[Smeggypants]

No doubt. But not only will those fast lenses be darker than you'd expect, as DxO says, but most 1.2's also perform their worst, resolution wise, wide open.

So you will usually pay a high price - literally and optically - for dat bokeh.

There's no high price to be paid optically for 'dat bokeh' at all. No one judges optical quality of lenses based upon sharpness/resolution alone. I have and use a Pentax A 50/1.2. it's soft creamyness at 1.2 is what gives it its' optical superiority if anything. Beautiful lens. IOn fact if it was really sharp at 1.2 it would lessen the quality of the lens.

[Winder]

Right. Not enough 'pros' out there to cover the current sales of the D3s alone, according to TH. It's really almost all enthusiasts.

(and FWIW I paid a lot less than that $8000 you mention for my FF kit.)



The entire ILC market is expanding. China alone, in the next 10 years, could come close to doubling the market as their economy ramps up. They don't need to come close to European or US per-capita income to do it - their sheer numbers guarantee a viable market mixed in there as the balloon expands.

Re 645D - I don't think so. It's a specialty camera, with few (and very expensive) lenses. It's not really meant to compete with general purpose DSLRs. I think bringing it's price down to $6K will only shrink margins without significantly expanding sales. (I could be wrong, but I just think it's unwise to bet too much $ on the 645D.)


.

I think the money is in the glass, not the body. Most of the 645D technology comes out the K-5 line so the R&D costs are pretty small. And if the 645D goes mirror-less (Pentax wants to be interesting) then we really change the game. All of a sudden the 645D is smaller than a Canon 5D and IQ with a modern CMOS sensor would be amazing. The evolution of the 645D is not over. Pentax supported the 645 and the 67 line. With Ricoh's support it could put out a 645D with OVF and a 645D EVIL. With the right lenses they be a major player in higher end commercial/fashion photography. In the old days the 645 and 67II were the Pentax Professional cameras. History has a way of repeating itself.

[stanleyk]

I did such a thing once, making a list of what use and needs I had for my first car.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

This was my first owned car and it really did everything I needed. Suzuki Super Carry pick Up. Getting cheap around having spare money to do thing at arrival. Drove 83.000 km with it around Europe.

That's awesome. I would love to have one of those. I don't think my dogs would fit in the front though..

[RonHendriks1966]

144 likes, 1604 posts and 107 pages 79231 views. Wow. If this translated into actual sales Ricoh would surpass canon

Well if every reader was only a buyer. I run a little poll on a dutch forum about camera purchase in 2012 (I think at the time over 50 % has now (or with the coming holidays and still running cashback) a K-5. So who is gonna buy a camera in 2012? Well only if it is either an upgrade (K-1 FF or APS-H, improvement K-3 with 24 megapixel APS-C) or a slight improved K-5 Super (same sensor but electronics improved). To sell more K-5's you need to find new customers. To sell camera's to the current userbase you need to make a new step forward or those users will walk around with their newly purchased K-5 until christmas 2013.

Leave the K-r line at APS-C to compete against the Rebels and what ever Nikon has at that point.
Move the K-5 line to ASP-H to compete with APS-C bodies like the Canon 7D and Nikon 300.
Develop the 645D line as your professional system to compete with FF bodies. Price point would have to be in the $6,000 range.

I think that this is a great plan. It is balanced and gives current users who own K-5 a good reason to move on in 2012 to that new top camera with APS-H!

[Kunzite]

Winder:
The 645D is interesting enough without it becoming a gadget Sorry, but I don't buy the theory that it would fly only by getting rid of that wonderful MF viewfinder.
Are you talking about two separate lens lines, for the 645D and for a lower registration distance (mirrorless) version? Isn't this a bit too much, for such a small market? I rather see the 645D as being the current "645" and a future, larger sensor "645D" as playing the "67II" role.

[Winder]

Winder:
The 645D is interesting enough without it becoming a gadget Sorry, but I don't buy the theory that it would fly only by getting rid of that wonderful MF viewfinder.
Are you talking about two separate lens lines, for the 645D and for a lower registration distance (mirrorless) version? Isn't this a bit too much, for such a small market? I rather see the 645D as being the current "645" and a future, larger sensor "645D" as playing the "67II" role.

A EVIL 645 body would be a specialty camera and would only need 3-4 lenses. This is not a massive system that would require huge investment. Like the Fuji 6x7 or the Maymia 7 it would serve a very specific market. I have 4 lenses for my Contax 645 and I can do everything I need with that camera and those lenses. That big wonderful OVF/PDAF and mirror is a big part of production cost and size.

