[quote=Tbear;168391]"I don't understand this obsession with full-frame at all, IQ is more important and the photographer's satisfaction with his own work more important still than how big the sensor is..."
Originally posted by welshwizard645
Precisely, IQ is more important! I don't think anyone can dispute that a FF sensor is CAPABLE of better IQ than ANY APS-C sensor.
But MF is CAPABLE of even better IQ, and Linhoff backs are better still - whats your point? 95% of camera buyers have a budget $1500 or less, and 90% are $1000 or less. I doubt it is actually possible to build a profitable FF SLR for $2000 so why should Pentax try if they know they cant?
There has been NO downward trend in FF prices in 8 years with the exception of the 5D. The Kodak 14n digital cost the same in 2002 as the D3 does now ($5000). Note the 5D was only cheap because it used a old sensor from the 1DS, and a cheap mid-range body and even then it had to be discounted to sell.
If the new Sony comes in at around $3500 it will be a huge achievement, but who would buy a $3500 Sony camera? Have you seen the lens prices? If they discount it it will eat into A700 sales and sell at a huge loss. They will probably make a few and sell it as a loss leader to highlight the brand and thats about it.
Sony are gambling, and so are Nikon. I think at least one of them will live to regret it terribly. I cant see Canon 1D users migrating to the D3 (2k more and those lenses!!) and I cant see Nikon D2X users upgrading to it either (2k more and bigger lenses). In fact I think its a fatuous, pointless tour de force that everyone will aspire to and few will own.