[Rondec]

SLRs are not like cars. You don't go to a showroom and pick out the features you want and the ones you don't, you leave by the way side. They are released as a package and there has to be some separation between models, otherwise, none of the top models would ever sell. Points of separation for Pentax seem to be weather sealing and pentaprism, as well as a slightly different sensor.

The "features" you are talking about don't really add much to the cost of the camera. They are mostly software and are continued from one camera to the next, with an addition here or there.

I do see EVFs as replacing pentamirrors in the not too distant future, so maybe that will make you happy, but then again, maybe not?

[Aristophanes]

SLRs are not like cars. You don't go to a showroom and pick out the features you want and the ones you don't, you leave by the way side. They are released as a package and there has to be some separation between models, otherwise, none of the top models would ever sell. Points of separation for Pentax seem to be weather sealing and pentaprism, as well as a slightly different sensor.

And dedicated controls.

I do see EVFs as replacing pentamirrors in the not too distant future, so maybe that will make you happy, but then again, maybe not?

EVF only for either pellicle or mirrorless. With the former you keep the k-mount, with the latter a new lens mount is required. That's the dilemma.

OVF prisms should continue because they have 100% DR and lag response (as in none), but clarity benefits for certain focusing situations.

I see the prism OVF enduring because of this, but at higher price points all around. Prisms were replaced by mirrors in consumer budget models in the 1980's almost universally across brands.

[Aristophanes]

In other news Happy 50th Page, everyone!! 50 pages, 738 posts, and 37 thousand views in under two weeks. Who says there's no interest?

Lots of interest. No consensus.

Hard to make a market foray off that.

[Jodokast96]

It would also be reasonable to assume that it will be a weather sealed body similar to Canon's EOS 5D Mark II

God, let's hope not. The sealing is pretty bad on that thing compared to Pentax.

[eddie1960]

God, let's hope not. The sealing is pretty bad on that thing compared to Pentax.

+1, canon you need to go to the 1dx for proper weather sealing, 5d series is limited sealing
it would be a step back for Pentax to go that route (Assuming there would only be 1 Ff model no need to hold back on a feature like this as Canon does )

[Ubuntu_user]

+1, canon you need to go to the 1dx for proper weather sealing, 5d series is limited sealing
it would be a step back for Pentax to go that route (Assuming there would only be 1 Ff model no need to hold back on a feature like this as Canon does )

Agreed! If Pentax did that, I think they'd loose customers (yes, some of us do need the rigorous sealing).

[eddie1960]

I don't need the sealing often, but am damn happy i have it when i do
the reason i replaced my k10 with a k7 instead of a KR was partially this
it'll be one of the reasons my next body is a top apsc or FF model as well

[jsherman999]

[FONT=Arial][SIZE=2]...
I don't know about the rest of you but to me the pentaprism viewfinder, with its generous size, brightness and clarity for critical work, is the very essence of SLR photography and I feel betrayed by Pentax (and others) who have decided to reserve it for their high-end models - i.e. those with most bells and whistles - presumably to satisfy "the market". The K-7/K-5 is an expensive way to upgrade your *istDS sensor. That's my beef.

Well, that is a legit beef, IMO, and I feel the same way somewhat. It makes sense for the camera companies, it takes advantage of a larger available feature set in DSLRs vs SLRs - they can stratify the features over a wider range of models, creating an 'upgrade' incentive.

One thing Pentax may have going for it in FF - both Canon & Nikon have uber 'pro' models that get all the very top features, and their entry-FF level is a bit crippled because of that. If Pentax enters at the D700/5D level, they could put their best feature set in at that level, since they wouldn't have the D3/1dS level to cannibalize.

If they go FF I'd prefer to see it in mirrorless rangefinder style, like a grown-up Fuji X100. Then it won't be so massive.

This would almost assuredly require yet another mount, and your nice big OVF would be replaced by an EVF.


.

[jsherman999]

Lots of interest. No consensus.

Hard to make a market foray off that.

It's a terrible idea to take a lack of 'consensus' in an open internet forum as an indication that a product will not be viable. If that were a good indicator, no Apple product released in the last 10 years would have ever got out the door

Almost nothing would ever get out the door.

Build it well and they will come (around). A DSLR is never going to be all things to everyone, it can't be. It's not a requirement that it try to be.


.

[Aristophanes]

It's a terrible idea to take a lack of 'consensus' in an open internet forum as an indication that a product will not be viable. If that were a good indicator, no Apple product released in the last 10 years would have ever got out the door

Build it well and they will come. A DSLR is never going to be all things to everyone, it can't be. It's not a requirement that it try to be.

It's a worse idea to take a few fanboy arguments to heart. The market data simply does not lie. Pentax has less than 5% of the DSLR market and FF from other brands has less than 5% of their total DSLR sales.

This leaves Pentax with very few potential customers from its installed base.

To heap on the data, there exists vocal consumer, media, technical, and financial voices discussing openly the concept that DSLR's are going to be niche products due to the onset of mirrorless systems.

Both current and future markets are compromised. The price of any FF is going to extremely high compared to current and projected discretionary buying power. In fact, the FF market looks to be in decline relative to APS-C as current discretionary $$$ are moving towards less expensive options. Articulated sentiments expressed here are showing up as real data in sales stats. This is likely a function of pricing, something that looks unlikely to change in the next 2-3 years.

FF looks only to be viable if Ricoh is willing to bet a staggering amount of money on the format, and lose that money for a 5-10 year period. Since the format is tied to the lens mount, this is problematic as the ability to sell-though the large form factor DSLR in an increasingly fractured market will almost certainly lead to repressed volume, on a product that has pretty much zero price elasticity. not all current Pentax FF followers want a DSLR. Many want a quantum leap to mirrorless.

