[jsherman999]

I don't like it. It's suggesting Pentax should replace it's main source of revenue and lose most of their customers in the process. Abandoning us and starting from scratch is not an option.
Besides, can the K-mount be sustained only with one FF DSLR? Can it survive with a market share of way less than 1%, and get enough money for all the high-tech things you're asking for?
Last but not least, why should Pentax give up on the 645D, i.e. on a market where they can be truly competitive? Should they spent fortunes instead trying to fight Canikon's flagships? Should they use as a "halo" product a me too FF DSLR?

.


The main thing that's changing in Tier2 is mirrorless, arriving on a missile. What I'm saying ^^ there is that I have doubts Pentax can survive in that tier if the continue to concentrate on aps-c DSLRs only, because the low end of the aps-c tier is going to be eaten up by really, really good $300 mirrorless cameras, the upper-end is going to be approached by increasingly less-expensive FF bodies... I think there's room for one really good OVF'd DSLR in Pentax aps-c in the near future, with the K-r, K-x slot being filled by a mirrorless camera(s).

If Pentax enters FF, they will probably enter at around the $2300 - $2700 point, then later, as FF yield ratios increase off the wafer and and price goes down for other reasons, we'll see the low-end FF bodies taking the place of where we thought a K-3 could go - $1800, $1600, $1500, maybe eventually less. These would be there for folks who wanted the most performance, the big OVF that mirrorless couldn't provide at $300-$1100. Until the FF price comes down, you'll need a high-end aps-c DSLR to fill that want, which I allowed. In the meantime, a very-competative D800/5DIII level FF body, maybe distinguished in size, with an enticing lens roadmap keeps Pentaxians in the fold, keeps K-mount more than viable, and gives Oly/Panasonic shooters another upgrade path option. That roadmap has to begin immediately, though, which is why the $2600 K-1 and new lenses should be greenlit and announced at Photokina 2012.

The Tier 1 I described is simply an acknowledgement that P&S's will be eaten by phone cameras, and that Interchangeable lens compacts or fixed-lens, larger-sensored mirrorless will be seen as a legit bump from a phone for anyone wanting to upgrade - the typical P&S will no longer be seen as an 'upgrade' by enough folks. That tier is an attempt to offer products in that void. ('Q' wasn't completely idiotic in concept, sensor was just ridiculously tiny for the price and thus it's not competitive. Guess you could say execution was the problem.)

Tier 4, I'm not sure about. I'd have to see the actual numbers. There's been some indication that the 645D sold some 10,000 units in it's first year & a half; If that's true, it doesn't matter if the margins are so much less than Hassy & Mamiya & Leica, it's making money and might be good to keep around.




.

---

Last edited by jsherman999; 09-24-2011 at 08:27 PM.

[jsherman999]

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.

By my rough estimation, you've spent at least $7000 on just those lenses you list. You sure you wouldn't consider $2500 Pentax FF body, assuming it was uber-great? Is it because you feel you've tied up so much in the DAs?

(FWIW, I spent much less on my entire FF kit than you did on just those lenses, and it includes D700 + 20 2.8, 50 1/8, 85 1.8, 180 2.8, 300 f4 primes, Sigma 100-300 f4 HSM, Tamron 28-75 2.8. If you didn't want to shoot aps-c also you could sell off most of the DA lenses to pay for the FF body! )

.

[Aristophanes]

You won't hear or see anything from Ricoh/Pentax until 1-2 years after Sony releases their FF plan.

The FF market is not big enough for more than 3 players (Leica doesn't count). Sony knows that. Lens design, tool and die, software, etc. all wait until there is a sensor available at the right price. There is no sign of that.

[maxfield_photo]

I'm not so sure about that, isn't Samsung developing a FF chip? If they are Pentax might go with that one, OR Sony may realize that Pentax may go with a Samsung chip, and decide to offer theirs at a more reasonable rate, or risk losing that business. I don't care about video, and I can live without live view, so a Kodak CCD would suit me just fine, but I suspect I'm in the minority there. My point is there are other sensor manufacturers besides Sony.

[Emacs]

The FF market is not big enough for more than 3 players (Leica doesn't count). Sony knows that. Lens design, tool and die, software, etc. all wait until there is a sensor available at the right price. There is no sign of that.

The «FF» market is the DSLR market in the near future. The APS-C will be mirrorless area, it's clearly seen from the last 3 month camera sales statistics.

[Emacs]

I'm not so sure about that, isn't Samsung developing a FF chip? If they are Pentax might go with that one, OR Sony may realize that Pentax may go with a Samsung chip, and decide to offer theirs at a more reasonable rate, or risk losing that business. I don't care about video, and I can live without live view, so a Kodak CCD would suit me just fine, but I suspect I'm in the minority there. My point is there are other sensor manufacturers besides Sony.

I'm too. Kind of Digital LX would be enough for me.

[Asahiflex]

The «FF» market is the DSLR market in the near future. The APS-C will be mirrorless area, it's clearly seen from the last 3 month camera sales statistics.

I agree completely. Everything APS-C and below it will ultimately become mirrorless. It's perfectly logical if you think a bit about it.

Although I won't mind a mirrorless FF. That would be EVEN better.

[Rondec]

The «FF» market is the DSLR market in the near future. The APS-C will be mirrorless area, it's clearly seen from the last 3 month camera sales statistics.

