So what happened to the K-3 ?

Allison · 09-13-2012, 04:17 AM

Originally posted by mannyquinto

Me thinks that if ever Pentax releases a FF it will be around $2,500 initially....considering Nikon had it for $2.1k and Sony for $2.8K. That's quite a lot of money for me for a hobby. I wish Pentax surprises us with a real budget FF.

I think that if Pentax ever releases FF then they will have to price it according to the other FF on the market. The specs would have to offer much more than the d600 and be decently close to the d800 to be priced at $2500. If the specs are closer to the d600, then a lot of people would just spend the extra $300 for the d800. they already have quite a few people who wanted FF considering a switch and any FF would be targeting not just current Pentax users, but new ones too like students and new pro shooters. To get people over to (or to stay with) Pentax they need to offer something over canikon. In the past this was value. I don't know what else they could offer as their "thing" if they no longer go for the value angle.

Kenn100D · 09-13-2012, 04:32 AM

For me if Pentax will ever release their FF next year, i hope its contour is like the K-5 and the same BG so less burden for the consumers who owns K-5.

richard balonglong · 09-13-2012, 04:48 AM

The Nikon D600 Product Video:

You Tube

If the Pentax full frame camera comes out, what would it look like..?

**Pål Jensen** · 09-13-2012, 05:10 AM

Originally posted by Clavius

But the D600 (FF!) is going to be $2200,- probably eventually ending up somewhere at $1900,-. The difference consists of mere pocket-change! Who's going to buy that APSC-body, when they can get FF for virtually the same price?

Those who don't want an FF camera. 24mp FF cameras have sold for $1800 years ago. APS is a format in its own right, just like FF. They have both their strenght and weaknesses.

**Pål Jensen** · 09-13-2012, 05:12 AM

Originally posted by mannyquinto

Me thinks that if ever Pentax releases a FF it will be around $2,500 initially....considering Nikon had it for $2.1k and Sony for $2.8K. That's quite a lot of money for me for a hobby. I wish Pentax surprises us with a real budget FF.

If Pentax do that there will be lots of unhappy Pentax users that will end up buying a D800 instead. They haven't much of a choice than to bring out an K-5 FF equivalent; ie a sturdy, small and weather sealed model.

John Shriver · 09-13-2012, 06:39 AM

At $2100, the Nikon D600 is at the next "price point" above the K-5 II. It's 24 megapixels, a number we've heard with relation to Pentax in recent rumors. So maybe this is what Pentax releases in spring once Nikon's "exclusive" on that Sony sensor expires.

At one level, perhaps Pentax has to under-price Nikon, since they have less sophisticated autofocus, light metering, and flash automation. They also have a narrower lens selection. On the other hand, Pentax is a smaller company, they have less sales volume to recover capital costs, so they may have to charge more per camera. But there isn't much wiggle room on full-frame pricing -- the sensors cost at least 4 times more than APS-C sensors.

But no full-frame DSLR camera can be as small as the K-5 II, since the pentaprism has to be larger for the larger focusing screen. Although they could give up the built-in flash, which makes room for a bigger prism.

janneman · 09-13-2012, 06:50 AM

Originally posted by John Shriver

At $2100, the Nikon D600 is at the next "price point" above the K-5 II. It's 24 megapixels, a number we've heard with relation to Pentax in recent rumors. So maybe this is what Pentax releases in spring once Nikon's "exclusive" on that Sony sensor expires.

....

But no full-frame DSLR camera can be as small as the K-5 II, since the pentaprism has to be larger for the larger focusing screen. Although they could give up the built-in flash, which makes room for a bigger prism.

K-5IIs is about usd 1.300,00. I´d say that is quit a few price points between that and the D600.
If pentax decides to g FF they should look at specs rather than the D600 price..

rawr · 09-13-2012, 06:58 AM

OK, so now we have some new Sony FF's (in different shapes and sizes) and a new 'affordable' Nikon FF.

