[Aristophanes]

Honestly, no. I have FF, now. I want and expect Ricoh to spend money in order to make money, so that Pentax will not become a kitsch-niche brand. And it's not really even a relative risk in the same way it was with Pentax-standalone, Ricoh could equity-fund the entire initiative with less than one's year's interest on it's existing cash reserve, if it wanted to. ('interest' really meaning a conservative return on the near-liquid assets that make up the 'cash reserve'.)

China, India, Indonesia.

I predict the D800 will outsell the D700 by a significant margin, unless they release a D700s (or D600, etc) that splits the sales at that level.

There you have it. Natural growth in the ICL market is the reason Ricoh bought Pentax in the first place. I think the only reason they wouldn't go FF is if they have no real intention of keeping K-mount around for any length of time, because selling K-mount lenses in a mirrorless-disrupted aps-c market with Fuji, Panasonic, Samsung, Sony hitting almost as hard as the traditional big two is going to be a tough haul. (And even then, after killing K-mount, they may eventually end up going FF with a new mount on mirrorless.)
.

East Asia countries are already heavily branded and aligned with Canon and nikon just as entrenched there as they are here. There is really no new "frontier". It's no longer the same dynamic as when Coke got to China first and Pepsi to Russia, although that myth persists. Pentax would have to find an FF sensor and compete on price against Canikon, and, as already noted, that's not a fight Pentax can win, if it can even find the sensor.

Ricoh would be run by idiots to chase down truly marginal returns with cash, cost-shifting from its other operations towards a dynamic market utterly dominated by Canon and Nikon. The ROI for FF is not there because there would be too few customers willing to pay $2-$3,000 for a camera body alone to ever get paid back.

Again, you totally overestimate the demand for such elite, expensive cameras, especially if your focus is on developing markets where disposable incomes are still relatively small.

I predict the D800 will outsell the D800 close to the average DSLR market gains overall and a huge number of D700's will hit the used market. Rumour is that the D700 will stay in production and may edge even lower in price, making it that much harder for FF competition.

FF sensor prices have to move towards Pentax's comfort zone to make sense, otherwise Pentax/Ricoh would bleed red ink trying to get there trying to sell very expensive products to a very elite few purchasers, most of whom are already vested in other systems.

[Aristophanes]

Drop down to the Nikon 1.8 lenses, and the price is very reasonable. How does US$750 for a 35/1.8, a 50/1.8 and a 85/1.8 sound? Not each, but for all 3?

Getting a pristine but used D700 locally for US$1,500 is also easy. It's looking like a mighty fine option for me...

This is precisely the dynamic that Pentax would have to combat to get a foothold in the FF market. Nikon and Canon pro cameras of very good build quality entering the market used (and by many, not very much use) at undercutting prices a new Pentax could not hope to match.

And they come with the Canon andNikon superior flash, support, and lens systems.

It was against similar backdrops that Olympus pulled out of the SLR race in the 1980's, Yashica, Ricoh and others in the 1990's, and Minolta and Konica in the early 2000's.

[Spag]

(...) Pentax is not my child. (...)

Says who?

[PentaxMom Felua]

Says who?

You had me worried for a moment, I am getting older afterall, but no, I checked the family papers and I never had more than 5 of my own and they didn't mention a little pentaxie.

[Clavius]

You had me worried for a moment, I am getting older afterall, but no, I checked the family papers and I never had more than 5 of my own and they didn't mention a little pentaxie.

It would make you very popular around these forums though.

[thibs]

Dang, I missed that bit. Would have been fabulous though.

No, not at all if maybe for 645D.
For various reasons (some bad ones), CCD is dead in SLRs (and soon MF SLR as well).
We may not agree but this is a very soon reality.

[tjk911]

On my tablet so I can't quote Aristophanes, but I agree and optimistically slightly disagree.

He's entirely right that much of East Asian countries recognize Nikon and Canon brands more than they do others. An earlier poster also mentioned East Asian countries as "untapped," which isn't entirely accurate but is still rather acceptable because East Asian countries are - currently - generally booming and the growth in camera users are ridiculous.

It's become very common for teenagers and young adults to afford good DSLRs, and I even know a few young'uns sporting Leica M9s with money from their first job.

But a reminder, Aristophanes is right, Nikon and Canon are very popular.

However, even a brand like Sony has gained a cult-following in Malaysia. Their SLRs are actually very popular. Not as popular as Nikon or Canon, those two behemoths are unlikely to be tackled anytime soon, but the Sony brand has gained considerable traction as an SLR maker.

