[ozlizard]

Near the end of 2010 I expect they will anounce the K-7 replacement. At Photokina I bet

Yes and I bet that replacement camera will be FF. Really what have Pentax (or any other DSLR manufacturer for that matter) have to gain by cramming more pixels into an aps-c sensor? Surely the 7D is at the "usable" limit. If Pentax bring out an 18 megapixel K8 there will be a relatively insignificant return for the extra 4 megapixels but more noise to deal with. And really what are they going to add to it that the K7 or Kx hasn't already got....a MP3 player or a mobile phone!?

[richtrav]

Yes and I bet that replacement camera will be FF. Really what have Pentax (or any other DSLR manufacturer for that matter) have to gain by cramming more pixels into an aps-c sensor? Surely the 7D is at the "usable" limit. If Pentax bring out an 18 megapixel K8 there will be a relatively insignificant return for the extra 4 megapixels but more noise to deal with. And really what are they going to add to it that the K7 or Kx hasn't already got....a MP3 player or a mobile phone!?

They can add lots aside from more mp: better high ISO performance/dynamic range (at least on the K-7), a faster burst mode, 1080 video w/manual control and variable frame rate and AF w/stereo mics and windcutting option, geotagging, 3-D leveler, a more robust intervalometer, better contrast AF, an articulating better LCD screen (SVGA and/or OLED?), in-camera HDR processing without tripod use, an APS-H sensor (just kidding! we've been over this already and it seems to be a no-starter, even though most of their digital lenses can handle it).

In short, pretty much a laundry list of what you'd expect from a 2010 digital camera. Pentax seems to have found their niche by offering well-spec'd, small cameras at prices below the competition's comparable offerings.

[bunegg]

ill say pentax have to get profitable before we will start seeing ff from them
and the best way to start making profits is to turn pentax into a "cult" like what certain OS is doing now. make pentax the hype!

[David]

I have been wanting a ff for some time but as I get more and more impressed with the K20D IQ and general performance I find myself wondering why. I am now a purely private hobby photog and would have trouble justifying Aus$2000 at least outlay for a ff. In fact I am considering buying another K20D body are maybe a discounted K7 and opting out of the new camera market.

David

[*isteve]

Pentax almost went out of business because of poor marketing. not because they sell cheap. besides, I don't see China going bankrupt just because they sell cheap items.

Really, Pentax should hire you. You have all the answers.

[Rondec]

Actually, Pentax bodies are still quite cheap, for what they are. China sells cheap items cheaply. Pentax was selling expensive items cheaply and taking a loss. You can do the first thing without a problem, the second one will put you out of business pretty quickly.

Pentax's cheapest lenses currently are the plastic mounted DA-L lenses sold with the KX and K2000 and I have read many complaints about their "cheapness." If you want Chinese Cheap, that is what you get.

[Pentaxor]

Really, Pentax should hire you. You have all the answers.

they should had done that a long time ago. now my rates had gone up as well. just like with their lenses.

[falconeye]

Large sensors will get cheaper. APS-C sensors will get more and more pixels. Eventually, the highest pixel count APS-C sensors will cost more then the FF chip with the same pixel count.

This is theoretically possible but very unlikely.

Nevertheless, your argument holds true. Basically, because it is increasingly expensive to build the higher resolving lenses for the smaller format.

So, if you add sensor and lens costs (system cost), FF systems will be less expensive beyond a certain threshold.

[Pentaxor]

Actually, Pentax bodies are still quite cheap, for what they are. China sells cheap items cheaply. Pentax was selling expensive items cheaply and taking a loss. You can do the first thing without a problem, the second one will put you out of business pretty quickly.

Pentax's cheapest lenses currently are the plastic mounted DA-L lenses sold with the KX and K2000 and I have read many complaints about their "cheapness." If you want Chinese Cheap, that is what you get.

not entirely true. the cost of materials isn't that really expensive as you might think. how much do you think the production cost of a 50 dollar lens? I tell you that it's not even half of that price nor a 1/3. with part automation production and cheap manual labor, Pentax would still profit a lot. of course, the transport fees and duties are also considered, but we are in the globalized era where free trade agreements now exists which is helpful and beneficial to the business sector. taxes in some countries however befall on the importer or international dealer.

regarding China Cheap, I dont think that the Nike shoes, electronic equipments, and clothings that are being sold in Indiana nowadays are all made in the U.S. well, that's china cheap for you.

[Kunzite]

I've heard this argument ("the production cost is much lower") lots of time, and that Pentax can make better products and sell them cheaper, while making huge profits.
But if this were true, why don't they make huge profits right now?

