[Uluru]

Sorry, I don't think so. If the 645 format is obviously better in terms of IQ than FF as they insist, why do they get FF out?

Because there is no absolute better. IQ aside, 645Z is not everyone's dream camera in terms of "carry around" paradigm.
Pentax has some nice 35mm glass not to justify one nice 35mm camera for it. If they refresh
FA31, FA43, FA77, 50/1.4 and 50/2.8 macro (all currently made, but never refreshed), and make a 35mm camera for them, users will an enormous amount of fun.
Put into it only one new lens: 70-200, and there is already 7 lenses (including 100mm macro) ready to be sold in more quantities than right now.
We need a 35mm camera too boost the sales of lenses Pentax already has, nothing less than that.

---

Last edited by Uluru; 06-02-2014 at 05:22 PM.

[RGlasel]

Some people can afford a $3-5K system, very few can afford a $11-15K system - or justify one.

First thing to remember is that the profit margin on a $11-15K system is better, so if you have limited production capacity, you build the most profitable products first. Second thing to remember is that cameras don't wear out quickly, and almost all of the potential buyers for a new model will know about it fairly quickly. Those that want it and can afford it will buy it early in its product life cycle, and once the initial sales spike is over, sales will be limited to the few that move from not being able to afford it to can afford it, AND still prefer that model over any new models that have come on the market in the meantime. Third thing to remember is that people who can afford a $3-5K system now, but haven't bought one yet, are not likely to be tempted to purchase another brand because Pentax has delayed the release of its new system in that price range until the initial surge of sales of the more expensive system have subsided. Especially when a very attractive $2-4K system is already available from Pentax. Everything points to Ricoh timing the release of new products to build a sustainable overall sales volume in the long term (long term for the digital camera market, anyway). There are several advantages to this, not the least of which is to provide steady income for Ricoh's points of distribution, which keeps Pentax products in stock at retailers and will do more to build Pentax's market share than discounting and mass advertising.

[Uluru]

.. OTOH, if they thought they could sell 50,000 FF's why haven't they done one yet?

You are right, they cannot sell that many with some ordinary FF that looks like a D610 clone. It has to be unique, and distinct product to sell at some 2,000 – 3,000 a month.
Fujifilm has managed to sell 100,000+ of its original X100 cameras for $1200 USD in the first year. That is some ~10,000 units a month.
The secret was a form factor, plus OVF / EVF innovation.

Pentax must follow that same route; bring something new, refresh the lens line for the 35mm to some extent, and the numbers may follow..

[jatrax]

Unprecedented success??? This camera will hit the market at the end of this month. Not one production unit has been independently tested yet.

Success can be determined in many ways. From a production standpoint, if dealers ponied up for more than the anticipated first run (without any testing) then yeah, that's an unprecedented success. And if it happened it might throw huge wrenches into production plans. Not saying it did or didn't but the few shops I visit, the only Pentax gear still around is MF 645 stuff. Lots of shops might add a new 645 line to the shelf as they have customers that shoot 645 film yet.

[monochrome]

You are right, they cannot sell that many with some ordinary FF that looks like a D610 clone. It has to be unique, and distinct product to sell at some 2,000 – 3,000 a month.
Fujifilm has managed to sell 100,000+ of its original X100 cameras for $1200 USD in the first year. That is some ~10,000 units a month.
The secret was a form factor, plus OVF / EVF innovation.

Pentax must follow that same route; bring something new, refresh the lens line for the 35mm to some extent, and the numbers may follow..

Well the one thing I can say for certain since I got the K3 is I am serene about this whole FF thing. It doesn't gnaw at my gut, make me grind my teeth, give me a Love/Hate relationship with my K-lenses like I had before. If they bring it - maybe I'll buy one, maybe I won't. Maybe I'll buy new lenses, maybe I won't.

But either way I'm enjoying what I have in a way that I never did with the K-01 - as much fun as that camera is.

