[Emacs]

something like digital lx

i want this

[maxfield_photo]

"people [don't] know what they want until you give it to them".

This is a good point. Who would have predicted the popularity of the Q? I still don't want one, but I'm surprised at the number of people who do. Nikon certainly thinks that Pentax is on to something as is evident from the launch of their 1 Series cameras. They even decided to make them in different colors a la the K-x.

With the Q, Pentax engineered and built both the body and five new lenses for an unproven, and previously unidentified market. How much easier then is it to build a body for an identified market for which the mount and a staggering 24 million lenses already exist? Will it hurt APS-C sales? Maybe a little, but the money all go to the same pocket, and APS-C has already paid for itself.

The K-5 sells well at it's price point, the 645D sells well at it's price point, but the cost of the latter is ten times that of the former, I have to believe that there is a market somewhere between the two that is going unserved by Pentax at the moment. I know I held off on making the transition to digital for as long as I could hoping that they would one day offer a full frame body; I'm still waiting, and there are others like me. Further there are folks ready to upgrade from the K-5, and maybe a few who would even jump from a K-r or K-x straight into a full frame body if it were offered. The market for a full frame Pentax exists, and it's easier to imagine than that of the Q, yet somehow even that camera managed to find it's niche.

[jsherman999]

...

Pentax needs to protect all its APS-C biz because they have millions of purchasers of APS-C DSLR"s with serious DA lens investments. Convincing consumers their DA glass is "OK" but that Pentax has abandoned APS-C in favour of sensor crops will backfire because it triggers buyer's remorse based on company decision-making. That's a way to lose brand loyalty, fast.

This is some pretty heavy speculation on motivations and effects. It could just as likely signal to Pentaxians and 3rd party lens manufacturers what it actually is: a very strong commitment to K-mount. Excitement over a refreshed lens roadmap would likely offset the few DA-only customer's slight feelings of being jilted.

For the future, Pentax still needs to keep its APS-C DSLR offerings, in part because the whole FF ecosystem is simply not there. Things like a new, robust flash system, tethering, video control, PDAF, and 14-24, 24-70,, 70-200 lenses do not exist with quality to match the competition.

The ecosystem is part of the equation, part of the capital investment by Ricoh, one that pays benefits throughout the product tiers. The new AF, the new lenses, flash, tethering... all should be coming anyway.

One reason the K-5 does well is the form factor. Any FF DSLR is going to erase that advantage. The K-5 is the smallest pro level DSLR body with perhaps the best ergonomic design.

Which can be replicated in a relative way with a FF offering. Neither Sony nor Nikon ever claimed they made the Smallest Possible FF DSLR with the A850 or D700 - they weren't even trying to do that, in 2007 and 2008 when those bodies were designed. And it doesn't have to be 'mirrorless-small', just smaller, and built like a K-5 - which provides a lot of positive tactile feedback in the hand. (it feels great )

So there's 3 reasons why FF Pentax may weaken demand, not strengthen it. And at the same time, Pentax has to think of the 645D lens line-up and the inevitable larger sensor, not to mention the mirrorless trend when it becomes obvious the Q cannot compete on the sensor/price ratio.

And three refutations... although I agree it takes more than a 'FF push' commitment to fit everything in there, it takes a fully strategized multi-tier approach, which I took a stab at in this post.


.

[Ubuntu_user]

I know at least five CaNikon APSC shooters that would switch brands if Pentax came out with a FF. Seriously. They are so sold on my K-5 that they would almost switch the way it is, but these guys are progressing—the next step? FF.

[falconeye]

I suspect FF sensor supply is constrained by Sony and Nikon agreement.
[...]
Pentax needs to protect all its APS-C biz because they have millions of purchasers of APS-C DSLR"s

The first phrase is the problem. We don't know and can only suspect.

Personally, I think the Sony CMOS division is rather independent and want to own the market. I assume one would easily be able to source an FF sensor for about $200 from them, buying lots of 100,000.

The second phase is misleading. Pentax already lost most of their customers anyway. If they cannot win more new customers than they curently have, then it is Game Over. Then they become too small to be anything but a value-adding reseller.

So, no risk, no fun. FF is risk. But currently FF is their best bet. Because mirrorless is a battle ground where market share is expensive to win. And FF is driven slowly due to marketing reasons only. That FF cameras are bulky and good f/4 glass is rare is part of this slowness.