[Aristophanes]

I've heard this argument ("the production cost is much lower") lots of time, and that Pentax can make better products and sell them cheaper, while making huge profits.
But if this were true, why don't they make huge profits right now?

Because they have almost the same sourcing and distribution costs as Canikon with too small market share. Less user base to spread out costs. This is one reason why Hoya has let the Pentax lens price advantage slip away. Lower prices were not gaining market share, so the installed base now has to supply those margins--you and me. They are making you pay for your loyalty to the K-mount!

Pentax's camera body line-up is not about long term implementation of model lines with upgrades at similar price points based on advancing, available, cost-effective technology, it's about seeing what the other guys do and trying and slide a model modestly in under or slightly over (feature dependent) what Canikon and Sony are doing.

Pentax is reacting. If they do an FF, it will be a reaction to the other guys, hoping that they drive production costs down so Pentax can buy cheaper, sunk cost sensors and compete on price.

Form factor has a huge amount to to with this. Can you squeeze an FF sensor and lens onto a K-7? The larger the camera, the much smaller the potential market. Bigger (especially sensors) adds more cost.

[Pentaxor]

I've heard this argument ("the production cost is much lower") lots of time, and that Pentax can make better products and sell them cheaper, while making huge profits.
But if this were true, why don't they make huge profits right now?

since when did Pentax made an aggressive marketing ads campaign that included TV commercials as well? selling cheap doesn't work unless the general public hasn't heard about you. as Donald Trump would say, "think outside of the box". CaNikon did just that decades ago, and look where they are right now.

btw, the K-7 is getting the attention it has right now due to the billboard/magazine print ads done by Pentax. the same with the k-x. without those medium, people would wonder who in the blue hell is Mr. Pentax?

[Pål Jensen]

Actually, Pentax nearly went out of business by pursuing *exactly* the strategy they are currently pursuing - offering no high end enthusiast/professional gear (in this case, FF) and focusing on low/lower end "consumer" grade gear. This brilliant strategy - which many here tout as the road to success - is how Pentax went from selling more cameras than anyone to an also-ran. If history teaches us anything, it is that Pentax needs to move upmarket, and that means a FF offering is a must. Competing for nothing but a small piece of the most crowded market segment is sort of like slitting your own throat.

..and that is what Pentax is curently doing. The K-7 is move upmarket and so is the K-x. The 645D certainly is a high-end item and not to mention the Limited lenses.
I'm sure we will se an FF Pentax within three years.....

[Aristophanes]

Actually, Pentax nearly went out of business by pursuing *exactly* the strategy they are currently pursuing - offering no high end enthusiast/professional gear (in this case, FF) and focusing on low/lower end "consumer" grade gear. This brilliant strategy - which many here tout as the road to success - is how Pentax went from selling more cameras than anyone to an also-ran. If history teaches us anything, it is that Pentax needs to move upmarket, and that means a FF offering is a must. Competing for nothing but a small piece of the most crowded market segment is sort of like slitting your own throat.

The 35mm market was ALWAYS crowded. It is a standard, open-source format. That's why Kodak wasted its energy trying to change film formats under patent.

Pentax in the 1970's got trumped because Nikon, then Canon, followed by Minolta, embarked on a low-end volume sales strategy. Then Nikon took those gross revenues and subsidized a professional market where they practically gave the gear away for free just to have the product associated with the shot.Goal: advertising. Canon followed, moving aggressively to the sports and nature photographer whereas Nikon was the portrait and art scene. Canon stole a huge chunk of the market. Minolta rocketed up the sales charts because they took Canon's marketing technique and made them about the technology and price ""From the mind of Minolta") , about the same time as the PC was taking off in the early 1980's. Nikon looked like your grandpa's Oldsmobile, Canon was too "pro", so Minolta almost moved into 2nd place. Pentax, Oly and other brands (Konica, Yashica) never quite recovered. The move to digital was equally brutal, but the need for optical legacy was a factor in favour of some smaller players.

What history teaches is that in the long run, you need mass market sales to drive capital accumulation and gross revenues. With those leveraged, you can pursue other markets. Ask Hyundai. Ask Porsche (fascinating ownership about-face there). What history teaches--now more than ever--is that up market will kill you if you cannot continue to drive a large revenue base. When everyone moves "up market" what's left for the rest?

[*isteve]

they should had done that a long time ago. now my rates had gone up as well. just like with their lenses.

So YOU want to charge more but Pentax should charge less? Interesting.