[whatever7]

I don't think Sony cares--they win either way. By supplying Pentax with FF sensors they're increasing the number they need to produce, meaning the ones they keep for themselves will be cheaper, and the surplus is bought by Pentax, so it's a win-win situation for Sony. They had no problem letting Pentax sell their 6MP and 10MP cameras with Sony sensors for cheaper than the competition and themselves.

.

You have to consider the lens margin as well. A FF sensor inside an alpha mount body will sell maybe 2-3 more FF lenses, lenses that cost close to $1000 no less. Obviously Sony will make more money by having the cheapest FF body.

[dylansalt]

The Sony 850 with the incredible CZ 24-70 2.8 is cheaper to purchase than the same setup from Nikon & Canon by a quite a large margin

[ma318]

For similiar spec'd aps-c and FF, I am willing to pay a 25% extra to get the FF one.
Assuming the current retail price of the K7 is $1300, I am willing to pay about $1625 for a FF version.

With the Sony A850 currently at $2000, that is really going to put price pressure on how much Pentax can charge for their top line APS-C camera - more so as the FF price keep on dropping.

[bunegg]

Depending on how good it is... 1000 to 2500. 2500 is my max limit i would pay for a camera.

[Blue]

I'm personally holding out for an APS-H! Dare to be different.

[PaddyB]

it will be 5-10 years before FF reaches the $2500-$1500 marks. FF is a pro feature, so bodies with FF will have all the other bells and whistles that go along with pro gear.

The first $1500 FF camera would be interesting, but it will oudoubtedly be an intro level, plastic body with very few features, no vertical grip, pentamirror viewfinder, lower FPS, slower af....bla bla bla. I'm not interested in a intro level FF camera at all.

I love these old FF posts. It just goes to show we have no clue as to markets, costs or technology as little as two years down the road. So anyone who says Pentax can't/won't/shouldn't go full frame in the near future is being a bit narrow-minded.

[asdf]

I'm personally holding out for an APS-H! Dare to be different. :laugh:

Well, Canon's high fps 1D's (not 1Ds's) aren't full frame...which is just confusing.

[shaun2k]

the above statement is true, full frame should be kept in that bracket for a reason, as if they really did fall into prosumer markets around the world, you can expect very debatable situations based on IQ its possable to have a poor full frame sensor in a cheaper model that would get hammered by a good prosumer slr

what i'm trying to say is that, its like buying a 79.99 1080p movie cam, it IS 1080p but that poor you throw it away as its useless.

So many people get caught like this in these sorts of markets, where its a very mixed usage bracket, when most people buy a camera, they get concerned about what its got, what it does etc etc... when the concern is always image quality at the end of the day, thats one of the fundimental elements to a good camera.

Full frame is notorious for low light greatness, faster lenses, blah blah... and i think it should be kept that way, its almost like the next step to photography, the gate to pass through into professional use, whack that into prosumer markets around the same price as some flagship models we know, and you have just more medium IQ full frame cams that will show no real benifits to increased production/quality/usablility.

Theres always someone out there that tries to get a niche in the market for low price/ high product spec items/tech, claiming great quality

you sooooo get what you pay for

If you go full frame you need 4k

If some one made one retail for 2k, that said it was of similar spec, how popular would it be....very, yet the spec might be the same, the parts might not

then they get home and the faithfull k7/k20/k10 can pull images consistant with it

they are loads of money for a reason...and thats professionalism

I do though, wish that pentax would go pro, and give us a nice combatent for the 3ds and 1ds

It should be called the K1 IQ with a 25m sensor and full body in retro style, but basic handling, and the usual mega build quality of pentax and it should be 100% in terms of quality, i'd happily wait 5 years for development of that.

It also should be more money then the 1ds and the d3s just for the cheek of it,and i'd still gladly pay it with a smile on my face...please pentax!!!!

[eigelb]

I'm personally holding out for an APS-H! Dare to be different. :laugh:

I agree with that!!!

[GoldenWreckedAngle]

I just shot a Nikon D700 on my last job. It is in the price point I'll be shopping for soon. I answered $1,500 - $2,500 because I think the premise of the pole was for cost of body only. Actual cost is going to be around $5,000 kitted out the way I have been shooting it, plus the cost of a back-up body.
Pentax will need to be at least 15% cheaper for the same kit for me to justify the risk and inconvenience of making the leap to full frame on a platform that is not fully supported by the industry (rental, 3rd party accessories, locally available bodies and accessories, fast turnaround on repairs, etc.). More importantly, they are going to have to offer comparable features and performance to the competing full frame models that will be on the market when a Pentax full frame is released. I would almost insist that they have to exceed those specs but I'm a realist.
I have two Sigma lenses and one flash that might work on a full frame Pentax so that is a pretty good start. I would also have a couple of cropped sensor back-up bodies that would fit those accessories if I stayed with Pentax, but really, if I'm shooting jobs that require full frame I'm probably going to need a full frame back-up anyway so that incentive is pretty minor. I can also recover most of my investment in everything but the bodies by selling off my Pentax kit.
These are all things that people making the leap to full frame will consider. Any way you look at it, moving to full frame costs a lot more than buying a full frame body. That goes for consumers and manufacturer's both. Entering that market segment offers lots of reasons to pause and take a long look down the road at all options. Pentax will have to offer incentives to its early full frame adopters to help them take that leap of faith.
The one thing that keeps me interested is the probability that they will.

[Samsungian]

Yeah, it costs more to go full frame & in a different brand however the Nikon gear you might buy will retain most of its value. If you sell it later you re~coup alot of your outlay. Well, that is if you bought it right to begin with & take great care of it all. Buying Online at competitive prices instead of making local purchases at full retail plus all the local fees.

Same with my Pentax stuff I've been selling, I'm getting most of my purchase costs back. Sad to see the pentax treasures go, but I'm happy to re~coup most of my outlay after the fact, after I added both Canon in 2008 and Nikon gear in 2009 to my Pentax kit, my first Dslr system from 2006.

I just shot a Nikon D700 on my last job. It is in the price point I'll be shopping for soon. I answered $1,500 - $2,500 because I think the premise of the pole was for cost of body only. Actual cost is going to be around $5,000 kitted out the way I have been shooting it, plus the cost of a back-up body.
Pentax will need to be at least 15% cheaper for the same kit for me to justify the risk and inconvenience of making the leap to full frame on a platform that is not fully supported by the industry (rental, 3rd party accessories, locally available bodies and accessories, fast turnaround on repairs, etc.). More importantly, they are going to have to offer comparable features and performance to the competing full frame models that will be on the market when a Pentax full frame is released. I would almost insist that they have to exceed those specs but I'm a realist.
I have two Sigma lenses and one flash that might work on a full frame Pentax so that is a pretty good start. I would also have a couple of cropped sensor back-up bodies that would fit those accessories if I stayed with Pentax, but really, if I'm shooting jobs that require full frame I'm probably going to need a full frame back-up anyway so that incentive is pretty minor. I can also recover most of my investment in everything but the bodies by selling off my Pentax kit.
These are all things that people making the leap to full frame will consider. Any way you look at it, moving to full frame costs a lot more than buying a full frame body. That goes for consumers and manufacturer's both. Entering that market segment offers lots of reasons to pause and take a long look down the road at all options. Pentax will have to offer incentives to its early full frame adopters to help them take that leap of faith.
The one thing that keeps me interested is the probability that they will.