[jatrax]

General rule in retail is "good, better, best"

Good = entry level, fewest features produced at lowest possible cost. Price point is the primary sales motivation and must be competitive with the competition, preferably a little less. Features are less important as the buyer either has no need of them or doesn't understand them or cannot afford them. Price promotions and sales usually feature this model.

Better = Value is the primary motivation for sales. Best bang for the buck, most features that can be packed in at a reasonable price point. Price is important but not the prime motivation. This is generally the sweet spot for sales with better margins than the 'good' model but still high volume sales. Sales people are taught to up-sell to this model from the entry level and to down-sell from the 'Best' model if that price point is too high for the customer.

Best = Flagship, or premium model. Features and bragging rights are the primary sales motivation, price is not nearly as important. The model will likely have more features than most users will ever use. Might have special paint jobs or other bling to make you feel special. Might be a professional model that has features no mere mortal understands or needs. Margins are usually much higher but volume is much lower. High price is often used to drive business to the 'Better' model. Show the features of the 'Best' but sell the more value oriented 'Better'. Salespeople are taught to show this model and then sell the 'Better' model, "the 'Best' model is simply fantastic but you can get almost the same features a lot cheaper with the 'Better' model." This makes the 'Better' model look less expensive.

Pentax has generally had only a 'Good' and a 'Better' model. The flagship can arguably be the 645D but I think that is really a different market. A three model line up is easier to sell at the retail level and Pentax has lacked the third leg of this for a long time. Whether the flagship is FF, APS-H or high-end APS-C I think they need another price point in the line.

[RonHendriks1966]

I see why not make all their DSLRs weather sealed?

Well I think that would be a great move. Giving Pentax a special thing by making it the best brand for outdoors and adventure photography. Claim a market I would say.

General rule in retail is "good, better, best"

Pentax has generally had only a 'Good' and a 'Better' model. The flagship can arguably be the 645D but I think that is really a different market. A three model line up is easier to sell at the retail level and Pentax has lacked the third leg of this for a long time. Whether the flagship is FF, APS-H or high-end APS-C I think they need another price point in the line.

Somehow I have the feeling that we do read more often about APS-H these days

I think there is a market for at least three different camera's. Maybe even four.

[Azzy]

Well I think that would be a great move. Giving Pentax a special thing by making it the best brand for outdoors and adventure photography. Claim a market I would say.


Somehow I have the feeling that we do read more often about APS-H these days

I think there is a market for at least three different camera's. Maybe even four.

K200 was such a nice "good" weather sealed camera, its a shame they discontinued it so quickly

[Jorge]

As far as I am concerned, if they offer a FF Pentax with the KODAK KAI-16070 (take a look here, and see the space the sensor needs here) and they find the way to make it fully compatible with the FA Limiteds (no need to start a new line of lenses), they will sell a lot of cameras, and I will gladly be one of the early adopters.

[RonHendriks1966]

As far as I am concerned, if they offer a FF Pentax with the KODAK KAI-16070 (take a look here, and see the space the sensor needs here) and they find the way to make it fully compatible with the FA Limiteds (no need to start a new line of lenses), they will sell a lot of cameras, and I will gladly be one of the early adopters.

And how much Dynamic range is 66dB (40Mhz) 70dB (30Mhz) compared to other sensors?

[Jorge]

82dB, not 70dB, equals approximately to 13.62 EV. I have followed this doc for the conversion, but I could be wrong. Hopefully somebody with real knowledge could answer more accurately your question.

BTW, CCD will be a better choice than CMOS, and I can carry three batteries if energy consumption is a problem (even though I haven't had any with my k10D for 5 years).

[maxfield_photo]

And how much Dynamic range is 66dB (40Mhz) 70dB (30Mhz) compared to other sensors?

70dB translates to about 11.6 stops, to put that in perspective the K5 is capable of capturing about 9 stops. But, according to Kodak, this new KAI-16070 sensor has a dual-gain sampling feature where each charge packet can be sampled at low and high gain, this gives the new sensor a dynamic range of 82dB or about 13.6 stops (I think my math is right). Pretty sexy.

[falconeye]

82dB, not 70dB, equals approximately to 13.62 EV.

The important bit in this document is:

Charge Capacity (full well capacity) / Read noise = 40000 / 12 = 20 log_10[40000/12] dB = 70 dB = 11.7 EV (*).
__
(*) 20 rather than 10 because light intensity ratio is a power ratio.


