Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-05-2012, 08:55 AM   #316
Pentaxian
Asahiflex's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,753
(On a side note: Ron is a notorious machine gun shooter. He easily shoots thousands of RAW images at one sports event. Hence the processing power he needs...

I guess he has made more than 100,000 K-5 shots (with several K-5's).

03-05-2012, 08:59 AM   #317
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,428
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
With K-5 you can make sportsimages almost anywhere and be able (Image quality wise) to sell them for internet exposure or for newspaper. For modern glossy magazines it can't compete with D3s image quality wise for (most) indoor or evening sports. This means that a magazine would only buy such an image (if ever) when there is no competing alternative supplier.

I'm not a big selling sportsphotographer yet.
So here's the rub!! If a pro needs to sell to Getty (I read they have changed their spec.s to FF) or to glossy magazines to earn a living then the capital must be invested. For everyone else a FF isn't absolutely necessary. For enthusiasts it is really a toy.

I bet I can't het anything better out of a K-5 than I can out of a K-01, but that's me.
03-05-2012, 09:14 AM - 1 Like   #318
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
So here's the rub!! If a pro needs to sell to Getty (I read they have changed their spec.s to FF) or to glossy magazines to earn a living then the capital must be invested.
Well not sure about Getty, since they do except images taken with 7D also so far as I know. But mainly the question for Pentax Ricoh Imaging is wheater they want to be in toy-land or make a jump into pro-land (with more then just 645D).
03-05-2012, 09:20 AM   #319
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by Asahiflex Quote
(On a side note: Ron is a notorious machine gun shooter. He easily shoots thousands of RAW images at one sports event. Hence the processing power he needs...

I guess he has made more than 100,000 K-5 shots (with several K-5's).
Well there is a reason why the specs of the shutter in the D4 has changed to 400k actuations, so more sportsphotographers take a lot of images during their work.

I used 4 different K-5 body's (still have two in use at the time) and have made about 170k pictures. But there are also a lot of just testing things in it (why I can answer things like writespeed of the camera) and a few timelaps things I did (a total failure project about a bean growing for wich I just set up the camera and made a lot of images) and ofcourse the sportsimages I liked to make. Also done 20 new sports last year and my learningcurve is true the shutter on this. I have no professional school done in photography.

03-05-2012, 09:27 AM   #320
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,428
I do beleive what I hear. Pentax Ricoh plans some sort of run at the true professional market. I think the key question is which segment? They don't all have the same needs.

Whatever they bring, unless it is a complete, transformational system like the Canon F1 was, will disappoint somebody. There's always somebody who complains about everything.
03-05-2012, 09:32 AM   #321
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
QuoteOriginally posted by northcoastgreg Quote
I'm hard pressed to notice any differences at normal viewing distances.
But here is the mistake you make.

AT normal viewing distance, the human eye can resolve 1.38 MP (which is based on the 1/1730 Zeiss formula used for depth of field calculations determining the circle of confusion). This is reflected in the true HD 1920x1080 specification which is 2 MP. Ok. Let's work with this then.

Now, there is a noticeable difference in acuity between an image at its native resolution and one sampled down to 1/4th its pixels, esp. with a Bayer filter and/or AA filters. So, let's increase the above size by 4x, leading to 8MP. This is what the 16,000$ Canon C300 does.

8MP is also what DxO uses to normalize their metrics for still photography.

Everything beyond 8MP is wasted. The *istD already had a nice balance actually.

10MP, 12MP, 14MP, 16MP, 18MP, 24MP and 36MP are all a waste of resources.

So, where do you stop? It is arbitrary if you didn't stop at 8MP.

My take is to not stop at all at any point below 100MP.


Beyond that, I am a long time advocate of zooming by cropping, what Nokia now did in the 41MP 808 Pureview camera. I rather see fast primes with outstanding center resolution than much heavier optical zoom only yielding the same performance with a fine pitch sensor. Or a combination of both where a single zoom like the 24-70/2.8G has enough center resolution to deliver the equivalent of 24-150mm 8MP photos. With good enough quality to make lens changing obsolete in many circumstances. That's what DX crop mode is really good for.

