[biz-engineer]

Only if they change their philosophy.... which they may have done. Their policy of best available off the shelf tech instead of development of proprietary systems, limits them, but it also keeps prices low.

I'm glad that there is still a brand that offers a camera without 4K vid. that cost less than 2K, as opposed to the other brands that charge 3K5 for a camera that does 4K video that I wouldn't use. What if the customer doesn't care about 4k video, should he still pay extra money for the 4K video he will never use? So tomorrow because someone decided that all still cameras must be able to record 4K vids at 60i, we must all pay 35% more?

[mecrox]

Are they expecting it to be mostly professionals? My wife and I make a very good living, have a nice house, nice cars, we take excellent vacations... she'd look at me like I had three heads if I suggested that I was going to spend $10k on camera equipment. She looked at me like I had two heads when I told her I spent $400 on a lens.

And then you consider that the $10k system you just bought into is only produces marginally better images than one you could have purchased for $2k. You'd have to look hard with some serious pixel peeping in edge case photos to tell the difference between that Canon kit you described and a used K-3ii with a 16-85 mounted on it you could get for $1k.

My understanding - maybe quite mistaken - is that in the high-end audio biz of old, prices continued on a dizzying upward spiral until one day the whole thing imploded. What caused that was likely portability and convenience as sourcing and listening to music switched to mp3, online and mobile - good enough for the 99 per cent. So likely it will be exactly the same things which end up impacting the camera biz as we've known it. There is a mountain of good second-hand kit out there, too, which will produce images of top quality for much less than the latest new toys. There is no need to spend anything like $10k, imho. In many cases, at up to medium print size, most folks would find it difficult to distinguish between APS-C or even M43 and FF sources anyway, ditto between one lens and another which cost five times more. That said, I'd imagine that the camera-makers are also producing some bling come trophy items for the new money in China. It's good old opportunism but it won't last.

[reh321]

My understanding - maybe quite mistaken - is that in the high-end audio biz of old, prices continued on a dizzying upward spiral until one day the whole thing imploded. What caused that was likely portability and convenience as sourcing and listening to music switched to mp3, online and mobile - good enough for the 99 per cent. So likely it will be exactly the same things which end up impacting the camera biz as we've known it. There is a mountain of good second-hand kit out there, too, which will produce images of top quality for much less than the latest new toys. There is no need to spend anything like $10k, imho. In many cases, at up to medium print size, most folks would find it difficult to distinguish between APS-C or even M43 and FF sources anyway, ditto between one lens and another which cost five times more. That said, I'd imagine that the camera-makers are also producing some bling come trophy items for the new money in China. It's good old opportunism but it won't last.

Much of this depends on us .... the guys who spend the money. Beginning last year, I had never spent more for a camera than the $700 I spent on a Canon EOS Elan film camera kit in 1995. I had been watching the KP, but its price of $1K was just plain more than I was willing spend on any camera. Then, at year end the price reached the magic $700 mark - and after another day of angst about what 2019 will bring, I purchased it.

[ThorSanchez]

I'm glad that there is still a brand that offers a camera without 4K vid. that cost less than 2K, as opposed to the other brands that charge 3K5 for a camera that does 4K video that I wouldn't use. What if the customer doesn't care about 4k video, should he still pay extra money for the 4K video he will never use? So tomorrow because someone decided that all still cameras must be able to record 4K vids at 60i, we must all pay 35% more?

Is 4K video driving up costs? Go to your favorite electronics megastore and search for 4K video cameras, and there are pages of them for way under $1000.

---------- Post added 01-14-19 at 02:06 PM ----------

My understanding - maybe quite mistaken - is that in the high-end audio biz of old, prices continued on a dizzying upward spiral until one day the whole thing imploded. What caused that was likely portability and convenience as sourcing and listening to music switched to mp3, online and mobile - good enough for the 99 per cent. So likely it will be exactly the same things which end up impacting the camera biz as we've known it.

