[Class A]

Is this another case of assuming prices are set arbitrarily? Pentax have to charge the prices they must in order to be profitable.

Do you think that before Canikon started to offer budget FF cameras the pricing on their FF models was the best they could do to stay profitable?

Do you think that Sigma is losing money by offering lenses (made in Japan) at almost half the cost of Canikon equivalents?

Do you think no profit is made when Pentax equipment goes on sale (with sometimes huge deductions)?

BTW, some of the high Canikon pricing can be excused by very healthy dealer margins. The dealers, in return, keep Canikon on the shelves, convince customers to buy the products, and provide service. The latter does not happen with Pentax in most countries, so we are getting brick & mortar pricing with online shops.

P.S.: I think expecting an AF system at the level of the D810 is setting one up for disappointment. I don't have any insights into internal Pentax developments and I don't put it beyond the engineers to surprise us all, but my inclination is to believe that all this talk about a model with features equivalent to a D810 is overly optimistic.

[shaolen]

And also.. if true.. then what makes a user want a 645Z system over this?

Agree I think 36mp is the only solution

[mee]

P.S.: I think expecting an AF system at the level of the D810 is setting one up for disappointment. I don't have any insights into internal Pentax developments and I don't put it beyond the engineers to surprise us all, but my inclination is to believe that all this talk about a model with features equivalent to a D810 is overly optimistic.

I think you are right.. while it's fun to dream big about this camera.. it is probably going to be an improved K-3 level camera with a FF sensor.. that is to say.. evolutionary changes but not revolutionary.. and this comparative to what Pentax already had on the market.. not compared to the DSLR scene as a whole..

Look at the 645Z.. it doesn't have super incredible AF or anything.. but as a whole package, what it does for its price is very nice.. We get that same concept with a FF sensor..

[Class A]

1. Why should anyone switch to Pentax based on a cheap FF camera?

There would be no reason to switch to Pentax on that basis, just like there wouldn't be any reason to switch to Pentax for an expensive FF camera.

A good reason to switch is when there is a product that provides more value for money. Given Pentax's position, it is easier to get a good value-for-money proposition by keeping the price reasonable. The alternative would mean that they would have to develop a class-leading camera (topping D810, A7RII, etc.) and find buyers that need that kind of performance in the context of the Pentax system (with its hopelessly outdated flash system, limited lens selection, lack of professional support, etc.).

2. Pentax can undercut the other MF manufacturers not because Pentax have reduced profit margins, ...

I think that's your opinion, and I respect it, but if Hasselblad, Mamiya and PhaseOne are not making higher profit margins on their MF cameras compared to Pentax then I think they are doing something wrong.

BTW, I'm still a Pentax fan. For instance, their flash system limitations do not bother me because I'm shooting with manual power control via radio anyway. If Pentax continuous to offer great value-for-money bodies, I'll remain a supporter. But if they become Canikon for bodies as well as lenses then I'll ask myself the question: Why put up with the many disadvantages if there is nothing left to outweigh them?

[kooks]

But if they become Canikon for bodies as well as lenses then I'll ask myself the question: Why put up with the many disadvantages if there is nothing left to outweigh them?

I think that one of the reasons Pentax is still alive after all the changes suffered is because the brand users know that they can get great products at good/fair prices.. sometimes even lower than the Canikons.. IF, Ricoh start releasing products at prices like the high end Canikons, people ( like me, and many others ) will compare this products against the similars.. The new FF will be compare head to head, inch by inch to the D810/5Dmk3s.. the lenses will be compare at microscopic levels to the ones that Canikons have, same as flash system, same as service support, etc, etc.... Why should i buy a pentax if i can get all the extra things that Canikon could offer?? They have more lenses, more accesories, more stores, better reselling prices, etc, etc .. Why should we invest in something that cost the same, or almost the same.. without nothing unique?? Like it or not.. PRICE is something that plays in favor of Pentax, changing this means adding a lot more than just a good FF body, the body will be outdated within a year..

Ricoh could even give us a product that is even better than the D810.. but so what?? Nikon will come eventually within a few months with a new body better than the one Pentax have.. and so one..

[Nakedgun]

you are right.. we are not dicussing APS-C we are talking about FF.. but we are talking about the same Company.. and all this "change of stragety" just doesnt seems to be quite right. Ricoh is Ricoh from most basic models to the most expensive.

1) Will be aimed at the "professional" market

This could be totally right.. but we dont know for sure. I believe that Kenspo was the one that told us that this was aiming for that.. actually.. i cant recall if he was talking about the new lenses or the new FF. Because as i said.. this are 2 differnet things, related yes.. but different.

