Well there is already a digital 645 camera - the Mamiya 645 AFD II with ZD back (a mere 22 megapixel). The cheapest digital MF currently, it costs US$10,000 a piece (current promotion price). Has sales been phenomenal? I doubt it.

So why would a digital Pentax 645 be any better sales wise? Assuming Pentax matches Mamiya's price, at 10K per body many Pentax users will baulk to buy one.

A digital 645 might well be a lovely proof of concept but produce 1,000 copies to give away? That's 10 million dollars Pentax can ill afford to throw away. Is it any wonder it got shelved and taken off the roadmap...

My point is different, Creampuff

First don't believe that if the selling price is 10K the production price is 10K so the 10 milion is not 10 milion at all;
Secondly if they sale some digital MF cameras they will also sell MF lenses which incidentaly they make right now. Also they could develop a digital back for existing Pentax MF film cameras;
Thirdly I said pretty clear that there are not much money to be made from this I never said that it will be a better financial choice than a FF camera;
Lastly I said 1000 units because I am sure some will be sold and others will be given away to sponsored photographers or for advertisement purposes. In the end maybe they don't earn a penny but almost sure don't lose any money as well and end up with some prestige.

I hope you agree,
Radu

[Pål Jensen]

There is no way Pentax will replace current cameras with new models after so little time after their introduction.

Why not? The K100D and K10D lasted about a year. And apart from the hypothetical K30D, we are talking about updating current models. K20 isn't much of a new model. Just a change of sensor and imaging pipeline card from the K10D; it must have been very cheap to implement productionwise.

[Blue]

Canon & Nikon are hung up on numbers. They like numbers that tell people their camera is best. So both will do one or more of about 4 things. More fps, more pixels, more dynamic range, or higher ISO. . . .

The current consumer reports had rankings of current dslr on Page 31 (I think or close). Pentax ranked about 10 in both upper end and entry level . . . the k10D and K100d that is. From the look of the #'s, I'm certain the k20D would have been in the top 3 and maybe even won it and the k200D should win the entry level category. The editor needs to were is ass for a hat on that review.

[monochrome]

The current consumer reports had rankings of current dslr on Page 31 (I think or close). Pentax ranked about 10 in both upper end and entry level . . . the k10D and K100d that is. From the look of the #'s, I'm certain the k20D would have been in the top 3 and maybe even won it and the k200D should win the entry level category. The editor needs to were is ass for a hat on that review.

From what I read here when the issue was released, this is par for CR in camera reviews - apparently not their strong suit.

[Blue]

From what I read here when the issue was released, this is par for CR in camera reviews - apparently not their strong suit.

My point was they reviewed the k10d and k100d and not the k20d and k200d!

[ogl]

Maybe we will see 24 Mp SONY or Samsung sensor in 645D body with 645 bayonet- ?
all technologies are ready - menus like in k20D, good processor, functionality, weather-resist,
two types of memory - SD and CF.
PENTAX 645 DIGITAL(‰јЏМ)
The body for FF is ready.
And maybe removable sensor? And something which can help to use K lenses with AF?

[philmorley]

Maybe we will see 24 Mp SONY sensor in 645D body with 645 bayonet- ?
all technologies are ready - menus like in k20D, good processor, functionality, weather-resist,
two types of memory - SD and CF.
PENTAX 645 DIGITAL(‰¼�Ì)
The body for FF is ready.
And maybe removable sensor? And something which can help to use K lenses with AF?

did a lot of driving today so had lots of time to think

nedB says not street shooter, not low end model. we know pro apsc needs new af system, shutter etc etc so lots of work. WendyB says 645, and elsewhere we are told 645 will be before ff k mount.

we are also told pentax will go more niche. what is their niche? -> well it aint photojournalists, sports, wildlife, people moving up from p&s so its us older people who know the brand name, and Landscape and studio shooters???

so take the k20d sensor, make it bigger but no other changes (ie 30-odd mp, nice and easy (says the non engineer ) put it back in a k20d body? throw in some more memory to make a bigger buffer to maintain frame rate (just a long writing time) put on a 645 mount and then sell it is a MF camera for around $3000 (cost of FF dslr)

as it is a MF camera (think marketing spin here), all of a sudden your

closest competition is a $10000 22mp camera, 30mp is over $30000
its about 1/2 the weight and size of competition
2-3 fps is lightning fast for MF
your flash system, battery life, etc etc is the best of class

as a MF camera, the specs of the K20d would be unbelievable, basically you have created the best MF on the market at a tiny fraction of the price of the competition (remember think marketing).

and your hitting a market where you still have very high brand recognition, put a k-mount adapter in, and some of your existing dslrs users are happy. you've got MF film users going digital, you've got people who hire 'blads buying (for that matter you'd have some of them selling and changing with that level of money involved). and you've got dslr users who want ultimate resolution without $10-$40k

(re lenses, they aint out yet but there isn't any point until a camera is released - chicken and egg)

Idle thoughts while driving

[ftpaddict]

Doing that would, IMO, hammer the final nail in Pentax' coffin. They don't need to go niche, they need to become mainstream; a household name. That's where the sales are, not selling ~300 MF cameras/year.

did a lot of driving today so had lots of time to think

nedB says not street shooter, not low end model. we know pro apsc needs new af system, shutter etc etc so lots of work. WendyB says 645, and elsewhere we are told 645 will be before ff k mount.

