Originally posted by lytrytyr Design challenges, which have been solved.
Selling a cheap MF mirrorless would be much less difficult
than selling a complex DSLR body for USD 8500!
Hate to break it to you, but something totally new would likely cost more. The tooling for manufacturing the mount and body components already exists, and will require less changes throughout the MF SLR lifespan. A new lens mount would require a ton of R&D. New electronics would need to be designed, which would cost money developing chips, then would require new manufacturing of ASICs that would be unique to the model.
The most expensive component in the 645Z is the sensor. The mount was already designed, so there was no development cost for the mount or lenses. The 645Z reuses a lot of software and ICs from the K-3, which were in turn just improved from the K-5.
It may be a simpler design, but the R&D needs to be done, and the manufacturing process needs to be created. Pentax would then have to pay for that process over the lifespan on the camera. Millions of dollars on what, I still believe, will end up a niche market product. Think of it this way, the 645Z is a K-3 on the inside, with a different shutter, mirror, viewfinder, body and lens mount. All of those components they have built before, so production exists, and research has likely already been covered in their sales.
Also, keep in mind, raw materials are the least expensive component and developing a product (the sensor being an exception). Much more would need to be spent (millions) on R&D, testing, and designing manufacturing lines. From an engineering efficiency stand-point, especially in this day and age, the more you can use components in multiple products, use off-the-shelf components, and re-use components you already manufacture, the lower sales numbers you would need to stay afloat. This is big when developing something really brand new with limited application.
They would have to spend millions on R&D for the new lenses, mount, and electronics, as well as design new manufacturing. Pentax is not known for film or digital rangefinders, and (I disagree, love the Q for what it is) is not really an experienced player in the high-end mirrorless market. If Pentax were to develop something totally new like this, the market mght be hesitant to buy into it, especially since they would either have to sell them at a loss and try to make up money elsewhere, or charge more for them than the 645Z to try to recoup their costs. Pentax is a larger company with APS-C sales to help make up the market, but think of how expensive the dedicated MF Digital systems cost. They cost that much, not really for market reasons, but because they have little else to sell to subsidize their costs.
---------- Post added 04-20-14 at 10:34 AM ----------
Another couple quick thoughts:
What is the projected sales numbers for digital MF?
It's a struggling market, no matter where you look. Leaf/Aputs/Mamiya/whatever they call themselves these days is barely making it. Hasselblad is not doing that much better, and they have the best brand recognition in the industry. No matter how you look at it, something that, even after cost cutting and mass manufacturing to reduce cost, would still retail for $5k. The market is just not strong enough to support that on its own, and would require as much engineering common sense and subsidizing with other products to capture the market.
I think it's best for Pentax to stick to what they know, and what they do well. The one reason I ended up with Pentax a few years ago was lens compatibility. They have the best lens compatibility in the industry, allowing metering, AE with A series and newer, AF with all AF lenses (they don't leave motors out like Nikon), and shake reduction with any lens that will fit on the front of thing thing.
Pair that with small, light lenses, and the best weather sealing in the industry. They have refined the APS-C cameras into fast, weatherproof, light, pieces of gear, which is what they're known for to others, too. They're known for high quality MF cameras, too. Back in the day, they were the only big player that mass manufactured MF and 35mm cameras. Their 645 line was well used by professionals, and is well known by them, just like their high-end 35mm SLRs are known to 35mm users.
It would be way off Pentax's base to design a mirrorless MF camera, and a huge gamble. R&D is massive money, and you have to be reasonably sure your product will sell to recoup that cost.
What happens if they do this, the market isn't strong, and they lose millions? They'll have to make that up somehow, or they'll be bust. If it fails, what happens to Pentax when there's less $$$ to spend on R&D for continuing their fantastic APS-C line? What if there's no money left for R&D into doing a FF? They'd be doomed.
FYI, my company does engineering project management, and we've worked with everyone from small startups with great ideas, to large companies just trying to refine their existing components, to engineers that have a great FPGA designed that need an ASIC. I understand quite a bit about what it takes to go form an idea to a finished product, and how much doing things like that would cost.
This is why with my personal engineering projects, I only allow myself to use existing components (currently designing an LED powered portable enlarger capable of formats from 6x7cm to 8x10" film). The market would be limited, so even if I wanted to sell, building from the ground up would end up costing way too much, prices would be way higher than you would believe, and nobody would buy it.