Looks like it is Canon's turn to do something new with FF. Then Pentax

BTW it's interesting to see how all the majors (Pentax, Sony, Nikon) seem to have made all their recent big product releases in an orderly sequence.

**Pål Jensen** · 09-13-2012, 11:09 AM

Originally posted by John Shriver

At one level, perhaps Pentax has to under-price Nikon, since they have less sophisticated autofocus, light metering, and flash automation. They also have a narrower lens selection. On the other hand, Pentax is a smaller company, they have less sales volume to recover capital costs, so they may have to charge more per camera. But there isn't much wiggle room on full-frame pricing -- the sensors cost at least 4 times more than APS-C sensors.

The D600 is a cheap body and as opposed to the Nikon a Pentax FF needs to work as a K-mount flagship as well. Therefore I think Pentax best bet is to make a sturdy weather ealed body at $2500+. I hope they choose the 36mp sensor and even charge $3000+. Also, my suggestion is that they make it with interchangeable viewfinders. An optical one and an electronic one. The latter the mirror will stay up and it will then work like a mirrorless. This will make it unique and justify a higher price. I believe SR will be optical.

beholder3 · 09-13-2012, 11:23 AM

[deleted]

**Pål Jensen** · 09-13-2012, 01:31 PM

Originally posted by beholder3

Just read the current numbers of how much the average user payed for a new DSLR here in Germany in 2011: 620 EUR
And the average lens cost 290 EUR.
If you consider the fact that the cheapest DSLR body costs about 320 EUR body only you can deduce how far off any DSLR body far beyond the 1,000 EUR mark is for the average buyer. It's a lot of price points (about 5 new average lenses anyway).

What is even more interesting is that for 2 bodies only three lenses per year are being sold (unit-wise).

So a $2,200 camera is a lot but not entry level. It is still niche for the relatively wealthy (as any body beyond $1,000 seems to be) .

Yes. Thats why FF has 5% markershare. The new FF bodies have not change the price picture. Previous 24mp entry level FF was cheaper than the D600....

regor · 09-13-2012, 01:44 PM

To me the possibility or a surprise announcement for a K-3 seems pretty improbable. Such announcement would kill all sales of the K5II before it even started. The K-5II and K10 were the low-hanging fruits for Pentax, who had to get something new out, but having spent much efforts on getting the K-30 out the door, and working on the next generation flagship in the same time after yet another take over, was no doubt pretty challenging in itself. They may announce future body road map to keep Pentaxian salivating, but that is as much as I hope for.

**Ash** · 09-13-2012, 02:09 PM

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

, my suggestion is that they make it with interchangeable viewfinders. An optical one and an electronic one. The latter the mirror will stay up and it will then work like a mirrorless. This will make it unique and justify a higher price. I believe SR will be optical.

That sounds like LV with an unnecessary EVF. I'd be quite happy with LV the way it is, viewed on the brilliant large rear LCD.

regor · 09-13-2012, 02:10 PM

Originally posted by John Shriver

But no full-frame DSLR camera can be as small as the K-5 II, since the pentaprism has to be larger for the larger focusing screen. Although they could give up the built-in flash, which makes room for a bigger prism.

You obviously never held an OLY OM-1, or Pentax ME FF Film cameras, which are two third the size of the K-5 !

janneman · 09-13-2012, 02:33 PM

Originally posted by regor

You obviously never held an OLY OM-1, or Pentax ME FF Film cameras, which are two third the size of the K-5 !

I think a FF sensor would require more space than a FF film because of all technicalities that need to be connected. And SR requires somw additional space as well alltough given the size of the SR APS-C Pentax bodies compared to non SR other APS bodies like the D7000 that is negligable.