And the A7r doesn't bother me. The thought of a new mount and an engineered adapter doesn't bother me. hociR doesn't bother me.

The suspense is actually kind of fun.

[Daikokuya]

Because there is no absolute better. IQ aside, 645Z is not everyone's dream camera in terms of "carry around" paradigm.
Pentax has some nice 35mm glass not to justify one nice 35mm camera for it. If they refresh
FA31, FA43, FA77, 50/1.4 and 50/2.8 macro (all currently made, but never refreshed), and make a 35mm camera for them, users will an enormous amount of fun.
Put into it only one new lens: 70-200, and there is already 7 lenses (including 100mm macro) ready to be sold in more quantities than right now.
We need a 35mm camera too boost the sales of lenses Pentax already has, nothing less than that.

Not so convincing. Look at this link. Pentax says:

we decided to release PENTAX 645Z as a new flagship model in 2014 to call attention to its superiority in image quality overwhelming 35-mm full frame cameras. As for the price, the price range of medium format digital cameras was 3 to 4 million yen, which is hardly payable, but PENTAX 645D was put on sale at the barely reasonable price of 800,000 yen, making an impossible dream come true. PENTAX 645Z has directly inherited the excellent cost performance of PENTAX 645D. This fact has a very significant meaning.

The highest ISO sensitivity of PENTAX 645Z is ISO 204800, which is 128 times of the sensitivity of PENTAX 645D, ISO 1600. Namely, as the competitor, we see 35-mm full frame cameras rather than medium format cameras offered by other companies.

If the 645Z has superior IQ, excellent cost performance, and better ISO compared to 35mm FF, why do they have to get FF out? Pentax clearly said the 645Z's competitor is 35mm FF. Then, does it make sense that they have that competitor on their own, which directly decreases the 645Z sale?

As for FA31 or other FA lenses, just buy K-mount APS-C cameras. You don't need FF to use them.

[JPT]

Any success of the 645z will reflect well on Ricoh and the Pentax brand as a serious camera maker. If and when a full frame Pentax comes, it will stand to benefit from the improved perception of Pentax. This kind of thing is important because a full frame will go head-to-head with some very serious competition from Day One.

[JimmyDranox]

Not so convincing. Look at this link. Pentax says:

we decided to release PENTAX 645Z as a new flagship model in 2014 to call attention to its superiority in image quality overwhelming 35-mm full frame cameras. As for the price, the price range of medium format digital cameras was 3 to 4 million yen, which is hardly payable, but PENTAX 645D was put on sale at the barely reasonable price of 800,000 yen, making an impossible dream come true. PENTAX 645Z has directly inherited the excellent cost performance of PENTAX 645D. This fact has a very significant meaning.

The highest ISO sensitivity of PENTAX 645Z is ISO 204800, which is 128 times of the sensitivity of PENTAX 645D, ISO 1600. Namely, as the competitor, we see 35-mm full frame cameras rather than medium format cameras offered by other companies.

If the 645Z has superior IQ, excellent cost performance, and better ISO compared to 35mm FF, why do they have to get FF out? Pentax clearly said the 645Z's competitor is 35mm FF. Then, does it make sense that they have that competitor on their own, which directly decreases the 645Z sale?

As for FA31 or other FA lenses, just buy K-mount APS-C cameras. You don't need FF to use them.

Simple. It was said again and again by many of us. Because I can't, and I don't want to pay 15000+ for a new (to me) system. I want to pay 2000-2500 for a K mount FF camera. Multiply this with about 100 000 users, or more, and you will find the answer why they must do it. Or they will lose tens of thousands costumers in the next years.

[Aristophanes]

Well the one thing I can say for certain since I got the K3 is I am serene about this whole FF thing. It doesn't gnaw at my gut, make me grind my teeth, give me a Love/Hate relationship with my K-lenses like I had before. If they bring it - maybe I'll buy one, maybe I won't. Maybe I'll buy new lenses, maybe I won't.

