[GoldenWreckedAngle]

I'm 100% certian the K-7 will be far more profitable for Pentax than a strategy to develop, and eventually release, a full frame body and lens line to compete for the top tier 2% market share currently OWNED by the big boys. We really don't know the long range Pentax strategy, it may even include full frame down the road a ways (who knows), but I'm fairly certain this is exactly the right move in the here and now.

[jeffkrol]

So if Pentax wants a 2-5% market share, they need FF? Forgive me if my math is wrong (I hate numbers) but wouldn't a maker rather have models in the 95-98% range of the market?

The 5DI is old, available new or not. Get over it.

No FF zealots ever listen to numbers. Heck Pentax HAD a FF ready to go , what 10 years ago.......
Anyways current Nikon babble...
On the surface, the arrival of the D5000 was only a matter of time. According to figures released from Nikon, sales of the entry-level D40, D40X, and D60 cameras account for roughly 80 percent of all Nikon DSLR sales. It's no wonder that Nikon was so eager to take the new high resolution sensor and video mode from their mid-grade D90 and put it into a lower-priced entry-level DSLR ...
Nikon w/ 50% market sell 80% of those 3 models, leaving 10% market share for the
following models D3X, D3, D700, d300, D90...........
Pentax takes as much of a risk w/ an upscale APS-C.....
Reality bites...............

[GoldenWreckedAngle]

Why don't you own a K20D? ...
Is $669 with free delivery still too high a cost to own Pentax Best Dslr they've made to date?

Because the K10D was $399 when I was deciding whether to make a short term bet on Pentax's future or cash out and go with one of the more obvious platforms to build a photo business on.

Either camera was a step up for me but I was looking at the platform, not the step. The K-7 isn't even the platform, it's just another potential step, and it looks like it might be a big one but Pentax has a ways to go.

The platform is an integrated system of bodies, lenses, and most importantly SUPPORT. It's not something that pops up overnight with the next body release but I'm optimistic that the Pentax platform will be there when I am. Having shot for a while with the K10D, and anticipating the release of the K-7, I don't see much of a need for the K20D at all. If I were making the same bet today, I would go for the K10D again.

[ryan s]

No FF zealots ever listen to numbers. Heck Pentax HAD a FF ready to go , what 10 years ago.......
Anyways current Nikon babble...
On the surface, the arrival of the D5000 was only a matter of time. According to figures released from Nikon, sales of the entry-level D40, D40X, and D60 cameras account for roughly 80 percent of all Nikon DSLR sales. It's no wonder that Nikon was so eager to take the new high resolution sensor and video mode from their mid-grade D90 and put it into a lower-priced entry-level DSLR ...
Nikon w/ 50% market sell 80% of those 3 models, leaving 10% market share for the
following models D3X, D3, D700, d300, D90...........
Pentax takes as much of a risk w/ an upscale APS-C.....
Reality bites...............

Great point about the market shares. In my personal opinion, I think the point of having flagships is to lure people in ("look...that pro is using a Canon!") then sell them something cheaper. What was that one example about watches...can't remember exactly...

It had something to do with if you have 2 watches side by side, one at say $500 with no options on it, next to a $250 watch with lots of options...most people will go for the cheaper one with more features. Or something close to that.



Another thing people need to remember, that no one does...Pentax WAS going to be the first one with a FF sensor. They decided against it for quality reasons, and Kodak then sold the sensor to Contax. Do we see Contax making cameras anymore? Nope.

Why not? Ohh, just that their little parlay into FF killed their company.

[ManuH]

Pentax takes as much of a risk w/ an upscale APS-C.....
Reality bites...............

Good point about the market share but I disagree that the upscale APS-C is as risky because they already have the lens line-up (With a FF they would have to release a few FF lenses) and because the R&D invested in that new K will at one point or another be reused in cheaper bodies. So the R&D is not lost and they have a flagship to demonstrate their abilities.

