[Kunzite]

I think that global economy is hurting the dslr market harder then FF is hitting on aps-c.

Most likely.

because the K-5 at least had finished hardware, with a competitive sensor. the K-7 did not, in a rush to bring video.

The K-7 had finished hardware, including the sensor.

the introduction of eight new cameras (OM-D, both FUJI-Xs, NEX6&7, GH3, D600, 6D) in or around the same price bracket as APS-C DSLRs are aiming clearly at them (and not P&S shooters like some here have tried to claim). unless you can assure me they will all utterly FLOP (early signs say that's far from the case), the APS-C DSLR market is under heavy attack from both sides. that's logic.

First, appealing to emotions; now, "logic"? Oh, please - you can't so easily replace data!
Besides, your logic is unfortunately quite... wrong: it's not necessary for all your eight new cameras to utterly FLOP for the APS-C DSLR market to continue growing.

again, if you want to play it safe and postpone any conclusions to wait on data, by all means do so. but i sincerely hope Pentax doesn't, because every second they wait is another second the market is moving on ahead without them.

I want to draw correct conclusions, which I can do only with data (even when trying to look into the future); otherwise, it's called guessing - and I'd rather not play this game. YMMV.

compared to no, but in relation to, Olympus's sales are far better now than when it was fighting against Canon and Nikon in the DSLR market like a certain beloved brand of ours...

Olympus failed in the DSLR market, very true.. why was that? They tried to "drive the market" with their "made for digital" 4/3 system.
And about their sales, I saw this item on Photorumors.com:
New Olympus PEN E-PL1 camera on sale for $140, refurbished for $120 | Photo Rumors
Wow, a brand new Olympus E-PL1 for $140! They should sell quite a few at that price, but what are the margins?

[illdefined]

..but tnere are plenty of people on this forum (and certainly elsewhere) that change from FF to APS...

if this is really the case, why wouldn't they stay within their Canon/Nikon system and keep compatibility with their FF lenses?

[Franky2step]

Yes, but since the launch off the D800 there is a little rush the other way. Currently that rush isn't as hard as in the beginning, since there is plenty of stock everywhere.

The D600 and soon the 6D are going to bleed Pentax dry IMHO. They are both offered at prices that make the switch from Pentax affordable.Check the ,marketplace and see how many Pentaxians are hitting the exits. I think even if a Pentax FX camera comes soon, they'll never get these people back into the fold.

In business it's always cheaper to keep a client than to find a new one.

JMHO

[illdefined]

Most likely.

I hope you aren't suggesting the economy will somehow affect DSLRs growth, but not the growth of same priced mirrorless cameras...

The K-7 had finished hardware, including the sensor.

ok...so you believe it wasn't rushed?

First, appealing to emotions; now, "logic"? Oh, please - you can't so easily replace data!
Besides, your logic is unfortunately quite... wrong: it's not necessary for all your eight new cameras to utterly FLOP for the APS-C DSLR market to continue growing.

I want to draw correct conclusions, which I can do only with data (even when trying to look into the future); otherwise, it's called guessing - and I'd rather not play this game. YMMV.

you're totally guessing, just like I am. you're not looking at realtime data, only old data. please, tell me who's going to win the election with last year's newspaper.

Olympus failed in the DSLR market, very true.. why was that? They tried to "drive the market" with their "made for digital" 4/3 system.
And about their sales, I saw this item on Photorumors.com:
New Olympus PEN E-PL1 camera on sale for $140, refurbished for $120 | Photo Rumors
Wow, a brand new Olympus E-PL1 for $140! They should sell quite a few at that price, but what are the margins?

How the hell is making yet another DSLR "driving the market"? They failed because they tried to tackle the established DSLR market with a smaller sensor than the competition, and the IQ wasn't worth the size/weight/complexity of the mirror/prism/lenses in the system. sound familiar? yes, a seriously dangerous parallel for APS-C now that mirrorless cams have caught up to them in IQ and FF is catching up to them in price and size.

are you really trying to judge the current price of a 2010 camera with their current sales? talk about an "old newspaper"...Olympus is on the E-PL5 now. how much has the Q gone down in price? how much are they selling at what margins? please try harder.

---

Last edited by illdefined; 10-09-2012 at 03:00 PM.

[RBellavance]

if this is really the case, why wouldn't they stay within their Canon/Nikon system and keep compatibility with their FF lenses?

"Compatible" doesn't necessarily equate "useful" when you change format. And Nikon's DX lens lineup has many holes.

[illdefined]

"Compatible" doesn't necessarily equate "useful" when you change format. And Nikon's DX lens lineup has many holes.

one of the main arguments I've heard people prefering APS-C over FF is reach. in that case, their FF glass could be very useful..

[Kunzite]

I hope you aren't suggesting the economy will somehow affect DSLRs growth, but not the growth of same priced mirrorless cameras...

Nope...
But it could make people going for cheaper cameras.

ok...so you believe it wasn't rushed?

Yep.

you're totally guessing, just like I am. you're not looking at realtime data, only old data. please, tell me who's going to win the election with last year's newspaper.

What exactly am I guessing?
No strawmen, please - I want actual, not old data. And to answer your question: I would use data, i.e. polls made by reliable institutions, to say who would most likely win some election.