I know a professional wedding photog who uses the Maymia 7II for the majority of her work. People who buy these are not looking for a Swiss Army Knife type system. There are a bunch of them still using film simply because none of the current digital systems meet their needs. The Maymia 7II is still in production because it is still selling. Leaf shutter lenses and controls make it a very capable tool.

The 645D with OVF could/would stay in production and would serve a different market. Pentax needs to share its technology and buy sensors in a larger quantity to control cost. Two distinctly different 645D platforms, but with 80-90% shared technology which is also shared in the K-line.

People who want a Swiss Army Knife type system are better served with Canon or Nikon. I use a Contax 645 for film, a Canon 5D and currently a Pentax K-7. I don't care much for this brand or that brand. I don;t want a 1-camera-fits-all. I want specialized tools that fit a specific role. I don't think Pentax can win the 1-size fits all battle. Trying to be more like Canon than Canon is not going to work.

[Kunzite]

But a DMF isn't a Swiss Army Knife - it's designed for one thing only, to offer the best possible IQ.
What would a mirrorless add to that? IMO, nothing.

[eddie1960]

A EVIL 645 body would be a specialty camera and would only need 3-4 lenses. This is not a massive system that would require huge investment. Like the Fuji 6x7 or the Maymia 7 it would serve a very specific market. I have 4 lenses for my Contax 645 and I can do everything I need with that camera and those lenses. That big wonderful OVF/PDAF and mirror is a big part of production cost and size.

I know a professional wedding photog who uses the Maymia 7II for the majority of her work. People who buy these are not looking for a Swiss Army Knife type system. There are a bunch of them still using film simply because none of the current digital systems meet their needs. The Maymia 7II is still in production because it is still selling. Leaf shutter lenses and controls make it a very capable tool.

The 645D with OVF could/would stay in production and would serve a different market. Pentax needs to share its technology and buy sensors in a larger quantity to control cost. Two distinctly different 645D platforms, but with 80-90% shared technology which is also shared in the K-line.

People who want a Swiss Army Knife type system are better served with Canon or Nikon. I use a Contax 645 for film, a Canon 5D and currently a Pentax K-7. I don't care much for this brand or that brand. I don;t want a 1-camera-fits-all. I want specialized tools that fit a specific role. I don't think Pentax can win the 1-size fits all battle. Trying to be more like Canon than Canon is not going to work.

or for that matter a replacement for the Bronica RF645 which had i believe 4 lenses (most people had 2 at most) wonderful little camera

[eddie1960]

But a DMF isn't a Swiss Army Knife - it's designed for one thing only, to offer the best possible IQ.
What would a mirrorless add to that? IMO, nothing.

it's a size thing. there were always compact MF cameras (the Bronica, several fujis etc) that filled a gap the big boys didn't. High IQ and compact.

[Kunzite]

But why should Pentax fill this gap? Why compete with themselves?

[RonHendriks1966]

A EVIL 645 body would be a specialty camera and would only need 3-4 lenses. This is not a massive system that would require huge investment. Like the Fuji 6x7 or the Maymia 7 it would serve a very specific market. I have 4 lenses for my Contax 645 and I can do everything I need with that camera and those lenses. That big wonderful OVF/PDAF and mirror is a big part of production cost and size.

I know a professional wedding photog who uses the Maymia 7II for the majority of her work. People who buy these are not looking for a Swiss Army Knife type system. There are a bunch of them still using film simply because none of the current digital systems meet their needs. The Maymia 7II is still in production because it is still selling. Leaf shutter lenses and controls make it a very capable tool.

The 645D with OVF could/would stay in production and would serve a different market. Pentax needs to share its technology and buy sensors in a larger quantity to control cost. Two distinctly different 645D platforms, but with 80-90% shared technology which is also shared in the K-line.

People who want a Swiss Army Knife type system are better served with Canon or Nikon. I use a Contax 645 for film, a Canon 5D and currently a Pentax K-7. I don't care much for this brand or that brand. I don;t want a 1-camera-fits-all. I want specialized tools that fit a specific role. I don't think Pentax can win the 1-size fits all battle. Trying to be more like Canon than Canon is not going to work.

The thing with 645D is that it could have been smaller from design:

Behind the sensor there is room empty, so a different design could make this camera much smaller. Only problem is the use of 645-lenses and thus that enormous flange distance.

A new system with new lenses is possible, but it means again a new system. So you share a lot of the electronics and designs with all other systems. Making it cheaper.

The question is, how big would you make the sensor in such a new system. What size-formula 3:2 4:3 1:1 16:9? Would you go all the way to full size MF or would a sensor like Samsung presented for MF (36mm square) be good for this purpose? For lenses, I think that a wide-angle, a standard zoom and a portraitlens would be fine for such a system.