[awo425]

Great point about the market shares. In my personal opinion, I think the point of having flagships is to lure people in ("look...that pro is using a Canon!") then sell them something cheaper. What was that one example about watches...can't remember exactly...

It had something to do with if you have 2 watches side by side, one at say $500 with no options on it, next to a $250 watch with lots of options...most people will go for the cheaper one with more features. Or something close to that.



Another thing people need to remember, that no one does...Pentax WAS going to be the first one with a FF sensor. They decided against it for quality reasons, and Kodak then sold the sensor to Contax. Do we see Contax making cameras anymore? Nope.

Why not? Ohh, just that their little parlay into FF killed their company.

Great example, so Contax got bad FF sensor from Kodak proceeded with production of the camera and went out of business, and that was 9 years ago. What does it have to do with today's technology? It's 2009, there are plenty of new tech available and at least 2 companies are making FF sensors that kick a**.

[nosnoop]

Every "large" brand has Full Frame DSLR models - Canon, Nikon and Sony.

Sure, and see what happens to the A900.
In the end, it just the big two - Canon and Nikon which really matters in the FF market.

So, if Pentax wants to climb up in the market, they have to do something different in order to compete, if they do not have the Full Frame symbol and technologies.

And they have the 645D, though I am equally concerned about its chance of success as much as a FF Pentax; but at least it is in a different market segment than the big two.

If Pentax wants success, hybrid system is the future, and that's where the money is; NOT FF.

[nosnoop]

Great example, so Contax got bad FF sensor from Kodak and went out of business, and that was 9 years ago. What does it have to do with today's technology? It's 2009, there are plenty of new tech available and at least 2 companies are making FF sensors that kick a**.

No, the analogy was not about a bad sensor. The analogy was about a key investment or a key model turning out to be a flop, and how the company could survive it. Even if Pentax has a FF camera with a kick a** sensor, it can still turn out to be a flop just like A900. The total FF market segment is just plain too small. Whatever Pentax does, it is unlikely it would be able to convert significant number of Nikon/Canon FF users. And projecting Pentax FF sales based on Nikon/Canon : Pentax sales volume from recent history would give you a very depressing figure - it would be a flop even if the sales meet the "expectation".

[Samsungian]

On this page in this thread Ryan says full frame is 2-5% sales, & you're saying 10%.

I'm curious is this unit sales 2%-5%-10% for full frame or total cash from full frame sales?

Also, provide links to Nikon and Canon full frame unit sales please? The "IDC" 2009 numbers are not out yet (for free). Its not worth it to me to buy their 2009 global report for $3500 to find out what 2008 camera company sales and unit totals are.

I don't know about zealots. In canon and nikon forums its all good from what I've noticed. Full frame'rs are not arm wrestling aps-c owners and visa versa. Only in pentax world do you get these debates. In fact several people I read own both a full frame and a crop body. So in reality alot people understand each are tools that serve specific needs. I prefer Pentax for Crop format. So I'll never buy a D300 or a 50D. As Pentax choose to not offer full frame then if thats what you want then learn about Nikon and Canon and maybe Sony to decide which of their tools work best for you and your Pentax crop format system. My kit is complex with really no exact lens duplication inside my 3 brands I own: Canon ,Nikon & Pentax.


Here's a plug for IDC:

http://www.mindbranch.com/Worldwide-Digital-Camera-R104-38908/

& more reports for those to buy who are "quoting" dslr company vs company sales totals ;^)

http://www.mindbranch.com/catalog/find.jsp?keywords=dslr&newsearch=Search&searchtools=less

No FF zealots ever listen to numbers. Heck Pentax HAD a FF ready to go , what 10 years ago.......
Anyways current Nikon babble...
On the surface, the arrival of the D5000 was only a matter of time. According to figures released from Nikon, sales of the entry-level D40, D40X, and D60 cameras account for roughly 80 percent of all Nikon DSLR sales. It's no wonder that Nikon was so eager to take the new high resolution sensor and video mode from their mid-grade D90 and put it into a lower-priced entry-level DSLR ...
Nikon w/ 50% market sell 80% of those 3 models, leaving 10% market share for the
following models D3X, D3, D700, d300, D90...........
Pentax takes as much of a risk w/ an upscale APS-C.....
Reality bites...............