The K-5 has both higher full well capacity and lower read-out-noise. This is esp. noteworthy as a Kodak pixel has twice the surface (same #pixels and FF). An FF pixel (at same #pixels) should at least have twice the full well capacity, not less! That read-out noise with a K-5 is much lower (~3 e) is due to Sony's trick to embedd the A/D converters into the die which isn't feasible with a CCD sensor.

IMHO, an FF dSLR with a CCD after 2010 is destined to become an epic fail.

The 82 dB applies to 2x2 binning which combines 4 pixels into one which doubles the signal/noise ratio (+6dB, I don't trust the +12dB). This is easily achieved in post-processing as well.

[audiobomber]

Pentax did that with the K200D and it didn't make as big a splash as they might have thought it would. They stripped the weather-sealing and released the K-m/K2000, nothing much again. They upgraded the insides (then colored the outside) and released it as the K-x - and boom, sales went up.

"Upgraded the insides" seriously undersells the K-x. For a time, it held the title for best ISO performance and best DR of any APS-C. It had other features that blew its base priced competitors out of the water. The K-x was a marvel when it was released.

[maxfield_photo]

The 82 dB applies to 2x2 binning which combines 4 pixels into one which doubles the signal/noise ratio (+6dB, I don't trust the +12dB). This is easily achieved in post-processing as well.

Forgive my ignorance, but wouldn't the dual-gain sampling counteract the increase in noise caused by by the 2x2 binning?

[RonHendriks1966]

The important bit in this document is:

Charge Capacity (full well capacity) / Read noise = 40000 / 12 = 20 log_10[40000/12] dB = 70 dB = 11.7 EV (*).
__
(*) 20 rather than 10 because light intensity ratio is a power ratio.


The K-5 has both higher full well capacity and lower read-out-noise. This is esp. noteworthy as a Kodak pixel has twice the surface (same #pixels and FF). An FF pixel (at same #pixels) should at least have twice the full well capacity, not less! That read-out noise with a K-5 is much lower (~3 e) is due to Sony's trick to embedd the A/D converters into the die which isn't feasible with a CCD sensor.

IMHO, an FF dSLR with a CCD after 2010 is destined to become an epic fail.

The 82 dB applies to 2x2 binning which combines 4 pixels into one which doubles the signal/noise ratio (+6dB, I don't trust the +12dB). This is easily achieved in post-processing as well.

Thanks for the input. Does this mean that this sensor would be outperformed by our K-5 in dynamic range, signal/noise level, things as tonal range and so on?

That the dynamic range is lower (is it?) then K-5 is also with 645d, but that is most important when working on base iso.

[Ben_Edict]

Forgive my ignorance, but wouldn't the dual-gain sampling counteract the increase in noise caused by by the 2x2 binning?

The binning will reduce noise. It also, obvoiously, reduces resolution.

Ben

[Ben_Edict]

Thanks for the input. Does this mean that this sensor would be outperformed by our K-5 in dynamic range, signal/noise level, things as tonal range and so on?

That the dynamic range is lower (is it?) then K-5 is also with 645d, but that is most important when working on base iso.

That is exaclty what Falk wrote. But we should be careful, when comparing numbers here. The K5 is the final product with all the corrections applied. The chip data are just that and performance may be improved with the right processing applied.

Nevertheless, Falk's short summary pretty much makes clear, that a FF sensor does not automatically imply superior performance.

Ben

[Ben_Edict]

As far as I am concerned, if they offer a FF Pentax with the KODAK KAI-16070 (take a look here, and see the space the sensor needs here) and they find the way to make it fully compatible with the FA Limiteds (no need to start a new line of lenses), they will sell a lot of cameras, and I will gladly be one of the early adopters.

There are always people with a very special taste. They do not account for a viable number of buyers. If Pentax would produce a FF camera, they need to improve their lens line-up dramatically. And as there is no such thing as a crop factor involved then, the need for longer, fast glass will be even higher than it is already.

Ben

[falconeye]

Thanks for the input. Does this mean that this sensor would be outperformed by our K-5 in dynamic range, signal/noise level, things as tonal range and so on?

That the dynamic range is lower (is it?) then K-5 is also with 645d, but that is most important when working on base iso.

Yes, but a CCD sensor as large as that of the 645D would still (and does) outperform the K-5 (although not by a large margin).

However, to put things into perspective: a CMOS sensor with the qualities of the NEX-7/A-77 (14EV DR and 24MP) in FF size would rival the 645D's CCD IQ. Assuming AF and lens performance catch up which may be the real challenge actually.