[monochrome]

It's a little hard to see how that's going to happen quickly or how 4 DSLRs can be squashed into APS-C

I could see this over the next 18 months:

MILC

• Q line
  • Q-2 announced late August, 2012
• K-zero line
  • K-02 announced February 2013

dSLR

1. K300 (true entry level) Fall 2013 release
2. K30 (mid-level) Summer 2012 release
3. K3 (high-end) K-5 replacement Photokina announcement early fall release - shares a lot with ->
4. LX-2 (enthusiast Full Frame) Spring/Summer 2013 - series uses the even numbers

MF

• 645D

That's a pretty full lineup for any camera company, especially one the size of Pentax. Fortunately with only [EDIT:] three two] mounts there's plenty of room for technology transfer across virtually all the bodies (especially by electronically disabling capability, as was likely done in the K-01 to allow the K-30 some performance room).

Ricoh stated they want to triple dSLR sales in 2 years - this is a possible roadmap to do that.

---

Last edited by monochrome; 06-30-2012 at 10:37 AM.

[ElJamoquio]

On 2, given a FF can be cropped to give identical result to APS-C, presumably the valid reasons for wanting APS-C are size, weight and price.

Now you're just trolling me.

Of size, weight, and price... well, price can be proven, and so can availability of cheaper, slower APS-C lenses...

[ElJamoquio]

Fortunately with only two mounts

I think you mean three mounts?

[Brangdon]

Fortunately with only two mounts there's plenty of room for technology transfer across virtually all the bodies (especially by electronically disabling capability, as was likely done in the K-01 to allow the K-30 some performance room).

Good point, although I count 3 mounts (Q, K, 645). In the long run, maybe there would be more technology share between a K-0x APS-C mirrorless and a FF mirrorless. (I see both K-01 and Q as ways to experiment with mirrorless technology without cannibalising their high-end sales; hence why K-01 was crippled by lack of viewfinder/articulated screen.)

[monochrome]

hence why K-01 was crippled by lack of viewfinder/articulated screen

As well as intentional crippling the frame rate and buffer and implementing the mid-range style M Mode (internal TAv) - still a more capable camera than most people believe and much more comfortable to shoot with than one would know from reading reviews

[monochrome]

I think you mean three mounts?

Good point, although I count 3 mounts (Q, K, 645). In the long run, maybe there would be more technology share between a K-0x APS-C mirrorless and a FF mirrorless.

Yeah I corrected that obvious error

Brangdon gets my point. There's a lot of room to share technology and lower development cost / unit when applying across the K-zero series and 4 dSLR line, as well as some technology sharing in MF (645D transferred a lot of technology developed for K7, which was the only reason 645D could be developed and released. Although I've always thought the transfer was the other direction) and maybe Q.

Pentax's big, possibly prohibitive challenge is lens development and production. There isn't nearly as much room for technology transfer, especially when a small company has three mounts running. We continually hear MFT proponents bemoaing the K-01 as a k-mount rather than MFT mount - but that would be a 4th Pentax mount, which I believe financially impossible for Pentax to support.

[mecrox]

It isn't. It is on the increase saleswise....

An increase in sales is welcome news, but it's a separate issue from how much APS-C cameras can be sold for and therefore how profitable they are for a company. It sounds as if APS-C is being squashed pricewise. And if the Nikon D600 rumours turn out to be true and if m43 cameras of increasingly high quality start appearing at lower price points, then the squishy squashing will become more apparent, imho.

[Pål Jensen]

An increase in sales is welcome news, but it's a separate issue from how much APS-C cameras can be sold for and therefore how profitable they are for a company. It sounds as if APS-C is being squashed pricewise. And if the Nikon D600 rumours turn out to be true and if m43 cameras of increasingly high quality start appearing at lower price points, then the squishy squashing will become more apparent, imho.

If the D600 rumors indeed are true it means that FF is getting squashed as well when it comes to profitability. I beliveve the D600 is an answer to the Canon 5D and priced similarly; time will tell.
I do not see that APS cameras and FF cameras must compete to a full extent for the same customers, not unless we are talking about 36mp FF camera that could work as no compromise APS cameras as well. But these are still way more expensive than an APS DSLR.
The DSLR industry is driven by the cropped sensors and don't think it is about to change....

[aragondina]

What? Another Pentax Full Frame thread?

When will everyone figure out that Pentax will NEVER, EVER bring out a full frame camera? They simply do not have the market share, or lenses in their lineup to do so. Doing so would be too huge a capital risk for them. It's hard enough for Canon & Nikon to put out a new FF DSLR every 3 years, so Pentax will never be able to afford the risk and the R&D. People will not drop their D800/5d MKiii and all their top glass to switch to Pentax no matter how cheap Ricoh could produce them. The market for it would be so small it would be suicide to invest in the R&D for the price point they would need to sell it for as we all know Pentaxians, at least many in this forum, are shall we say....thrifty. (ie. cheap)

If you want full frame, just suck it up and buy either Canon or Nikon. Stop whining about the size. If you really want a small FF then buy a Leica M9-P and strip your bank account in the process. Sure it's price, but it's small, and small costs money.

Why don't the mods shut down there repeated threads anyways? This thread says the exact same thing the last dozen full frame threads have.

[ElJamoquio]

What? Another Pentax Full Frame thread?

When will everyone figure out that Pentax will NEVER, EVER bring out a full frame camera? They simply do not have the market share, or lenses in their lineup to do so. Doing so would be too huge a capital risk for them. It's hard enough for Canon & Nikon to put out a new FF DSLR every 3 years, so Pentax will never be able to afford the risk and the R&D. People will not drop their D800/5d MKiii and all their top glass to switch to Pentax no matter how cheap Ricoh could produce them. The market for it would be so small it would be suicide to invest in the R&D for the price point they would need to sell it for as we all know Pentaxians, at least many in this forum, are shall we say....thrifty. (ie. cheap)

If you want full frame, just suck it up and buy either Canon or Nikon. Stop whining about the size. If you really want a small FF then buy a Leica M9-P and strip your bank account in the process. Sure it's price, but it's small, and small costs money.