09-13-2012, 11:23 AM	#175
beholder3 Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 3,112	[deleted] Last edited by beholder3; 08-11-2013 at 07:19 AM. Reason: [deleted]

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Question What happened?	RollsUp	Site Suggestions and Help	2	01-10-2012 12:30 PM
Misc What happened here?	Workingdog	Post Your Photos!	10	02-04-2011 08:56 AM
What happened?	thrillerb	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	16	10-13-2010 09:01 PM
Travel What happened?	Gashog	Photo Critique	3	09-25-2010 02:41 PM

09-13-2012, 04:17 AM	#166
Allison Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 667	Originally posted by mannyquinto Me thinks that if ever Pentax releases a FF it will be around $2,500 initially....considering Nikon had it for $2.1k and Sony for $2.8K. That's quite a lot of money for me for a hobby. I wish Pentax surprises us with a real budget FF. I think that if Pentax ever releases FF then they will have to price it according to the other FF on the market. The specs would have to offer much more than the d600 and be decently close to the d800 to be priced at $2500. If the specs are closer to the d600, then a lot of people would just spend the extra $300 for the d800. they already have quite a few people who wanted FF considering a switch and any FF would be targeting not just current Pentax users, but new ones too like students and new pro shooters. To get people over to (or to stay with) Pentax they need to offer something over canikon. In the past this was value. I don't know what else they could offer as their "thing" if they no longer go for the value angle.

09-13-2012, 04:32 AM	#167
Kenn100D Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Paranaque City, Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 697	For me if Pentax will ever release their FF next year, i hope its contour is like the K-5 and the same BG so less burden for the consumers who owns K-5.

09-13-2012, 05:10 AM	#169
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by Clavius But the D600 (FF!) is going to be $2200,- probably eventually ending up somewhere at $1900,-. The difference consists of mere pocket-change! Who's going to buy that APSC-body, when they can get FF for virtually the same price? Those who don't want an FF camera. 24mp FF cameras have sold for $1800 years ago. APS is a format in its own right, just like FF. They have both their strenght and weaknesses.

09-13-2012, 05:12 AM	#170
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by mannyquinto Me thinks that if ever Pentax releases a FF it will be around $2,500 initially....considering Nikon had it for $2.1k and Sony for $2.8K. That's quite a lot of money for me for a hobby. I wish Pentax surprises us with a real budget FF. If Pentax do that there will be lots of unhappy Pentax users that will end up buying a D800 instead. They haven't much of a choice than to bring out an K-5 FF equivalent; ie a sturdy, small and weather sealed model.

09-13-2012, 06:39 AM	#171
John Shriver Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Arlington, MA Posts: 160	At $2100, the Nikon D600 is at the next "price point" above the K-5 II. It's 24 megapixels, a number we've heard with relation to Pentax in recent rumors. So maybe this is what Pentax releases in spring once Nikon's "exclusive" on that Sony sensor expires. At one level, perhaps Pentax has to under-price Nikon, since they have less sophisticated autofocus, light metering, and flash automation. They also have a narrower lens selection. On the other hand, Pentax is a smaller company, they have less sales volume to recover capital costs, so they may have to charge more per camera. But there isn't much wiggle room on full-frame pricing -- the sensors cost at least 4 times more than APS-C sensors. But no full-frame DSLR camera can be as small as the K-5 II, since the pentaprism has to be larger for the larger focusing screen. Although they could give up the built-in flash, which makes room for a bigger prism.

09-13-2012, 06:50 AM	#172
janneman Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 908	Originally posted by John Shriver At $2100, the Nikon D600 is at the next "price point" above the K-5 II. It's 24 megapixels, a number we've heard with relation to Pentax in recent rumors. So maybe this is what Pentax releases in spring once Nikon's "exclusive" on that Sony sensor expires. .... But no full-frame DSLR camera can be as small as the K-5 II, since the pentaprism has to be larger for the larger focusing screen. Although they could give up the built-in flash, which makes room for a bigger prism. K-5IIs is about usd 1.300,00. I´d say that is quit a few price points between that and the D600. If pentax decides to g FF they should look at specs rather than the D600 price..