Sure, you can build it. Sure, people will come. Not enough people, say the stats, to make a profit in such a tiny niche.

In any case, the point is moot. Given sensor design and production cycles, Pentax is at least 24 months away from any system. And that's just body/sensor stuff. A proper lens array is even more problematic. All this while still having to output APS-C DSLR's to stay on shelves and generate revenues.

[eddie1960]

FF looks only to be viable if Ricoh is willing to bet a staggering amount of money on the format, and lose that money for a 5-10 year period. Since the format is tied to the lens mount, this is problematic as the ability to sell-though the large form factor DSLR in an increasingly fractured market will almost certainly lead to repressed volume, on a product that has pretty much zero price elasticity.
Sure, you can build it.

Sure, people will come. Not enough people, say the stats, to make a profit in such a tiny niche.

In any case, the point is moot. Given sensor design and production cycles, Pentax is at least 24 months away from any system. And that's just body/sensor stuff. A proper lens array is even more problematic. All this while still having to output APS-C DSLR's to stay on shelves and generate revenues.

Data to support this? if not it's speculation like the rest of us. As for the development cycle how do you know there isn't a protype that has been in development? I would be surprised to find out if there wasn't even with Hoya reigning in spending I imagine they looked forward as much as any other owner would and had it on the back burner planning for market shifts.

[maxfield_photo]

Lots of interest. No consensus. Hard to make a market foray off that.

There is some consensus:
1) There are quite a few Pentax users who would like the option to grow into a full frame system; some are ready now, some will be ready in the future.
2) Most agree that they should not release an underspeced camera just to keep the price down, it needs to be a step up from the K-5
3) Weather seals are a must
4) Most agree that SR should be included, and body based
5) Full frame glass = Everybody wins, even those who aren't interested in a FF body.
6) It should have a virtual crop option so that APS-C glass can still be used
7) AF needs some attention
8) Most want it in as small a package as is feasible while retaining all of the above (I like bigger, but hey)

Now where people seem to differ is:
1) Exactly how small is *possible*. (I would like to point out though, that it doesn't matter what we think, possibility or impossibility have nothing to do with opinion, and everything to do with engineering and physics. I can think that "Dude, Where's My Car?" is a triumph of cinematic achievement, but that doesn't make it so.)
2) Should it be a traditional SLR design, pellicle mirror, mirrorless, or a RF? (I think the majority still favors a traditional SLR and retaining the K mount)
3) and How much should it cost?

#3 is the real kicker. Is there a market for full frame? Yes. Is the market big enough to support a Pentax release at a price point that will make money in the long term, if not the short term? That's not for us, but for the marketing division to determine (God, help us all). There are some intangible factors that also need to figure into that decision like: What is having a professional brand image worth to the company? Do they care about just making money, or also about producing great photographic tools (i.e. the Innovator's Dilemma)

My point is there is more than enough consensus, I think most products are released with far less consumer feedback. This thread is a goldmine from a marketing standpoint. Pentax-Ricoh just needs to decide now what to do with the information.

[Aristophanes]

Data to support this?

CanonWatch | Blog | Bestsellers in Digital SLR Cameras

If you extrapolate from sales via an AR you quickly see that unit sales from APS-C are about 20x and more. So much so from Sony, for example, there is no sales data. APS-C is 99%.

You have to get down to #11 (5dMkII) and #24 (D700) on the BCN ranking to find FF. Before you get to those sales units in the 1,000's, you've sold 100,000 of APS-C.

It's that dominant. In fact, the 5% of DSLR sales being FF is probably a very high estimate. A decent FF package off-the-shelf is probably a US$10,000 investment now. By historical comparison that's into medium format territory back in the film days.

DSLR sales are still increasing, BTW, but they lose their margin profitability as mirrorless eats into market share. This is especially noticeable in Asia where Sony's NEX system has chewed up a lot of Canikon share. One side effect of this will be a slowing down of product cycles (as is happening with floods and earthquakes).

I think people here hugely overestimate how many people are willing to put $3,000 of discretionary income,e into a camera body and at least that into lenses. This is a tiny, tiny market we're talking about. I can get an APS-C DSLR package for $399, but a FF will start at least $3,000 with lens. These are entirely different markets; not really a stepping stone structure, especially not with the IQ difference being very difficult to discern on the democratic choice of viewing: the PC LCD screen.

[Aristophanes]

The meme floating around here here is the overall idea that Pentax can increase their market presence by introducing a $3,000 FF camera, one with a slew of $1,000+ lenses, a new flash system, and so on.

By definition, higher prices reduce market reach. This may be a textbook scenario where Pentax is better off biddie adieu to those who want FF.

Somehow that basic micro-economic concept gets missed by people who should know better.

[eddie1960]

With the exception of a FF that is (somewhat) attainable is a Halo product that general consumers will be aware of to some degree. the 645D is a great Halo product that virtually no-one knows or for that matter has ever seen (even here with all the shops i can get Pentax in I've yet to actually see a 645D - FF on the other hand I see all the time and all the models (including the elusive leica occasional) that are available
I don't think anyone here expects the FF to kill the KR on sales, but it's presence could actually sell more K5 since theoretically the K5 client is also the client most likely to see the value in an upgrade path to FF
Also there are the pros who wouldn't consider Pentax apsc because there was no FF and they want both, using the same lenses
if the 645D market is profitable I'm pretty sure they can make the FF market profitable