portal, the #1 rank of all system cameras clicked thru to shopping, incl. MF, FF, APSC, mirrorless and rangefinders, is ... the 5DmkII.

Don't tell me the volume demand isn't there.

The volume supply is what is missing. And it is missing for a single reason: Canikon not wanting to cannibalize their APSC business as long as they can.

Top five:
#1 5DmkII
#2 1100D
#3 A77 preorder
#4 7D
#5 D700

So, the top sellers (among internet-aware buyers) for both Canon and Nikon are FF models. Today!

It is only the walk-in buyers who make look the APSC business interesting. Still.
09-27-2011, 04:31 AM   #390
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,145
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Don't tell me the volume demand isn't there.
The marketshare for FF is below 5%. That puts it in the same category as medium format was versus 35mm SLR in the film days....

APS is a high volume market. FF is a low volume high profit (if you're not Sony) market. The manufacturers have all reasons for keeping it so....
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!
aps-c, body, camera, format, frame, k-5, lenses, limiteds, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, primes
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Some Full-frame shots & thoughts jsherman999 Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 5510 3 Days Ago 08:26 AM
Pentax and Full Frame oppositz Pentax DSLR Discussion 58 03-18-2011 09:39 AM
Full frame pentax cem.kumuk Pentax DSLR Discussion 11 11-12-2010 03:13 PM
Pentax and Full Frame... Shutter-bug Photographic Technique 60 11-03-2010 10:03 AM
Pentax A 50/1.2 on Full Frame aegisphan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 10-28-2010 04:16 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:47 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