It's all about the price.

---------- Post added 06-02-14 at 10:25 PM ----------

Because there is no absolute better. IQ aside, 645Z is not everyone's dream camera in terms of "carry around" paradigm.
Pentax has some nice 35mm glass not to justify one nice 35mm camera for it. If they refresh
FA31, FA43, FA77, 50/1.4 and 50/2.8 macro (all currently made, but never refreshed), and make a 35mm camera for them, users will an enormous amount of fun.
Put into it only one new lens: 70-200, and there is already 7 lenses (including 100mm macro) ready to be sold in more quantities than right now.
We need a 35mm camera too boost the sales of lenses Pentax already has, nothing less than that.

FF must have at least 5 zooms to start:

Something wide angle.

24-70/2.8

Something more versatile, like 28-200.

70-200/2.8

Something long.

All the primes in the world will not sell without zooms to underwrite the system. Not unless they pull a Sony and dump the OVF to drop the body size down. Hard to be "Penta..." without the pent up.

---------- Post added 06-02-14 at 10:27 PM ----------

Simple. It was said again and again by many of us. Because I can't, and I don't want to pay 15000+ for a new (to me) system. I want to pay 2000-2500 for a K mount FF camera. Multiply this with about 100 000 users, or more, and you will find the answer why they must do it. Or they will lose tens of thousands costumers in the next years.

No...they won't. There are not flocks of people moving from APS-C to FF.

93% of the market buys on price point. That includes whole cost of ownership pricing. FF is simply too expensive right now (but Sony has certainly dropped the A7 price to scare high-end APS-C).

[Daikokuya]

Simple. It was said again and again by many of us. Because I can't, and I don't want to pay 15000+ for a new (to me) system. I want to pay 2000-2500 for a K mount FF camera. Multiply this with about 100 000 users, or more, and you will find the answer why they must do it. Or they will lose tens of thousands costumers in the next years.

Nobody knows for sure that you can buy a FF K-mount camera for $2-2.5K. Those who can afford have already bought Canikon's FF. Anyways, I take the 645Z as Pentax's farewell message to 35mm FF. Isn't there anybody to see that way?

[JimmyDranox]

Yes, there are a number of people who saw this as a farewell message, but not everyone. Some thinks that this is an counteroffensive against cameras like Nikon D800, which was seen by many as a competitor for D645 in the last 3 years.

And yes again, nobody knows for sure, but some rumors from some well informed persons, tells that will be a Pentax FF.

Edit. And no, nobody can change the system with only 2-3000 for a FF Canikon.

[rangercarp]

But we will talk about success or failure at the end of this year, at best. Hopefully, no failure like those seen in K-3 will happens.

Just what K-3 failure are you referring to?

[derekkite]

Unprecedented success??? This camera will hit the market at the end of this month. Not one production unit has been independently tested yet.

Yes, could be a prestige gain, if, I repeat, if it will confirm the expectations. But we will talk about success or failure at the end of this year, at best. Hopefully, no failure like those seen in K-3 will happens.

And how many Pentax user will buy this camera? 1%-2%, maybe. If will be bought by 3% I think will be an unexpected success.

Failures?

---------- Post added 06-02-14 at 07:50 PM ----------

Any success of the 645z will reflect well on Ricoh and the Pentax brand as a serious camera maker. If and when a full frame Pentax comes, it will stand to benefit from the improved perception of Pentax. This kind of thing is important because a full frame will go head-to-head with some very serious competition from Day One.

This. A very attractive 645Z, a body that makes everyone drool, but can't quite come up with the cash. Then come out with a full frame that is well appointed and excellent IQ at a competitive but not bottom trawling price.

Ricoh having to scramble to meet demand is a great thing to see.

[filoxophy]

Just what K-3 failure are you referring to?

Probably the mirror-flapping, if I had to guess.

[JimmyDranox]

Mirror flap and high ISO noise bigger than K-5 IIs.