[awo425]

A long term strategy is very difficult in technologies that are changing very fast anyway. Nikon always denied their interest in FF until they released the D3 in 2007. The only "affordable" FF up to mid-2008 was the 2005 Canon 5D. Sony joined the party in late 2008. The prices are still in the 2500-3000$ just for the body. You don't really have the option of a cheap backup body unless you get an APS-C camera.

Conclusion: FF may come from Pentax but there is absolutely no urgency. It's more important to capture the big APS-C market now. One step at a time.

I am not sure about "absolutely no urgency" part.

I am in NYC in downtown Manhattan right now, I went for a short walk during my lunch time just a few minutes ago after reading this thread.
Out of curiosity I was looking at the cameras tourists and photographers are using around Wall Street , Broadway and Battery park.
I've seen quite a few people with 5Ds and those "bulky useless expensive L lenses". And nobody was using Pentax cameras. It really looks like Canon is selling more expensive FF bodies then Pentax is selling cheap and not so cheap APS-C cameras.
I've seen no istDs, no K100Ds, no K10Ds, no K20Ds and no KMs.

In my humble opinion this would be a good time for Pentax and Samsung to jump into affordable FF DSLR opportunity. You'll see they will do it in a few years, definitely after Canon will release next bestseller: "FF Digital Rebel" or whatever the name they will give it. And Pentax will bite dust again the way they usually do.

[Samsungian]

Until its buyable I say its Vaporeware. Hoya could easily kill it again as pentax has before or Hoya pentax could take 3 more years to launch it. All hype about a product that costs them nothing:

645D does not exist.

K Mount Full Frame is just as real as 645D as it does not exist either.

Sure, and see what happens to the A900.
In the end, it just the big two - Canon and Nikon which really matters in the FF market.



And they have the 645D, though I am equally concerned about its chance of success as much as a FF Pentax; but at least it is in a different market segment than the big two.

If Pentax wants success, hybrid system is the future, and that's where the money is; NOT FF.

[nosnoop]

Until its buyable I say its Vaporeware. Hoya could easily kill it again as pentax has before or Hoya pentax could take 3 more years to launch it. All hype about a product that costs them nothing:
645D does not exist.

Of course, we won't know until it is actually launched.
But 645D has been officially announced, and launch is under preparation. And a working prototype was shown before.

This is a far cry from a FF Pentax which really does not exist in any form - official press release or prototypes.

K Mount Full Frame is just as real as 645D as it does not exist either.

This, I have to disagree, because of the key differences above.

[awo425]

Of course, we won't know until it is actually launched.
But 645D has been officially announced, and launch is under preparation. And a working prototype was shown before.

This is a far cry from a FF Pentax which really does not exist in any form - official press release or prototypes.



This, I have to disagree, because of the key differences above.

Technically FF prototype was shown 9 years ago, the name was MZ-D or something along those lines.

[ryan s]

No, the analogy was not about a bad sensor. The analogy was about a key investment or a key model turning out to be a flop, and how the company could survive it. Even if Pentax has a FF camera with a kick a** sensor, it can still turn out to be a flop just like A900. The total FF market segment is just plain too small. Whatever Pentax does, it is unlikely it would be able to convert significant number of Nikon/Canon FF users. And projecting Pentax FF sales based on Nikon/Canon : Pentax sales volume from recent history would give you a very depressing figure - it would be a flop even if the sales meet the "expectation".

Exactly my point.

Just because "others can do it...others are doing it" doesn't mean Pentax is going to. What would be the point of not having a unique FF sensor and using Sony's for example? Unless they put in better features it'll be an A900 clone.