At some point good enough is good enough. When you have to be in a professionally constructed anechoic chamber to hear the difference between your stereo and your buddy's it's probably not worth the $8k price difference. Especially when you mostly just listen to the stereo that came with your car. When I rented a K-1 last month it didn't magically turn my photography into something otherworldly, it was somewhat better than my APS-C camera in some kinds of challenging situations.

The high-end audio biz also had the disadvantage of good old hucksterism that the internet usually weeds out today. For the low, low price of $775 you could get a tuned hickory volume knob that reduces resonant responses and dramatically increases audio fidelity! I'm not sure there are many features built into today's ILCs that are just expensive lies.

---

Last edited by ThorSanchez; 01-14-2019 at 12:09 PM.

[Ash]

the $10k system you just bought into is only produces marginally better images than one you could have purchased for $2k. You'd have to look hard with some serious pixel peeping in edge case photos to tell the difference between that Canon kit you described and a used K-3ii with a 16-85 mounted on it you could get for $1k.

Pentax in general has been relatively affordable, but with Pentax FF, it is now less so. Add up the cost of the K-1 to the 15-30, 24-70, 70-200 and 150-450, and you have quite an expensive kit indeed.
But image results between APS-C, which is significantly cheaper to buy into, and FF, bulkier and more expensive in general, is hard to justify going FF if cost is a significant issue.
To me it's akin to the law of diminishing returns, however image quality from an FA 31 limited is a few notches greater than say the FA 28 that the experience of shooting with the FA 31 justifies its 3-4x cost over the FA 28, for example. And that happens with every image taken with the lens, a legacy that for some photographers it is worth investing into.

[Rondec]

Is 4K video driving up costs? Go to your favorite electronics megastore and search for 4K video cameras, and there are pages of them for way under $1000.

---------- Post added 01-14-19 at 02:06 PM ----------

I think the issue is that getting a full frame sensor that has read out speeds capable of producing 4K video is ore expensive than one that can only do HD video. Pentax has no economy of scale and so they often keep costs down by using older sensors that can't do some of the things that more modern sensors can.

The 4K camcorders you are talking about have much smaller sensors and for whatever reason, it has been a lot easier to get smaller sensors to read out 4K video than bigger sensors.

I just think it is interesting that 4K video has turned into such a selling point when I really don't see many people publishing or editing 4K video streams.

[reh321]

I just think it is interesting that 4K video has turned into such a selling point when I really don't see many people publishing or editing 4K video streams.

The only video I take is by accident. On occasion I would put my K-30 into video mode by accident; I often overshoot LV with my new KP and get into video. I would prefer a camera without video because I'd waste less time taking video when I meant to do something else.

[BigMackCam]

The only video I take is by accident.

Ha ha

The closest I get to video is continuous shooting for a handful of shots at a time. I guess I could string those together and produce some sort of video

[Rondec]

Ha ha

The closest I get to video is continuous shooting for a handful of shots at a time. I guess I could string those together and produce some sort of video

Maybe you could make a video flip book. You could do it in a lot more than 4K too, if you wanted.

[Merv-O]

Much of this depends on us .... the guys who spend the money. Beginning last year, I had never spent more for a camera than the $700 I spent on a Canon EOS Elan film camera kit in 1995. I had been watching the KP, but its price of $1K was just plain more than I was willing spend on any camera. Then, at year end the price reached the magic $700 mark - and after another day of angst about what 2019 will bring, I purchased it.

REH:

As you know, cost is not dispositive for me if I like the camera and the features....The KP is worth a $1,000.00--it's a steal at $700.00-$800.00 and if Pentax can make $$ at that market price, they will continue to be on backorder. The value of anything is what the purchaser places on it. Tiffany's uses $30 worth of silver and cranks out ornate bracelets in high demand at $400 retail. The key is the ergonomics, IQ and satisfaction with the camera and the lens availability. Pentax has always been a consumer oriented company, which is ironic in that it has such a small market share. Maybe because it traded parent companies for years while the CanNikOny conglomerate flooded the market with cameras that had flashy names like "Rebel" and were disposable at their price points over time.