I guess I'm just being reservedly optimistic. I just see this extravagant consumption trend in East Asia that is relatively similar to the "Baby Boomer" era in the US. Arguably not as extreme, but still significant.

Sigh. I'm just holding out for a Pentax FF.

[Clavius]

No, not at all if maybe for 645D.
For various reasons (some bad ones), CCD is dead in SLRs (and soon MF SLR as well).
We may not agree but this is a very soon reality.

I agree, it's sad the CCD isn't marketed. The IQ is still better then CMOS. But for some irritating reason, people seem to want video on photocameras. It's silly like wanting gloves that can be used as shoes and vice versa.

[ManWithCamera]

Yeah! A full-frame, weather-sealed, mirrorless, k-mount, with an electronic viewfinder that we can hold up to our eyes (not just an LCD), and in-camera image stabilization would be quite unique!

[RobA_Oz]

It's become very common for teenagers and young adults to afford good DSLRs, and I even know a few young'uns sporting Leica M9s with money from their first job.
...

I guess I'm just being reservedly optimistic. I just see this extravagant consumption trend in East Asia that is relatively similar to the "Baby Boomer" era in the US. Arguably not as extreme, but still significant.

I bet you didn't even notice the tension between those two parts of your post, but let's not delve too far into that particular myth. The main point is that the cult of individualism and extravagant wealth is far more pervasive in the East Asian markets than has ever existed in the West. People who would like to believe otherwise just haven't had their eyes open when they've travelled, or have never visited those countries at all. What do you imagine the root cause of the fuss about Foxconn was all about?

What I think a fair number of people here have also missed about the emerging Asian consumer markets is the sheer size of the high disposable-income demographics there, which statistics about the average income levels tend to disguise. That of course does not make them sitting ducks for every carpet-bagger from the West or even Japan (and you also shouldn't underestimate the lingering suspicion - bordering on hostility - for Japan, particularly in China).

[jsherman999]

Again, you totally overestimate the demand for such elite, expensive cameras, especially if your focus is on developing markets where disposable incomes are still relatively small.

Average disposable income is small. Asia has a huge amount of new money, and that's trending up.

Also, look at Ricoh's history of moving into markets - it's in their DNA. It would be completely and suddenly out of character for them to faint at the sight of a few Canons along the Great Wall.

[Anvh]

Tell that to the DA 35 F2.4...

...which brings up a point, if it's DA - then the descriptions should match what DA lenses have been described in the past, no? Calling the 50 1.8 normal if the 35 F2.4 is also normal would be silly. So can anyone dig up the description of the 35 F2.4?

Then why not rate it DFA?

Because they didn't do it might be proof they aren't even considering a ff.

[RobA_Oz]

Then why not rate it DFA?

Because they didn't do it might be proof they aren't even considering a ff.

Well, perhaps, but just having the image circle covering the 35mm frame doesn't necessarily imply that the IQ is adequate right to the edges.

[tjk911]

I bet you didn't even notice the tension between those two parts of your post, but let's not delve too far into that particular myth. The main point is that the cult of individualism and extravagant wealth is far more pervasive in the East Asian markets than has ever existed in the West. People who would like to believe otherwise just haven't had their eyes open when they've travelled, or have never visited those countries at all. What do you imagine the root cause of the fuss about Foxconn was all about?

What I think a fair number of people here have also missed about the emerging Asian consumer markets is the sheer size of the high disposable-income demographics there, which statistics about the average income levels tend to disguise. That of course does not make them sitting ducks for every carpet-bagger from the West or even Japan (and you also shouldn't underestimate the lingering suspicion - bordering on hostility - for Japan, particularly in China).

Haha you're probably right about the tension between the two parts of my post. I just saw baby boomers in the US slightly differently - they bought real estate and such. Whereas in East Asia it seems more of... objects? Difference in spending pattern and style I would say. But then again I'm not entirely familiar with baby boomers in the US haha.

[sjwaldron]

Then why not rate it DFA?
Because they didn't do it might be proof they aren't even considering a ff.

Don't the big two offer a aps-c only 50mm f1.8 already? I think the purpose of that lens is to give new users a taste of what their expensive glass has to offer at an absolute minimal cost. These users they are targeting would not have started with a full-frame camera. They would have an 18-55mm aps-c kit lens and entry level or midrange DSLR body. They also focus on cost before most factors and are probably the type to (almost) never buy a third lens after they get a 55-300mm. I think this lens will be around $100 for absolute appeal...