Last edited by falconeye; 03-05-2012 at 09:43 AM.
03-05-2012, 09:45 AM   #322
Veteran Member
dankoBanana's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Posts: 535
ah. yet another rumor about a Pentax FF. I truly with it was true this time. I'd like to pair my DA 70&40 with a digital LX
03-05-2012, 10:21 AM   #323
Pentaxian
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,314
Has anyone thought that maybe the Pentax FF will use a Foevon sensor! Would be the first FF with such a sensor, right? Now THAT would be different and special.

lol sorry, I just love this wild speculation mixed with all sorts of frantic research.

03-05-2012, 10:53 AM   #324
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
Has anyone thought that maybe the Pentax FF will use a Foevon sensor! Would be the first FF with such a sensor, right? Now THAT would be different and special.

lol sorry, I just love this wild speculation mixed with all sorts of frantic research.
that would be very expensive and actually my last choice looking at Sigma's 1D.
03-05-2012, 11:23 AM   #325
Pentaxian
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,314
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
that would be very expensive and actually my last choice looking at Sigma's 1D.
Yes, but then you could have 8MP and 24MP at the same time.
03-05-2012, 01:39 PM   #326
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,160
QuoteOriginally posted by kenyee Quote
? Incorrect? It's a big chunk of profit margin to go from a $100 sensor (did we come to a consensus on the APS-C sensor cost?) vs. $400-500. Assuming wholesale cost is only $700 now for the body/package which sells for $1000 (standard 50% markup for distributors).

.
You've never worked in retail in the industry have you. 50% standard margin hahahahah, after i picked myself up off the floor and caught my breath i thought i'd correct you right here

on camera bodies at any level the retailer is lucky to make 15-18% gross margin and that's a retailer with best VIR program. Reaitly is a $2000 camera will have a dealer cost of $1500-$1600 at best. So if your suppositions on the senor cost are accurate t and assuming Pentax want to make margin on the added sensor cost FF version of the K5 will fall at $1600-1700 if you add $600 at cost to K5 Cost at launch (about $950) so $2200 retail is very viable IMO.
though I don't have sensor costs and we are all guessing, I do know the margins retailers work on for these items having spent 25 years in the business (if anything Dealer margins are even thinner than they were when i left 6 years ago). Distributors (ie wholesalers) in countries where Pentax doesn't own the distribution change will get more margin than the retailer but have to provide a service department out of that additional margin and cover the warranty costs. So to them their cost may be $1200-1300 on the same unit (Pentax still comes out well on this because they no longer have to provide advertising service or distribution in that market) - mostly this is smaller markets or developing markets they haven't beeninbefore or where projected volume doens't make afull fledged distribution viable 0- so as an example in australia the distributor does more than one brand and his service warehousing and distribution costs are spread across the multiple brands
03-05-2012, 01:47 PM   #327
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,160
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
I do beleive what I hear. Pentax Ricoh plans some sort of run at the true professional market. I think the key question is which segment? They don't all have the same needs.

Whatever they bring, unless it is a complete, transformational system like the Canon F1 was, will disappoint somebody. There's always somebody who complains about everything.
The 645D is a good example of targeting a pro segment. though it can be a good studio camera it was targeted at the landscape crowd - no-one else was really building for that market

the canon was really the second in that idea, nikons F series was there 3 years before canon BTW. and Pentax came to the party 10 years later with the LX (and lost money on it - this is what happens when you are too late to the market) - that divide at the pro end has grown ever since. If the LX system had come to market with the LX by 1973 latest (2 years after Canon and 5 after Nikon) the market may look very different now. Instead any Pro aspiration in 35mm was pretty much abandoned after the LX and all pro market focus went to 645 and 6x7 - and until the digital age that wasn't a bad idea since medium format was very widespread outside of the journo end of "pro"
03-05-2012, 01:56 PM   #328
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,160
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
So here's the rub!! If a pro needs to sell to Getty (I read they have changed their spec.s to FF) or to glossy magazines to earn a living then the capital must be invested. For everyone else a FF isn't absolutely necessary. For enthusiasts it is really a toy.