I think even the K10D/K200D are not differentiated enough because they use the same sensor and share features. The K-7 will put more room in between "top of the line" and mid-level. (That's assuming they'll move the Kx00D up and not make a Kx0D replacement.)

On this page in this thread Ryan says full frame is 2-5% sales, & you're saying 10%.

I'm curious is this unit sales 2%-5%-10% for full frame or total cash from full frame sales?

There are links somewhere...in one of these threads...in News and Rumors...but all the thread are merging together in my head It's definitely not up to 10%. I don't think Apple has even passed 10% with OSX yet?

I am in NYC in downtown Manhattan right now, I went for a short walk during my lunch time just a few minutes ago after reading this thread.
Out of curiosity I was looking at the cameras tourists and photographers are using around Wall Street , Broadway and Battery park.
I've seen quite a few people with 5Ds and those "bulky useless expensive L lenses". And nobody was using Pentax cameras. It really looks like Canon is selling more expensive FF bodies then Pentax is selling cheap and not so cheap APS-C cameras.
I've seen no istDs, no K100Ds, no K10Ds, no K20Ds and no KMs.

In my humble opinion this would be a good time for Pentax and Samsung to jump into affordable FF DSLR opportunity. You'll see they will do it in a few years, definitely after Canon will release next bestseller: "FF Digital Rebel" or whatever the name they will give it. And Pentax will bite dust again the way they usually do.

Hmm...that's weird...cause I rarely see any Canon or Nikon FFs...once in a great while.

But, you know...Manhattan has to represent the US market 100%. No point in actually looking at sales figures...just look at what people use

I swear we have the most Priuses per capita, even though I've never seen a study or stat. Madison, Wisconsin is the Capital of Priuses.

Doesn't that sound ridiculous?

I do agree with your last paragraph. Pentax needs to make an affordable body, and faster than the rest. Will it happen? Probably not...I don't see FF in Pentax's immediate future and they have already alluded to that end.

Of course, we won't know until it is actually launched.
But 645D has been officially announced, and launch is under preparation. And a working prototype was shown before.

This is a far cry from a FF Pentax which really does not exist in any form - official press release or prototypes.

Pentax will go through with the 645 first, IMO.

And they had at least 1 working MZ-D FF prototype back in 2001-ish.

[Aristophanes]

If you area pro photgrapher and require FF for a variety of reasons, you need to look beyond Pentax. It's simple.

Pro photography makes up less than 2% of unit sales in the overall market, and less than 6% of margins.

So FF is niche, plain and simple. The #'s tell us so. In a niche offering, Pentax is going for the MF 645D.

The problem with your post is that you are assuming FF competes with APS-C. No, it does not. This is like saying a pickup truck competes with a sedan. Different products for different uses and markets. There is always overlap, but it does not reduce the presence and demand for one product or another very much.

You simply do not understand market product placement. By making an assumption that a company has to have FF and its corresponding IQ in order to survive in the market is a false dichotomy. You are ignorant to make this correlation. The K-7 is not designed to "compete" with a FF DSLR.

If you want a FF DSLR and it is that important to you, buy another brand.

I know Pentax is still unable to make a Full Frame body at this moment, nor they are willing to bear the risk.

So, now they go in another way to compete - make a high grade body with most updated features, the best possible ergonomics and compactness as well as with highest possible build quality, so that it makes itself an unique product with all those valuable differentiating characteristics in the current market. But, it is still an APS-C DSLR afterall!

So and so, what do you think if this would succeed? Image quality wise, I still not believing that any APS-C can beat those of the current Full Frame lines. And price wise, the price difference is not very big. Say, if you pay just a little bit more, even one can get the old Full Frame Canon 5D MkI which can still be bought brand new in the market for the time being. And then for a little bit more, the popular Nikon D700 is there!

All in all, Do you think that Pentax can win in the game and competition? Or, just to continue their life in the DSLR battle field with the new K-7??