Aristophanes, don't misunderstand me. I agree that FF is a risky option. But Pentax has to win back lost ground and except via an FF SLR or FF mirrorless, I don't see it happen.

Hoya has used up all options for Pentax to play safe.

[Pål Jensen]

This is a good point. Who would have predicted the popularity of the Q? .

I would.
It is quite obvious in my view. The only negative is it price. It could limit its popularity.

[TaoMaas]

...Pentax has to win back lost ground and except via an FF SLR or FF mirrorless, I don't see it happen.

Nikon and Canon own the FF market right now, yet it hasn't persuaded us to sell our Pentax gear and make the jump. I don't think that Nikon and Canon shooters are all that different from us. Pentax has to provide an incentive for people to make the switch. So...what kind of camera would make you dump all your gear and start over?

[Pål Jensen]

Personally, I think the Sony CMOS division is rather independent and want to own the market. I assume one would easily be able to source an FF sensor for about $200 from them, buying lots of 100,000.

The second phase is misleading. Pentax already lost most of their customers anyway. If they cannot win more new customers than they curently have, then it is Game Over. Then they become too small to be anything but a value-adding reseller..

The problem is to sell 100 000's of them. Pentax certainly couldn't.

Pentax have more customers now for the (D)SLR's than they have had since the late 70's....

[Aristophanes]

Mirroless is cheaper than DSLR, so cost argument doesn't work for Pentax.

Not sure about that. Materials are so marginal in difference as to make no difference. The SLR system is a sunk cost, no licensing required set-up. Both use physical shutters, dials, etc.

Frankly, I suspect the costs are about the same. In fact, I bet the Fuji hybrid optical system is more expensive.

[ManuH]

Personally, I think the Sony CMOS division is rather independent and want to own the market. I assume one would easily be able to source an FF sensor for about $200 from them, buying lots of 100,000.

I wonder how much independent they are. The 14MP CCD and 14MP CMOS were not seen in any other camera than Sony-Minolta. And they get the scoop on the 24MP sensor. And why Leica bought the inferior Kodak sensor vs the Sony 24MP? And why the D3x is so expensive?

Hoya has used up all options for Pentax to play safe.

True enough. And if they could do the 645D, how hard is it to do a FF camera? The 645D is certainly not making more money than a FF at such low volumes. Also, a Pentax FF may revitalize the K-mount support from 3rd parties. Right now, they're all reducing their commitment to the K-mount: Cosina/Voigt, Zeiss, even Tamron and Sigma are much reducing their offerings. This is what is the most alarming IMHO about Pentax.

[Class A]

But it must be a convincing product, priced like the K-5 MSRP and with similiar specs, paired with 5µm pixel pitch to support APSC glass.

I agree with your overall reasoning and I like the 5µm pixel pitch but do you think that a 34MP FF sensor is going to be a reality soon?

Also, I think that Pentax needs one or two new FF zooms to go along with a new FF camera so that there will be additional revenue and FF-body owners do not have to go hunting on the used lens market for FF zooms.

That's why it won't happen. That's why I suspect FF sensor supply is constrained by Sony and Nikon agreement.

I'm not so sure. First, as other said Sony semiconductors may not be under direct orders of the Sony camera division. Second, Sony cameras would still have their all-time AF as a unique selling proposition. Third, selling more sensors is good for Sony. If they were as concerned as you say, why do they allow Pentax to take the DxOMark APS-C throne with a Sony sensor?

Convincing consumers their DA glass is "OK" but that Pentax has abandoned APS-C in favour of sensor crops will backfire because it triggers buyer's remorse based on company decision-making.

Opening an additional FF avenue does not mean to abandon APS-C. On the contrary, many APS-C Pentax customers are waiting for an upgrade path (and the 645D system is not one).

One reason the K-5 does well is the form factor. Any FF DSLR is going to erase that advantage.

I'm not convinced by that argument at all. My guestimate is that a FF camera need not be bigger than a K20D.

[jogiba]

Nikon and Canon own the FF market right now, yet it hasn't persuaded us to sell our Pentax gear and make the jump. I don't think that Nikon and Canon shooters are all that different from us. Pentax has to provide an incentive for people to make the switch. So...what kind of camera would make you dump all your gear and start over?