2) Will be more expensive than Pentax users are used to

Correct.. we can expect that any new FF camera will be more expensive that what pentax users are used to.. anything above $1400 could fit this.. I will quote what the same guy that told us it will be more expensive said just a little while ago.



Notice the "VERY expensive" thing.. and notice the word maybe... so, nothing is for sure here either..

3) Will use the latest technology available.

This is true.. but what will be the latest technology available?? we dont know yet.. is this the sensor shift technology?? will this be the new Sony sensor?? or perhaps a totally new feature maybe...



we'll see what happens in the upcoming months and see if some of us.. or perhaps none are right with how the FF will be..


In case that you didnt watch the video that i posted.. here are the numbers.. and the WHY it can be possible

$205 raw cost to build Samsung S5 ( all electronic parts with the latest technology at the time )
$395 marketing + developing
$100 profit per phone

$700 final selling price


OnePlus basically manage to cut the price almost in half doing a different marketing, experience in the indsutry. We all know that Pentax dont spend that much on marketing.. and the company is not starting from 0. they have K3/K3ii and 645Z experience and engineering.. so some cost can be cut here too... Lately Pentax is selling most of the products using online stores.. so they are also similar to the OnePlus company.. but this is just an example, i could be wrong.. or perhaps right.. who knows..

The example just shows that there are ways to delivere great products at prices lower than the competition.. this strategy helped OnePlus to grow really fast within a market full of Samsung, Apple, LG or Sony

etc...etc...

For months you've been projecting your (dare I say) desperation, that Ricoh produce a FF at a price which you find comfortable, as though they were reading this forum and listening to you.

Just seems odd, to me. And life will go on.

[JPT]

This line of thinking Is so nihilistic. So, there's no point in Ricoh trying to be best, because the competition might introduce something better (but if I remember rightly, the K-5 remained at the top of its category for years). And only way to succeed is to squeeze costs and sacrifice marketing (look forward to QC issues and crummy servicing if the company goes that route).

Ricoh can choose where they want to compete, and if they aim for the budget-constrained customer, that's what they'll get. That won't help them sell high-value lenses in the long term. I think the Sony-Minolta experience is very relevant. Their FF cameras were good value cameras, but that wasn't enough to make them sell well. Sure, they made some Minolta fans very happy, and that's great for them, but look what has happened to the system as a whole. If Ricoh were to follow the same path, I think they could expect similar results.

I think the other factor that's being missed here is that the biggest K-mount market by far is Japan. The D800/5D market is very robust in Japan. Those cameras and $2000 lenses actually make it into the top 10 on sales charts on a regular basis. So don't expect them to sell that many cameras, but Ricoh rightly wants a piece of that market. I think the psychology of pricing works differently here to the US. People see the price as a mark of quality to some extent in Japan. I notice that with their high-end products (K-3, GR, 645z), Ricoh has been achieving a good balance recently between giving excellent value for money without cheapening their image and the products have been well received in the US and Japan.

[kooks]

etc...etc...

For months you've been projecting your (dare I say) desperation, that Ricoh produce a FF at a price which you find comfortable, as though they were reading this forum and listening to you.

Just seems odd, to me. And life will go on.

Perhaps they are reading this.. perhaps they are not.. perhaps some people that write at this forum like Kenspo give them reports of what people think, perhaps he is not.. who knows.. but thats why it is a forum.. to share opinions based on what every one believe about something .. but just that.. simple opinions ..

As you said life will go on no matter what happens.

[Mistral75]

(...)

Did Sony start releasing the A7r or A7s ?? no.. they did it with the A7..

(...)

Sony Alpha 7 and Alpha 7R were launched on the very same day (October 16th, 2013).

See also Fujifim's strategy: first a high-end body (X-Pro1: January 2012), then a more affordable one (X-E1: September 2012), then entry-level ones (X-A1, X-M1: June and September 2013); more recently, X-T1 first (January 2014), X-T10 afterwards (May 2015).

[Matthew Saville]

1. Why should anyone switch to Pentax based on a cheap FF camera? Cameras that already exist from the competition? Do you really think Pentax can undercut their prices and make a profit? Not mention including features not present in the competition for free.
And are there any reason to expect that those FF buyers on a budget is going to buy a fleet of expensive new FF lenses?

2. Pentax can undercut the other MF manufacturers not because Pentax have reduced profit margins, but because they are a megacorporation compared to the competition, and doesn't have to share developing, manufacturing and marketing cost form selling 2000 bodies a year. No such luck in the FF market....

Going off the K-3 II and how it competes with the Canon 7D mk2 and Nikon D7200 for price and performance, I'd say there's a pretty good precedent for Pentax to deliver a camera similar to a Nikon D810 or Canon 5D 3 / 5Ds, and do it for ~$2K.