09-13-2012, 06:58 AM	#173
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	OK, so now we have some new Sony FF's (in different shapes and sizes) and a new 'affordable' Nikon FF. Looks like it is Canon's turn to do something new with FF. Then Pentax BTW it's interesting to see how all the majors (Pentax, Sony, Nikon) seem to have made all their recent big product releases in an orderly sequence.

09-13-2012, 11:09 AM	#174
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by John Shriver At one level, perhaps Pentax has to under-price Nikon, since they have less sophisticated autofocus, light metering, and flash automation. They also have a narrower lens selection. On the other hand, Pentax is a smaller company, they have less sales volume to recover capital costs, so they may have to charge more per camera. But there isn't much wiggle room on full-frame pricing -- the sensors cost at least 4 times more than APS-C sensors. The D600 is a cheap body and as opposed to the Nikon a Pentax FF needs to work as a K-mount flagship as well. Therefore I think Pentax best bet is to make a sturdy weather ealed body at $2500+. I hope they choose the 36mp sensor and even charge $3000+. Also, my suggestion is that they make it with interchangeable viewfinders. An optical one and an electronic one. The latter the mirror will stay up and it will then work like a mirrorless. This will make it unique and justify a higher price. I believe SR will be optical.

09-13-2012, 01:31 PM	#176
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by beholder3 Just read the current numbers of how much the average user payed for a new DSLR here in Germany in 2011: 620 EUR And the average lens cost 290 EUR. If you consider the fact that the cheapest DSLR body costs about 320 EUR body only you can deduce how far off any DSLR body far beyond the 1,000 EUR mark is for the average buyer. It's a lot of price points (about 5 new average lenses anyway). What is even more interesting is that for 2 bodies only three lenses per year are being sold (unit-wise). So a $2,200 camera is a lot but not entry level. It is still niche for the relatively wealthy (as any body beyond $1,000 seems to be) . Yes. Thats why FF has 5% markershare. The new FF bodies have not change the price picture. Previous 24mp entry level FF was cheaper than the D600....

09-13-2012, 01:44 PM	#177
regor Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Victoria, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 356	To me the possibility or a surprise announcement for a K-3 seems pretty improbable. Such announcement would kill all sales of the K5II before it even started. The K-5II and K10 were the low-hanging fruits for Pentax, who had to get something new out, but having spent much efforts on getting the K-30 out the door, and working on the next generation flagship in the same time after yet another take over, was no doubt pretty challenging in itself. They may announce future body road map to keep Pentaxian salivating, but that is as much as I hope for.

09-13-2012, 02:09 PM	#178
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Originally posted by Pål Jensen , my suggestion is that they make it with interchangeable viewfinders. An optical one and an electronic one. The latter the mirror will stay up and it will then work like a mirrorless. This will make it unique and justify a higher price. I believe SR will be optical. That sounds like LV with an unnecessary EVF. I'd be quite happy with LV the way it is, viewed on the brilliant large rear LCD.

09-13-2012, 02:10 PM	#179
regor Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Victoria, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 356	Originally posted by John Shriver But no full-frame DSLR camera can be as small as the K-5 II, since the pentaprism has to be larger for the larger focusing screen. Although they could give up the built-in flash, which makes room for a bigger prism. You obviously never held an OLY OM-1, or Pentax ME FF Film cameras, which are two third the size of the K-5 !

09-13-2012, 02:33 PM	#180
janneman Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 908	Originally posted by regor You obviously never held an OLY OM-1, or Pentax ME FF Film cameras, which are two third the size of the K-5 ! I think a FF sensor would require more space than a FF film because of all technicalities that need to be connected. And SR requires somw additional space as well alltough given the size of the SR APS-C Pentax bodies compared to non SR other APS bodies like the D7000 that is negligable.