Maybe eventually, but not right now. Most people are too satisfied with their 3100D or Rebels to look at mirrorless. Currently price for mirrorless is over equivalent SLR. NEX 5 costs 650 on Amazon with a kit lens, the Nikon D3100 is 530 with kit lens. At some point, price will drop on mirrorless, but as of right now it commands a premium that most people don't care to pay. My brother in law just bought a Nikon D3100 and he didn't even consider mirrorless, even though he is moving from a point and shoot.

Anecdotally, I just got back from a trip to Disney World with my family and I saw almost no mirrorless cameras. Most of what I saw were either point and shoots or lower end SLRs with kit lenses. (saw one pentax, a kx). As far as I could tell, Sony didn't have much presence in the SLRs either. Everything was either Nikon or Canon.

[falconeye]

Currently price for mirrorless is over equivalent SLR.

That's in interesting observation if it were true.

Currently (for kits in Germany), Mirrorless starts just below 300€ (E-PL1, NX100) while dSLR starts just below 400€ (A290, A390, 1000D, 1100D, D3000, E-450).

Going a bit up to more recent models like the 12-14MP D3100, A380 or K-r, it is 450€ for dSLR. But a NEX-3 is only 350€ and a NEX-5 is 400€.
Here are two prices from the same source, both for the the stabilized standard kit:
- Sony NEX5KB schwarz 18-55mm EU-Ware Digitalkamera mit Wechselobjektiv | redcoon Deutschland
- Nikon D3100 KIT 18-55 VR SLR Kamera + AF-S DX 18-55 VR | redcoon Deutschland
You really much too heavily rely on Amazon to compare prices. The NEX-5 is cheaper than the D3100 wherever the deal is serious.

And 480€ already buys you a NEX-C3 which is featuring the same great sensor as the K-5. In a dSLR, it costs at least 630€ (D5100, A580).

Again, all prices incl. a lens.


So, in summary, mirrorless already today is 100€ cheaper in the low end, and 150€ cheaper in the 16MP league. The prices may be more similiar if mirrorless must include a good EVF. However, the very similiar NEX-7 with EVF again is 200€ less than the A77 w/o OVF. So, even that's going to change soon. dSLR (excluding the A33) in the Sub-500€ region is already weak today.

Therefore, I disagree with what you said.
But where I agree is that the masses haven't realized yet that mirrorless is a viable alternative to dSLRs. That's going to change soon though...


Disclaimer:
I am member of the "APSC dSLR will die sooner than later" club

[ManuH]

So, in summary, mirrorless already today is 100€ cheaper in the low end, and 150€ cheaper in the 16MP league. The prices may be more similiar if mirrorless must include a good EVF. However, the very similiar NEX-7 with EVF again is 200€ less than the A77 w/o OVF. So, even that's going to change soon. dSLR (excluding the A33) in the Sub-500€ region is already weak today.

But if I look at the venerable B&H I don't see much good deals for mirrorless. My big electronic store has been in the obligation to heavily discount the NX10, etc. But best deals are on DSLR right now.

Mirrorless doesn't get much traction (yet) because of two things: it's not cheap enough, but since their built with much less parts they should come down at some point. And they have no viewfinders. And their AF-C suck. yes that makes 3 things. Anyway, for most people the APS-C DSLR is still the best bang for the bucks. But the writings seem to be on the wall...

The next big move for DSLR may be the sub-2000$ FF DSLR (to be pronounced Dinosaulaurus, because like the dinos, they're too old, too big and will die suddenly). But even that will not save the DSLR when EVF will become too much better than OVF.

All that being said, I could sit on my K-5 for many years because it's reaching a point of (very) good enough. What I want is more lenses, not a new body. I buy safely APS-C lenses knowing that in the worst case scenario I could adapt them on the new whatever mirrorless. The same cannot be said for mirrorless lenses. If you pick the wrong system, they can be hard to use in the future.

[jsherman999]

...

Anecdotally, I just got back from a trip to Disney World with my family and I saw almost no mirrorless cameras. Most of what I saw were either point and shoots or lower end SLRs with kit lenses. (saw one pentax, a kx). .

Go back next year at this time. And the year following that.


.

[TomB_tx]

Go back next year at this time. And the year following that.
.

Right - deciding what to design based on what is selling NOW will always make your products behind times.

[borno]

I doubt mirrorless will replace aps-c dslr's, they are nice to take for a few snapshots, but not for wildlife (or sports)where crop dslr's are very handy. You can spend a long time looking through the viewfinder waiting for the perfect moment and if the sensor was on the whole time, I would think it would be quite hot and noisy. I can imagine the sun in the frame would also not be a great idea for any length of time. I am lucky enough to have a FF, aps-h, and aps-c body and being able to put a lens on a crop factor of choice is pretty nice. If I could choose just one it would be the 1.3x crop.

[ewalk]

The next big move for DSLR may be the sub-2000$ FF DSLR (to be pronounced Dinosaulaurus, because like the dinos, they're too old, too big and will die suddenly). But even that will not save the DSLR when EVF will become too much better than OVF.

We almost hit that price point with the Sony A850...

I'd still like to find a used A850, but they seem to be rarer than unobtanium.

[Kunzite]

I don't believe APS-C will be gone; instead, FF could become more of a niche than it is today.
And about DSLRs being replaced by mirrorless cameras - IMHO that would be a huge loss (without some technology breakthrough). For some applications, optical viewfinders are the best.