How is making another DSLR "driving the market"? They failed because they tried to tackle the DSLR market with a smaller sensor than the competition, and the IQ wasn't worth the size/weight/complexity of the mirror/prism in the system. sound familiar? yes, a seriously dangerous parallel for APS-C now that advanced mirrorless cams have caught up to them.

How is making another MILC "driving the market", then?
I told you, "driving the market" doesn't specifically means MILCs, nor "full frames". It also doesn't imply success. Indeed, Olympus tried to "drive the market" towards their "standard" 4/3 system, and they failed.
You can't draw any dangerous parallel with APS-C, because APS-C is doing quite well.

are you really trying to judge the current price of a 2010 camera with their current sales? Olympus is on the E-PL5 now. how much has the Q gone down in price? please try harder.

You don't see the issue? You said it yourself: Olympus is on the E-PL5 now (and still, they have unsold E-PL1 stocks). Let's see their MILC timeline:
2010:
- E-PL1 (3rd Feb.)
- E-PL1s (16th Nov)
2011:
- E-PL2 (3rd Jan)
- E-P3 (30th Jun)
- E-PL3 (30th Jun)
- E-PM1 (30th Jun)
2012:
- E-M5 (8th Feb)
- E-PM2 (17th Sep)
- E-PL5 (17th Sep)
Still can't see it? They're flooding the market with lots of models, mostly cheap ones, and they don't care if they'll have 5 generations old cameras gathering dust on shelves. Such a model can indeed bring market share; but it's very inefficient if you want to also make a profit.
I doubt Pentax wants to play this game.

The Q is selling, afaik, around half its initial price; but you must agree it was vastly overpriced, at $800. The E-PL1 was $600, and $140 is less than 1/4 of that.

[Rondec]

It is clear to me that Pentax has had design plans for a 35mm sensored camera for a long time. The question now and in the past is how did/does the Pentax offering match up against other company's cameras? Clearly it would have to have something that draws people to it -- price, size, ergonomics, whatever. This is actually the hard part for Pentax, because their camera would not likely be have specifications that are higher than the 5D MK III or D800 and I doubt that small size alone would draw photogs from Canon and Nikon, although it would help. I am sure Ricoh is weighing the odds, figuring out what they are willing to risk in an effort to gain market share.

If they are a serious player, I think it will come, maybe in the fall of next year.

[illdefined]

What exactly am I guessing?
No strawmen, please - I want actual, not old data. And to answer your question: I would use data, i.e. polls made by reliable institutions, to say who would most likely win some election.

you're guessing APS-C DSLRs will keep growing and go on to do well, in spite of new competition from above and below.

How is making another MILC "driving the market", then?
I told you, "driving the market" doesn't specifically means MILCs, nor "full frames". It also doesn't imply success. Indeed, Olympus tried to "drive the market" towards their "standard" 4/3 system, and they failed.

um, there weren't any MILCs back then. the MICRO 4/3 "standard" mainstreamed MILCs and Olympus was on the ground floor with that push. together with Panasonic, they "drove the market", creating an entirely new market category that the establishment (Canon, Nikon, Sony) are now entering themselves.

You can't draw any dangerous parallel with APS-C, because APS-C is doing quite well.

see? again, says your old data. keep watching.

They're flooding the market with lots of models, mostly cheap ones, and they don't care if they'll have 5 generations old cameras gathering dust on shelves. Such a model can indeed bring market share; but it's very inefficient if you want to also make a profit.
I doubt Pentax wants to play this game.

The Q is selling, afaik, around half its initial price; but you must agree it was vastly overpriced, at $800. The E-PL1 was $600, and $140 is less than 1/4 of that.

I see Olympus taking shots, learning from them and co-dominating a growing market they had a hand in making. all the while, gaining crucial marketshare on the way. that last part cannot be said for Pentax. I'm not sure Pentax knows what its doing yet, as it stands now, we can only guess.

[Vylen]

I see a lot of ranting on about data, data, and data. But, have yet to actually see any data that people are supposedly using...

[illdefined]

I see a lot of ranting on about data, data, and data. But, have yet to actually see any data that people are supposedly using...

people have cited Canon's sales reports for 2012. obviously, none of this year's major camera releases have been on the market long enough to make a collective impact on those numbers.

[TomTextura]

In business it's always cheaper to keep a client than to find a new one.

Yep, as the adage goes, your best customers are your current customers.

[Alizarine]

Yep, as the adage goes, your best customers are your current customers.

Which is probably why Pentax, as a minor player, cannot simply discard the K-mount that easily, and keeps me happy too.

If Pentax will come out with an FF, they will, but not necessarily at the time we want. As much as I care about the brand that I buy lenses, bodies and accessories from, I have very little power, as an individual, over what Pentax does.

[TomTextura]

Which is probably why Pentax, as a minor player, cannot simply discard the K-mount that easily, and keeps me happy too.

Why in the world would Pentax even think about ditching the K-mount?! That'd probably spell suicide. It's a great mount, meant to house a 35mm imaging device, be it film or chip.

[Unsinkable II]

According to Thom Hogan, APS-C is 90% of Nikon's ICL camera business. It is under attack, but is not going away soon.

I think the introduction of the D600 and 6D may actually do Pentax some good. Both the Nikon and the Canon have had their wings clipped in various ways and if Pentax bring out a FF at the same price point that feels as premium as a K-5, and keeps all its features intact, people are likely to see the Pentax as the superior product.