Why don't the mods shut down there repeated threads anyways? This thread says the exact same thing the last dozen full frame threads have.

bookmarked.

[regor]

aragondina, I tend to agree with you. The big question, is what does Pentax need to do to make "investors" think that Pentax-Ricoh is a sound investment ? Look at Blackberry, ain't good enough to have a good product, the gadget-savy buyers out there have managed to destroy the way BB is perceived by investors as "not keeping up", enough to have BB go down in flame, pretty sad actually, still a good product ! The same could happen to Pentax. FF could be a double edge sword. If it is seen as the way of the future for the masses, then Pentax stock will go up if they announce a FF, on the other end, if FF is perceived as marginal and too risky business for Pentax, it will have the reverse effect and that could kill Pentax. It's a verrryy tricky move to go down that path indeed, and no doubt the Pentax-Ricoh business analysts are working hard to figure that one out. What the handful of serious enthusiasts want is quite irrelevant in the big scheme, there isn't enough of them to make it profitable, what matters is what the mass market buyers want.

[philbaum]

If the D600 rumors indeed are true it means that FF is getting squashed as well when it comes to profitability. I beliveve the D600 is an answer to the Canon 5D and priced similarly; time will tell.
I do not see that APS cameras and FF cameras must compete to a full extent for the same customers, not unless we are talking about 36mp FF camera that could work as no compromise APS cameras as well. But these are still way more expensive than an APS DSLR.
The DSLR industry is driven by the cropped sensors and don't think it is about to change....

Good points!

I think there is a new paradigm shift that will come to dominate the APS sensor cameras. Price will depend on the degree of outfitting of non-sensor features, rather than any differences in the sensors. For example, price will depend on features such as these:
a. WR
b. how quiet the shutter is
c. how good the video mode is
d. operability features such as twin roller wheels for shutter and aperture control
etc.

Thats true even now to some degree. Doesn't the D3100 or something have a 36 MP sensor. Eventually the public perspective will tweak to the importance of other camera functions as more important when most cameras continue to have the same aps sensors.

Its got to be discouraging to Pentax to see Sony not have much success with their FF cameras,having discontinued the 850 one.

I have a friend in a camera club who has a $6000 D4, and he was telling me the other night how cool the horizon correction was on the camera - yawn - so does the K5 (It actually works quite well)

[TomTextura]

They simply do not have the market share, or lenses in their lineup to do so.

That didn't stop the 645D from coming to be.

Doing so would be too huge a capital risk for them. It's hard enough for Canon & Nikon to put out a new FF DSLR every 3 years, so Pentax will never be able to afford the risk and the R&D.

I'm not sure it would take all that much R&D that wouldn't be able to be shared with the top tier APS-C model. After all, there's a fair amount shared between the K-5 and the 645D. While previously it's been the safe bet to not bother with FF that might not be the case for much longer. That is, there might just be a tipping point where not offering an FF system will be the riskier gamble.

People will not drop their D800/5d MKiii and all their top glass to switch to Pentax no matter how cheap Ricoh could produce them. The market for it would be so small it would be suicide to invest in the R&D for the price point they would need to sell it for as we all know Pentaxians, at least many in this forum, are shall we say....thrifty. (ie. cheap)

There are plenty of examples of photogs switching systems and it's not always at that much of a loss since good glass can be sold at a good price. The FF market won't rely on just converts, there'll be new comers as well. Not to mention all the current Pentaxians that wont be able to resist pulling the trigger. There are quite a few Pentax lenses that are anything but cheap (e.g. Limiteds & DA*s) and they're not unpopular by any means.

[monochrome]

What? Another Pentax Full Frame thread?

Pentax has said they will make a different FF if and when they can make a profit doing it. That will be 2013

Why don't the mods shut down there repeated threads anyways? This thread says the exact same thing the last dozen full frame threads have.

Just skip these threads if they don't interest you.

aragondina, I tend to agree with you. The big question, is what does Pentax need to do to make "investors" think that Pentax-Ricoh is a sound investment ?

Uhh - Pentax Ricoh Imaging Co., Ltd.doesn't have publicly traded stock. Pentax is a relatively small division of Ricoh Corp, a global conglomerate. Investors care about profit - and in the end, that is all investors care about, honestly-earned profit. If Pentax Ricoh Imaging Co., Ltd triples sales of dSLR's in 2 years, as is their stated goal, profit paid to the parent company should be higher.

RIMM - Resarch in Motion, the corporation that manufacturers the Blackberry devices, owns the network and sells the airtime, has a (formerly) rock-solid, more secure network than Apple - perfect for corporate use - but employees have demanded access to corporate networks on Apple and Android devices. As a result secure applications have been developed that allow iPhones and Android on corporate networks. The iPad has taken corporate use by storm, displacing Blackberrys abd inventing an entire new "need" that didn't exist two years ago. Two major outages in two years on RIMM's network are the real reason usage is dropping rapidly.

IMHO RIMM is not long for this world mbecause its "product" (secure, dependable communication) isn't really better any more.

[Alizarine]

When will everyone figure out that Pentax will NEVER, EVER bring out a full frame camera?

They were about to release one many years ago, but came out blessed not to release it yet due to problems with the Philips sensor that brought down Contax. R&D will just have to continue from there, not from scratch. And based from interviews with Kitazawa it seems "never ever" is not as solid a statement. They're just wary of how, when and what they will do for an FF product.