If it wasn't for the aperture pin in K-mount lenses hitting the mirror on the FF Canon 5D I bet there would be many getting it.

[Emacs]

If it wasn't for the aperture pin in K-mount lenses hitting the mirror on the FF Canon 5D I bet there would be many getting it.

Exactly. I would do it for sure.

[rtpguy]

Nikon and Canon own the FF market right now, yet it hasn't persuaded us to sell our Pentax gear and make the jump. I don't think that Nikon and Canon shooters are all that different from us. Pentax has to provide an incentive for people to make the switch. So...what kind of camera would make you dump all your gear and start over?

That's a good question, but I don't think it's the only one.
People 'evolve' through hobbies and their perceived needs/wants - someone's first step beyond camera phone will most likely be some sort of p&s or compact, and relatively low cost. Even if the bottom end cameras are low profit, it's advertising, it's name recognition, it's a chance at keeping a customer as they later 'move up' in their wants/needs. I used to do similarly running a business - having several items that don't really profit, but it was a convenience for customers, and helped to make their experience 'one stop' and less annoying. I'd say it's more about brand loyalty and name recognition with p&s/cheap lineup paving the way for future upgrades, simply increasing the chance of repeat business from a satisfied customer. Once you get to the ILCs/SLRs, obviously it can become a financial consideration as well - in an ideal world, Pentax might have 3 lens lineups, each of them being able to not only mount 'downwards' (e.g. full AF capable mounting a DA or FA on the Q), as well as potentially mounting upwards along with a 'cropped mode' as you move to the bigger sensor cameras.

Give a good overall experience, allow retaining as much value, even if only in passing, and you may have a customer for life or a long time. Being able to mount DA/DA* lenses on a potential FF offering in cropped mode won't take advantage of the new FF fully, but it sure would open the path for some to upgrade without selling thousands and thousands of $ of DA (only) lenses at once to try to finance their new FF equivalents. Make that an option, and I'd expect more people 'on the fence' about moving from an APS-C to FF might just do it, and then phase in replacing their now 'cropped mode' DA lenses for FF ones as they see fit and finances allow.

Back to your question - what would make you dump all of your gear?
There's more than one market there, and more than one answer. If a FF came about that would allow DA glass to be used in a cropped mode, I'd bet a lot of current K* owners would think about it, depending on the pricing and the offering. If a relatively inexpensive model were offered, it's possible some might jump from the K-r (or equivalent, or other entry level DSLR) to the FF. If higher priced or a pair of FFs, one 'K5+' say $500 or so more than the latest K*, and another 1k+ more..it's a tougher question aimed more squarely at pros, already having likely significant investment in non Pentax lenses, and I think that would be a much harder sell for most with 10-20k (more?) in Canon or Nikon glass already plus the bodies. I wouldn't expect too many converts in that area, at least not initially, and at least until after Pentax had comparable, competitive lens offerings for the FF, which people already gripe about in the current APS-C lineup. I'd expect the majority of purchasers to be already pentax owners, as well as some former Pentax owners with legacy higher end lenses that may have gone elsewhere to scratch the FF itch but willing to return to use the lenses they still have or have for film still, a growing number of users 'upgrading' through various phases into DSLRs....followed probably last by pros who have been shooting Canon or Nikon for some time. While pricing vs features would affect all potential purchasers except the 'hard core longer term/investment Canikon pros,' if you have tens of thousands in lenses, a difference of 1k or so for a body for a brand new system isn't a whole lot of money and is potentially a lot of hassle (moreso if the lenses you like/need/want aren't available), so it might become a second/third body at first, and I'm sure people would be looking to see if the camera and lenses were truly solid without lots of QC problems, SDM 'questions,' etc.

I'm interested in knowing what some of you guys with 20k+ in lenses think.. ??

[Asahiflex]

If it wasn't for the aperture pin in K-mount lenses hitting the mirror on the FF Canon 5D I bet there would be many getting it.

As a 5D owner I can confirm that it's not the aperture lever hitting the mirror, but the rather large protective flange next to the lever. Many old Tokina lenses do not have that flange, so they work perfectly as-is (for instance one of my most loved lenses on FF, the 17mm f/3.5 RMC Tokina). But in most cases the problem is not the flange, but a large protruding back element (such as the back element of the 50mm f/1.4 Takumar)..