[Dartmoor Dave]

I do not think having different sized bodies add a lot of R&D and they will probably not save on manufacturing cost using same body for APS-C and FF. They can reuse a lot of what has already been done for K3 III and K1 II. It is other things that take a lot more resources, like developing new AF hardware and algorithms.

It will just lead to APS-C that is larger, heavier and less optimised for smaller lighter APS-C lenses.

I was really thinking about putting an FF sensor inside a smaller body, rather than an APS-C sensor inside a bigger body. Remember the M series film SLRs? Why couldn't a full frame sensor fit inside a body the same size as a K3?

[Fogel70]

I was really thinking about putting an FF sensor inside a smaller body, rather than an APS-C sensor inside a bigger body. Remember the M series film SLRs? Why couldn't a full frame sensor fit inside a body the same size as a K3?

If you want AF and IBIS in a FF body it require a larger body than K3. At least if using the current IBIS design used for Pentax DSLRs. K1 is still quite small for a FF DSLR.

[Mistral75]

Not really. They haven't released any 645 product since... 2015? Clearly it took a backseat to developing (heh) a FF lineup.

Latest Pentax 645 products and their announcement date:

• 26 November 2015: Pentax 645Z IR
• 12 November 2015: HD Pentax-D FA 645 35mm f/3.5 AL [IF]
• 5 August 2014: HD Pentax-DA 645 28-45mm f/4.5 ED AW SR
• 15 April 2014: Pentax 645Z
• 12 December 2012: Pentax 645D IR
• 10 September 2012: HD Pentax-D FA 645 Macro 90mm f/2.8 ED AW SR
• 2 March 2012: smc Pentax-D FA 645 25mm f/4 AL [IF] SDM AW

[Mistral75]

Had an interview a few months ago where they said they are currently considering new sensors for the upcoming 645 camera, but have nothing specific to say, K-mount is priority number one at the moment
– Demand is also a problem
– There is an issue with to what extent older lenses will be usable on a new sensor
– The current 645z is very good value for money
– It would not be possible to come out with something at the same price now
– (Asked about a mirrorless 645) It would be unfair to the people who had picked up their existing lenses
- (When it was suggested that an adapter would fix this) Yes, but one would expect them to come out with a whole set of new lenses, which would be unrealistic for many years.

(...)

Let's give credit where credit is due: you're quoting, almost verbatim, fellow Pentaxian @JPT.

Pentax Interview in Cameraman Magazine from Late 2022 - PentaxForums.com

[Sandy Hancock]

When Pentax announces their new medium format camera, it will be interesting to revisit this thread

[Mistral75]

I fixed it for you:

When Pentax announces their new medium format camera and a dozen of new or revamped medium format lenses, it will be interesting to revisit this thread

[reh321]

I fixed it for you:

If the ‘film SLR’ turns out to be that camera, would the improved lenses be truly needed?

[MMVIII]

In other news, but it somehow fits this thread:
Hasselblad seems to end the H-system. The items are still listed on their website, but all marked as "sold out". via Neue Gerüchte zu Canon, Hasselblad, Pentax, Sigma, Sony und Tamron | photoscala (in German)

[James O'Neill]

I was really thinking about putting an FF sensor inside a smaller body, rather than an APS-C sensor inside a bigger body. Remember the M series film SLRs? Why couldn't a full frame sensor fit inside a body the same size as a K3?

If you want AF and IBIS in a FF body it require a larger body than K3. At least if using the current IBIS design used for Pentax DSLRs. K1 is still quite small for a FF DSLR.

Since I still have my MG and ME-Super .... behind the image plane sits the sensor, IBIS assembly, the system board which has various sockets on the left as you through the VF, and more sockets and the SD on the right, then the display, where the film take up was is where the battery sits. There are also more components to cock the shutter instead of doing from the thumb lever. A K1 spec camera could probably be a little smaller The prism is bigger than an APS-C camera, the mirror box is fixed size - with a sensor that doesn't fill the back of the box, the unused space can be used to accommodate the SR platform. Not only that space used by the sensor in a FF camera but the SR bits need to be more powerful to shift a heavier sensor, So the APS-C camera can always be a little smaller than FF. I doubt that AF makes a difference though, since the K1 only has an APS-C AF mechanism not a FF one.