I bet I can't het anything better out of a K-5 than I can out of a K-01, but that's me.
Getty and the other big stock agencies (at least the ones Getty hasn't already bought) have been updating the required gear on a regular basis. I think it's primarily to weed out the spurious submissions of amateurs which they have left for the micro-stock people
At one point Getty had a requirement of Canon or Nikon, they didn't even acknowledge leica lol. that has changed but trying to get them to look at anything not FF at this point is pretty hard.
Glossy's also sometimes have crazy demands for what they need - despite the fact that to print the way a glossy does any camera made at this point will provide a file that exceeds it (and if you are established you can still shoot whatever you want Terry Richardson uses a film point and shoot for all his stuff . Benjikan on the forum shoots for Harper's and others and uses Pentax
But if you are trying to break into the market shooting anything other than FF or better will be how they weed you out without even looking at your images (something like how I used to weed out resumes first by tossing any with spelling mistakes )
03-05-2012, 02:01 PM   #329
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,428
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
The 645D is a good example of targeting a pro segment. though it can be a good studio camera it was targeted at the landscape crowd - no-one else was really building for that market

the canon was really the second in that idea, nikons F series was there 3 years before canon BTW. and Pentax came to the party 10 years later with the LX (and lost money on it - this is what happens when you are too late to the market) - that divide at the pro end has grown ever since. If the LX system had come to market with the LX by 1973 latest (2 years after Canon and 5 after Nikon) the market may look very different now. Instead any Pro aspiration in 35mm was pretty much abandoned after the LX and all pro market focus went to 645 and 6x7 - and until the digital age that wasn't a bad idea since medium format was very widespread outside of the journo end of "pro"
As I was typing I figured Nikon was first and someone who knew both systems would catch that - but I left it in because it illustrates my point or question.

Can Pentax systematically approach the FF professional-use broad market by creating speicalist cameras that are optimized to each segment (but keep common internals) rather than markleting a few generalist bodies? Does a wedding photographer need to pay for sports-fast autofocus and shuttrer speed? What does a wedding pro need that is superfluous for sports? Will interchangeable viewfinders be helpful?

Such an approach would be different - but if it was more profitable wouldn't Nikon already do it?
03-05-2012, 02:39 PM   #330
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, PRofMA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,053
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
You've never worked in retail in the industry have you. 50% standard margin hahahahah, after i picked myself up off the floor and caught my breath i thought i'd correct you right here
Just to clarify, the 50% rule is a general business school product/marketing rule for each level of distributorship increasing the cost of delivery. Doesn't mean mail order companies have to live by that rule.

But bear in mind that the K-5's original MSRP was $1600 and street price was that. It's now down to $1K street price roughly. Seems like roughly 50% ($1K+50%=$1500) if their margins are down now as they get ready to roll out a new body...
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!
nikon, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Picture of the Week POTW #181 Sept. 11, 2011-Sept 25, 2011 lukulele Weekly Photo Challenges 49 09-24-2011 01:00 AM
Picture of the Week POTW #180 Sept. 4, 2011-Sept 18, 2011 lukulele Weekly Photo Challenges 57 09-18-2011 06:30 AM
Pentax Q price rumor - $699 Adam Pentax News and Rumors 50 07-05-2011 07:08 AM
Rumor of Pentax D FA 645 25mm f/4 Noisychip Pentax News and Rumors 94 04-24-2011 02:41 PM
Rumor: One SLR, one prime plus two compacts on Sept. 9th Noisychip Pentax News and Rumors 75 09-09-2010 02:46 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:11 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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