WendyB knows nothing, let her rest and perform her nurse duties.

we are also told pentax will go more niche. what is their niche? -> well it aint photojournalists, sports, wildlife, people moving up from p&s so its us older people who know the brand name, and Landscape and studio shooters???

so take the k20d sensor, make it bigger but no other changes (ie 30-odd mp, nice and easy (says the non engineer ) put it back in a k20d body? throw in some more memory to make a bigger buffer to maintain frame rate (just a long writing time) put on a 645 mount and then sell it is a MF camera for around $3000 (cost of FF dslr)

as it is a MF camera (think marketing spin here), all of a sudden your

closest competition is a $10000 22mp camera, 30mp is over $30000
its about 1/2 the weight and size of competition
2-3 fps is lightning fast for MF
your flash system, battery life, etc etc is the best of class

as a MF camera, the specs of the K20d would be unbelievable, basically you have created the best MF on the market at a tiny fraction of the price of the competition (remember think marketing).

and your hitting a market where you still have very high brand recognition, put a k-mount adapter in, and some of your existing dslrs users are happy. you've got MF film users going digital, you've got people who hire 'blads buying (for that matter you'd have some of them selling and changing with that level of money involved). and you've got dslr users who want ultimate resolution without $10-$40k

(re lenses, they aint out yet but there isn't any point until a camera is released - chicken and egg)

Idle thoughts while driving

1) to "make the sensor bigger" means effectively to make another sensor at far greater cost. The smallest MF sensor I believe is 44x33 mm and has nothing to do with the size of APS-C. Alternately if someone will come up with a method to seemless align 4 APS-C sensors in 2x2 then you could have a very big ~ 50.8 x 32.8 mm 58.4 Mp sensor. Still if this alignament could be done you will need 4x processing power of a K20D and no benefit in DR at all and a terible pressure to the lenses due to the extreme pixel count. The whole point of MF is to have larger pixels and thus better DR. And larger pixels will basically mean the technology used in current sensors is not usable "as is";
2) the registration distance are different between K mount and 645 mount, it was discused in extenso here. So you need a new body for this or to drasticaly modify the K20D body to the point a new one designed from scratch with MF in mind it's a better choice;
3) it's not the memory that can influence that much the fps of a camera. In this realm of huge RAW files the processing power is the key factor and the Prime is kind of old;
4) like I said K mount and 645 mount are different. If the sensor is MF then I doubt you could put K mount lenses (or use some crop image at most). If the sensor is APS-C or FF the 645 lenses can be used with adapters. What you say by "put a 645 mount" it's against what you say before (using a K20D body);
5) 3000 USD may be the sole cost of a MF sensor;
6) Actualy they have the body for a MF digital there is no need to reinvent the wheel;
7) sorry to crash your dreams but what you described is not realisable unfortunately.

Radu

[philmorley]

fair enough, not my dreams, just idle thoughts (I'm dreaming of a 70-200mm lens and the rest of the voigtlanders

forgot to put that I meant a 35mm ff sensor then crop?, (i think that is what wendyB was hinting at and Ogl said with sony) but I see your point that not very surprisingly there is more to it than my idle thoughts allow

[philmorley]

Doing that would, IMO, hammer the final nail in Pentax' coffin. They don't need to go niche, they need to become mainstream; a household name. That's where the sales are, not selling ~300 MF cameras/year.

in an interview recently NedB said they are / going further niche (but didnt actually say what that niche was)

in an interview recently NedB said they are / going further niche (but didnt actually say what that niche was)

Phil,

We all have our "dream gear" and from those ideas something good may come up. About this "niche" thing my take is that Pentax will try to offer greater quality for every class it's in. I said previously that the plan could be to:

- pit K200D against entry levels;
- K20D against the likes of 450D and the D90;
- make a K2D with more features and improvements but same 14,6 Mp sensor and price it bellow D300 and 50D when it will apear.

Also I think they will pair some of this models with the new DA 17-70 as kit.

IMO it's a great strategy!

Radu

[thibs]

BTW for those who thinks the FPS of the K200D is anemic, for what I read, both 450D and 1000D when NR is ON on rather high ISO, the fps is limited to a gorgeous... 1fps LOL

BTW for those who thinks the FPS of the K200D is anemic, for what I read, both 450D and 1000D when NR is ON on rather high ISO, the fps is limited to a gorgeous... 1fps LOL

Thibs,

The only real fault I find in K200D it's the small buffer (4 RAWs is passable but not 4 Jpegs). Otherwise it's a very nice camera and IMO a better value than all the other entry levels.

Radu

[Cambo]

I am looking more closely in to Wendy's claims...

When I was under my agreement, I could never have given these very specific poetic hints that Wendy has.

She is in the states and falls under the scrutiny of Pentax Imaging US. I doubt if Ned would accept nor condone this behaviour. That I am certain of.

I can only speculate presently given that I am no longer sponsored by Pentax.

Ben

who is she? Maybe she IS Ned? Were you two actually cross-dressing transvestite lovers who had a spat, is that the real reason you left...



JUST JOKING, MAN!

The camera she (if it is a she) is talking about would be massively radical, and completely blow the doors off everything. Now if they only implement TTL flash so my Metz collection worked properly again and powerzoom...

and what about 6x7 lenses... maybe it's a K 67D!

Now THAT would be my dream come true. I still lust after one of those cameras.

Cheers,
Cameron