[clackers]

Yeah, I hope it's like the K-3, they waited until all inventory had been sold before coming out with the K-3 III. I don't think the Ricoh executives like the idea of writing off stock on shelves.

There was no APS-C flagship you could buy for a number of years unless you counted the KP.

Or perhaps the financial spreadsheets just don't give a worthwhile ROI for the project.

[cdd29]

ok, I'm late to the party (pitty party??) I've read that in about every Pentax FB group but as it's been pointed out, Ricoh hasn't announced it nor marked it as discontinued... yet. Keep the dream alive!!!

[RGlasel]

A few questions come to my mind:1. Wasn't the large, bright optical viewfinder one of the things about the 645 series that owners raved about? 2. In one of the interviews posted on this forum, didn't a Pentax representative comment that some of the older MF glass would have problems with a higher resolution successor to the 645Z? 3. Isn't the total sales volume for MF cameras a tiny fraction of that for smaller formats?

It seems to me that if Ricoh Imaging was planning to develop a new MF camera (or even modify the 645Z to use currently available components), they would have to invest in new lenses at the same time and the new pricing would have to reflect that this significant investment would have to paid back by products with annual sales volumes of hundreds of units, not thousands or tens of thousands. Developing a new mirrorless MF camera would require a much, much larger investment, would be very difficult to sell without an entirely new line of lenses and would eliminate the primary selling point of the 645Z in competition with the GFX.

On the bright side for current owners of 645Z's, the mechanical bits should be repairable for a long time, it is the electronics (primarily the sensor) that can't be replaced and when was the last time you had a sensor failure on your 645Z?

[lemono]

Not long after the release of K3III, Pentax once again demonstrated the highly completed 645DII. The final conclusion is to completely abandon the 645 product line and created a new full frame camera project.
So it's not surprising to see this news now. The dealers I know even speculate that as early as 2021-22, the production of 645Z may have ended, but there is a lot of inventory, so there has been no notification.
Another interesting thing: I heard the dealer complained that one 645Z would be equipped with five GR3s, which made the dealer unable to sell the GR3 at all - because the annual sales of 645Z in Chinese Mainland are single digits.

It is entirely understandable that the 645 product line has been abandoned. The huge pentaprism and reflector bring extremely high costs, making it impossible to compete with Fuji at the closely price even with the same sensors.
Although P645 mount offers the possibility of using larger sensors, it is clear that high prices will only make users more scarce. From the successive discontinuation of MF DSLR production by various companies, it can be seen that this market is indeed gradually disappearing.

It's better to say that the decisions made by other manufacturers relieved Pentax and alleviated the pain of making this decision.
In summary, I believe this is the most correct decision made by Pentax in recent years.

[Sandy Hancock]

My own, business-naive assessment is that in the modern era, crop medium format (44 x 33) is not sufficiently bigger than "full frame" (36 x 24) to be worth pursuing. To give medium format a proper point of difference, I reckon Pentax should seriously consider using a film-sized 56 x 42 (ish) sensor in any 645Z replacement, giving it roughly the same crop factor vs "full frame" as the latter has vs APS-C.

Not counting the DA645 25/4.0 (a nobbled version of the FA645 25/4.0), the Pentax 645 system has only ever seen one lens which does not cover the native 645 image circle. Replace the DA645 28-45/4.5 with a modern re-design of the FA645 33-55/4.5 and that anomaly is fixed. Buy-in for the new body would be steep, but the large number of lenses (yes, mostly legacy for now) could make the system competitive as a whole.

[Fogel70]

My own, business-naive assessment is that in the modern era, crop medium format (44 x 33) is not sufficiently bigger than "full frame" (36 x 24) to be worth pursuing. To give medium format a proper point of difference, I reckon Pentax should seriously consider using a film-sized 56 x 42 (ish) sensor in any 645Z replacement, giving it roughly the same crop factor vs "full frame" as the latter has vs APS-C.

Not counting the DA645 25/4.0 (a nobbled version of the FA645 25/4.0), the Pentax 645 system has only ever seen one lens which does not cover the native 645 image circle. Replace the DA645 28-45/4.5 with a modern re-design of the FA645 33-55/4.5 and that anomaly is fixed. Buy-in for the new body would be steep, but the large number of lenses (yes, mostly legacy for now) could make the system competitive as a whole.

How many would consider buying a 20k+ USD 645 DSLR to mainly be supported with second hand lenses as most are no longer manufactured?