Originally posted by Kunzite Do you seriously think a K-1 needs to be priced that low to be attractive??
Yes, as it will not happen today but in 6 months yes. And $1500 is only $300 bellow introduction price for something like 2 year later. What the problem ? This may be more substainable than make a low spec 24MP FF that may cost more to manufacture due to low volume. K1 is already available.
The K1 isn't really highend on some aspects, it is hard to justify the $2000+ segment but on the opposite, Pentax can't make much money from buyers with lot of money if they don't price it high.
With K1 + K1-II, market segmentation is possible. Because honestly this is that. The additional batch of K1 is maybe costly $300 to Ricoh per unit. Maybe less, maybe more, but this is a low price. Maybe K1-II will cost $200 more for the BSI sensor or something if they take it. They'll price it $1000 more so no issue. Most of the cost is R&D and also the bodies taking dust at shops or warehouses now that the early adopter all got their own. The cost isn't really manufacturing. The problem then is getting enough money to cover the cost and to make a benefit.
Bellow $1500, even better maybe $1200-$1300, you get many people that want to get they toes wet on FF but don't want to spend $2000-3000 on it. And at that price, maybe having pixel shift or 36MP or better high iso while the other FF in the price range are typically 24MP would give a differentiation, would give sales. The AF of Pentax K1 is soso, but the AF of theses FF bodies in the $1000-1500 isn't better while the FF in the $2000+ range kill the K1 for AF performance. If they could pay $3000+ they would already think of A7RIII, D850 or Canon 5D IV. Not a K1, and honestly likely not a K1-II except if it really have something outstanding, unique and well marketed that the other don't have.
Pentax has almost no market share and is behind technology wise. The echosystem is not as good as the competition. Many say go highend, but there still isn't a justification for anybody to get a Pentax vs something else if he isn't invested in Pentax and Pentax users are not expecting Leica out of Pentax. Otherwise they would have a Leica already.
By making things attractive, with price and packed with features, then you get people on board, and theses people will actually spend more over the years. If they brought a Canikon or Sony like 99% of them because pentax has nothing outstanding in the segment, they never switch later on. It is just not substainable for them to buy a 6D or D610, a lens or 2 and in two year upgrade to K1-III instead of a D810 or 5D mark IV. Why would they take the Pentax while they have Canon, Nikon or Sony lenses ? No way.
if Pentax doesn't provide more for the price as they are the underdog and have obvious shortcomings that detractors will not hesitate to mention, there no way they are going to make money. They'll never get enough volume to fund R&D for high end.