Case in point: Is my Leica CL worth $2,800? well to me it is because I use it in manual for my excellent legacy Leica glass and it reads the lenses in many cases. Is the new K-1ii worth almost $2,000 when the Pentax equivalent in APS-c is half the price? Well, from the positive comments emanating from the K-1 sub section of this Forum, I'd say that's a resounding yes.....

One final point--completely anecdotal: Pentax users are in my opinion more serious shooters than many CaniKon users I meet up with. Point and Shooters covering Granny's B-day Party or taking vacation shots. The professionals excluded, I have never met a more enthusiastic group of amateur shooters than the Pentaxians (pat on the back-myself included). Keep it up-I just hope the RICOH Directors are reading this thread and contemplating a long-term roadmap for an icon in the industry.

[Kunzite]

One final point--completely anecdotal: Pentax users are in my opinion more serious shooters than many CaniKon users I meet up with.

That's not true - those who know me all agree I'm such a joker...

[MMVIII]

with all that discussions about a "possible/theoretical" loss of detail - again, looking at the comparison images at ISO 800 still gives the poor K-1II an edge over its competition:

Image comparison: Digital Photography Review

I first thought that these are the images with pixelshift, but obviously not...

[biz-engineer]

Is 4K video driving up costs? Go to your favorite electronics megastore and search for 4K video cameras, and there are pages of them for way under $1000.

I could have written it differently: I am glad that it is still possible to buy a high res. digital FF still camera for less than 2K (USD/EUR). If I consider ILC system cost, they've risen way about of the non-professional budget for electronics.

[teiki arii]

with all that discussions about a "possible/theoretical" loss of detail - again, looking at the comparison images at ISO 800 still gives the poor K-1II an edge over its competition:

Image comparison: Digital Photography Review

I first thought that these are the images with pixelshift, but obviously not...

Right. Nevertheless, better to compare to A7IIIR, Z7, D800/D810/D850, 5DSR (5DMKIV is out by far).. No, actually, the Pentax K-1 (II) is a fantastic tool for FF DSLR pictures. Of course, it's not good for video, AF has not to be compared to other brands, but image quality is exceptional... and exceptional according to the price. Thank you Pentax!
I am so happy with this camera.
Waiting for next generation (2 or 3 years time?), a new kind of (Hybrid?) HR-EVF camera with global shutter, a zero shutter lag, multi-frame stacking features and so on to make me switch. But for the moment, Z7 but especially Canon EOS R is not worth to spend so much money for this poor quality of image and an EVF less good than the last generation of Leica SL... It's just marketing, no more...
besides, I do not regret my updated K-1 to K-1 II...

[ThorSanchez]

I could have written it differently: I am glad that it is still possible to buy a high res. digital FF still camera for less than 2K (USD/EUR). If I consider ILC system cost, they've risen way about of the non-professional budget for electronics.

I think it's playing out like this:

1. Most people use cellphones for photography.
2. ILC manufacturers go luxury/high-end to cater to the "real" photographers who still want a camera, trying to push $1k buyers to $2k, $3k, $4k+
3. Companies drive more and more people to cell phones because there are fewer and fewer people who can afford a high-end camera
4. Eventually many ILC companies go out of business because there are only so many Leica customers

The camera industry is like if the auto industry decided that they can't compete with (insert something else here... scooters? Trains? It doesn't matter), so they're all going to move to the BMW, Land Rover, Aston Martin model. Only so many people can afford a BMW*, much less an Aston. That's kind of what's happening with domestic US sedans/coupes - few people want what they see as a rental car sedan from companies that made crap in the 1980s and 1990s, so they buy German and Japanese cars. US manufacturers give up and just make pickups and crossovers/SUVs. Tastes will eventually change, SUVs and monster trucks will become My Parents' Stodgy Vehicle and once again US manufacturers will be on the precipice because that's all they make.

* Oohhh... I just came up with a solution to the camera industry's woes. Get banks to approve eight or nine year loans for people with shaky credit to buy cameras, even if they depreciate to 50% of their value in a couple years. That's been a godsend for auto companies.