I'll bet a whole steak dinner that Pentax will not enter the FF market any higher than $2500, even if it has every bell and whistle and flagship performance spec they can possibly cram into it.

[mecrox]

This line of thinking Is so nihilistic. So, there's no point in Ricoh trying to be best, because the competition might introduce something better (but if I remember rightly, the K-5 remained at the top of its category for years). And only way to succeed is to squeeze costs and sacrifice marketing (look forward to QC issues and crummy servicing if the company goes that route).

Ricoh can choose where they want to compete, and if they aim for the budget-constrained customer, that's what they'll get. That won't help them sell high-value lenses in the long term. I think the Sony-Minolta experience is very relevant. Their FF cameras were good value cameras, but that wasn't enough to make them sell well. Sure, they made some Minolta fans very happy, and that's great for them, but look what has happened to the system as a whole. If Ricoh were to follow the same path, I think they could expect similar results.

I think the other factor that's being missed here is that the biggest K-mount market by far is Japan. The D800/5D market is very robust in Japan. Those cameras and $2000 lenses actually make it into the top 10 on sales charts on a regular basis. So don't expect them to sell that many cameras, but Ricoh rightly wants a piece of that market. I think the psychology of pricing works differently here to the US. People see the price as a mark of quality to some extent in Japan. I notice that with their high-end products (K-3, GR, 645z), Ricoh has been achieving a good balance recently between giving excellent value for money without cheapening their image and the products have been well received in the US and Japan.

Yes, good VFM for solid kit has been the Pentax mainstay for a very long time so why change it? Pentax always throw in a couple of extras to distinguish themselves such as IBIS, above-average WR and now pixel-shift. I guess it's just possible that the translucent mirror approach might show up as another one if it can be got to work not just properly but really really well. For myself, I see any move into FF as part of a long-term plan to put resources into market areas which offer superior margins, and FF now seems to offer that far more than APS-C. For a relatively small outfit, this is an important point. So I would be expecting a Pentax take showing these qualities on, roughly, a D810 kind of camera - that is, one with 36/42 mpx and IQ and features which reflect that. Crucial to this will be sourcing or developing processors and electronics in addition to the sensor which can carry that off. If Ricoh can, then no probs. But if not and Ricoh have to rely on a pretty standard Milbeaut approach while others are racing off with adapted high-power mobile processors that can manage the kind of AF tricks Sony is showcasing on the A7IIR (whether this work well in practice is another story), then they will be up against it, I think. We are generally moving on from "it's all about the sensor" to "it's all about the sensor and the onboard processor"

[Zygonyx]

Interesting, but tricky move...
I'm affraid this continuous integration is no good news for small independent players like ricotax... let's hope for the best end, including new cooperation with Tamron as far as lenses are concerned.
But one of these months Pentax could well follow Olympus in Sony's arms....
Although I know this would not be necessarily bad news for some PF members.

[Clavius]

Ricoh could even give us a product that is even better than the D810.. but so what?? Nikon will come eventually within a few months with a new body better than the one Pentax have.. and so one..

This! It has always been this way because their small company size. That's why Pentax always used to be a bit different. They tried and did things the other brands wouldn't dare to burn their fingers on. However, that is no longer an option now, because there's another brand that is "out-Pentaxing" them. Sony is now the one that's pioneering the off-beat gear, but harder and faster. Sony is still not appealing to the value for money factor though, that's where Pentax could still remain solid, if they wanted.

[rawr]

However, that is no longer an option now, because there's another brand that is "out-Pentaxing" them.

True. Canikosony are really making the environment tough for Ricoh. Halfway through 2015, and Sony have a hot new A7r II just about to hit stores. Canon have a new set of high MP studio cameras in the 5D S/R, and some new cameras to be released shortly. Nikon is putting out new and updated exotic FF lenses and is also apparently due to release a new high-end FF by end 2015 too.

Ricoh is going to have to work hard in 2015/16 to stand out and attact even the slightest amount of attention from FF pros (and everyone else in the market).

[Rondec]

There were predictions that the 150-450 would be a bomb based on its release price, but it sure seems like a lot of folks have picked up copies and are pleased with the results, for the most part.

The big question in my mind about the 70-200 isn't sharpness, it is auto focus performance. Is it speedy enough to keep up with or exceed auto focus speed of Canon/Nikon 70-200 f2.8 lenses? The same is true for the full frame camera. It needs to have top end auto focus performance, including tracking in order for it to command a high end dollar amount.

I still think people are overly pessimistic about whether a full frame would sell if priced at D810 levels. Pentax doesn't need to sell millions of cameras to turn a profit, they just have to hit their sales targets. Clearly the 645Z, while it has sold well, sells no where near the numbers that a D610 does, for instance. Yet, it turns a profit quite nicely.