Looked at the Samsung thing:

So it's not a beauty and not so handy I think. And we probably never going to see it in a store.

If this system would be the cheaper formula, then a smaller sized sensor with for that purpose dedicated lenses would be great. The 645D should grow into a full format sensor, and not with a crop like now.

[Winder]

A quick look at the drawing and you can see that 60% of the side is due to mirror/prism/PDAF/VF. An EVIL 645D could be the size of my K-7.

[Anvh]

A quick look at the drawing and you can see that 60% of the side is due to mirror/prism/PDAF/VF. An EVIL 645D could be the size of my K-7.

But the distance from the mount to the sensor will need to stay the same or else your lenses won't work anymore.
Look up register distance if you want to know more.

For you CMOS sensor 645D, nice story but such a sensor is very espensive to develop that means they either need to sell a lot of make the product very expensive.
CCD is much better for MF cameras and they have better image quality at lower ISO and there where most use these cameras for, landscape or studio photography so high ISO's aren't that important.

Then there is another problem with EVF, if they want to replace the quality of the OVF in for example the 645D they need to be big and that will be a huge drain on your batteries and it heats your sensor up because it needs to be on, which isn't good for image quality.
So i doubt we will see EVF in the top segment fast... a hybrid viewfinder is much more likely.

APS-H, a wonderfull idea but who make APS-H sensors these days?
Lot more FF sensors are made and develop so it might be easier and cheaper to use them.


Can we discuss things that can actually work?

[Riebs]

Hello, all,
Does Ricoh's production of the GXR with all its innovation, and potential for rejection by the Leica adherents, give any confidence it might produce a Pentax FF? The GXR seems to be more of a flyer, and actually, maybe more innovation, than is required to produce a FF in the Pentax line. As long as we are speculating here, I think the GXR gives me confidence Ricoh will take that step for which so many here seem to be wishing.

Just one more line of thought on the issue.
Riebs

[Winder]

But the distance from the mount to the sensor will need to stay the same or else your lenses won't work anymore.
Look up register distance if you want to know more.

For you CMOS sensor 645D, nice story but such a sensor is very espensive to develop that means they either need to sell a lot of make the product very expensive.
CCD is much better for MF cameras and they have better image quality at lower ISO and there where most use these cameras for, landscape or studio photography so high ISO's aren't that important.

Then there is another problem with EVF, if they want to replace the quality of the OVF in for example the 645D they need to be big and that will be a huge drain on your batteries and it heats your sensor up because it needs to be on, which isn't good for image quality.
So i doubt we will see EVF in the top segment fast... a hybrid viewfinder is much more likely.

APS-H, a wonderfull idea but who make APS-H sensors these days?
Lot more FF sensors are made and develop so it might be easier and cheaper to use them.

Can we discuss things that can actually work?

You would have to develop a new lens system and older lenses would work with an adapter. Just like m4/3 but all of your old manual focus MF lenses could work. I understand register distance.

Samsung will make what ever size sensor you want. They made a 36MM x 36MM MF sensor for internal use. Sensors can be cut from any wafer that is in production. You want APS-H? You want MF format? IT is not as big of a problem as it was a few years ago. Sony, Samsung, Kodak, Fuji has a new one rumored to be on the way, DALSA, Panasonic all make sensors that are sold to other camera companies. It was not too long ago that there were only a couple.

FF sensors still cost 6x what an APS-H sensor costs and easily 10x what an APS-C sensor costs. There are currently only 1 Canon FF sensor, 1 Sony FF sensor (A900, A850, Nikon D3x) and the 12MP FF found in Nikon D3s and D700 which I believe is also a Sony sensor. When you say "lot more FF sensors" how many do you think there are?

There are 2 APS-H sensors still in production as the Canon 1DIV is still being sold, and the Leica M-8 has a Kodak APS-H sensor. That is 3 FF sensors vs 2 APS-H.

Samsung has been trying to sell their sensors and will make whatever you want. If you take the existing 300mm wafers that Samsung is using to make the new 20MP APS-C and used to to make APS-H sensors you get a 24MP APS-H. There was rumors of a Samsung made m4/3 sensor for the new Olympus "professional" m4/3 that is in the works.

I don't really expect Pentax to take this path since they seem to prefer to follow Nikon and Sony. With Sony, Nikon, & Pentax all using the same sensors it makes it hard for Pentax to separate themselves and attract those new camera buyers who have been exposed to WAY more marketing from Sony and Nikon. Pentax is the little known "ME TOO" camera maker that only old school photographers know anything about. They really need to do something "outside the box"...... other than the "Q"