[Pål Jensen]

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.

Agreed but some people seem to enjoy an electronic finder and no flopping mirror.....

[DeadJohn]

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.

I don't agree with the highlighted part. If the hypothetical K-3 sold for $1700 or so and had features worthy of the price, the K-5ii would cost $500 less. That's a pretty big price difference for many purchasers and leaves room for both cameras.

Granted, I'm part of a small niche within the camera marketplace. The spot where I feel most limited by my current K-r is astrophotography. The K-r is great for what I paid but less noise from long exposures is important because I use that so often. My next DSLR might be the K-5iis, or the mythical K-3 if its extra features are meaningful to me. Either camera would also give be a significant improvements for normal terrestrial photography. I don't want full frame because the wider corners put more demands on my telescope optics.

I'm not a Pentax fanboy. A Canon APS is tempting because they have better tethering support with most astrophotography software. Or, I might go beyond the DSLR and buy a cooled astronomy CCD, but I have a hard time justifying $2k for a camera that can only be used tethered and cannot take conventional daytime photos.

[philbaum]

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....

Yep, thats the problem. If FF is 5% of the marketplace, and Pentax dslr buyers are, say 7% of the market, then .05 X .07 = 0.35% of the market share will be Pentax FF when it is produced. So Pentax may have to price its FF pretty high because of the reduced number of buyers for the product. It could be that the number off FF Pentax buyers is higher than 5% because there hasn't been that option before. In any case, Ricoh is going to need an estimate of how many buyers there will be for pricing purposes.

[Ash]

I wonder what proportion of the Pentax camera market share the 645D takes.
At its price point, I'd say it's relatively low also.
But I think FF market share would be considerably more than this at the $2,500-$2,800 price point.
There is that large gap between a $1,300 APS-C camera and a $9,300 MF camera.

[bossa]

I wonder what proportion of the Pentax camera market share the 645D takes.
At its price point, I'd say it's relatively low also.
But I think FF market share would be considerably more than this at the $2,500-$2,800 price point.
There is that large gap between a $1,300 APS-C camera and a $9,300 MF camera.

I agree with you 100% but prepare for a barrage of posts 'proving' that Pentax cannot afford this etc etc etc..

[infoomatic]

Yep, thats the problem. If FF is 5% of the marketplace, and Pentax dslr buyers are, say 7% of the market, then .05 X .07 = 0.35% of the market share will be Pentax FF when it is produced. So Pentax may have to price its FF pretty high because of the reduced number of buyers for the product. It could be that the number off FF Pentax buyers is higher than 5% because there hasn't been that option before. In any case, Ricoh is going to need an estimate of how many buyers there will be for pricing purposes.

so maybe with their lens prices risen they try to prepare us also to pay more for the full frame camera :-D ... hope so ... buying a FF Pentax at 3k € is still cheaper for me than selling my stuff and going with Nikon

[Clavius]

so maybe with their lens prices risen they try to prepare us also to pay more for the full frame camera :-D ... hope so ... buying a FF Pentax at 3k € is still cheaper for me than selling my stuff and going with Nikon

Or, they're preparing us for the something else. Ricoh sells lots of printer/copiers at almost zero profit. They make the profit when the customer buys the supplies for those machines. Who knows, maybe they're going to try the same trick with cameras. Not making a lot of profit on the bodies, but extra profit when they come back for lenses?

[LamyTax]

Or, they're preparing us for the something else. Ricoh sells lots of printer/copiers at almost zero profit. They make the profit when the customer buys the supplies for those machines. Who knows, maybe they're going to try the same trick with cameras. Not making a lot of profit on the bodies, but extra profit when they come back for lenses?

Camera makers make profits with entry to mid level cameras. Not with FF, not with lenses.

[RuiC]

We could still see a K-3 but given Pentax has declared the K-5II to be the DSLR flagship in its own marketing it doesnt bode well. Unless the K-3 is mirrored and therefore not a DSLR, which doesn't seem very likely.

Not being a DSLR maybe its name should rather be K-03.

[RuiC]

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.

I am still waiting for the transparent EVF in the optical path. And Pentax is ready for optical SR too!

[Clavius]

I am still waiting for the transparent EVF in the optical path. And Pentax is ready for optical SR too!

Optical SR? Oh no, not in the lens! That's one of Pentax main advantages.

[Clavius]

Camera makers make profits with entry to mid level cameras. Not with FF, not with lenses.

Becomming a manufacturer of interchangeable lens cameras and then not making any profit on the lenses, is not logical. And taking the actual lens prices into account, probably not true either.

[RuiC]

Optical SR? Oh no, not in the lens! That's one of Pentax main advantages.

Yes, ok about that. But I still think that for hand held long tele's optical is more than an advantage, it's a must! Also for FF due to more sensor area the masses involved are more critical to control putting an extra strain on battery power, size of the assembly and not to mention the extra EMI to shield due to higher electromagnetic fields!

[LamyTax]

Becomming a manufacturer of interchangeable lens cameras and then not making any profit on the lenses, is not logical. And taking the actual lens prices into account, probably not true either.

Sure, you make some profit with almost every product. But think about how much development you need for an EOS 1100 compared to an EOS 1DX. Hugely different.
The profit ratio is much higher with those cheaper cameras.

[Clavius]

Yes, ok about that. But I still think that for hand held long tele's optical is more than an advantage, it's a must!

Hand held long tele's?!?