Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-20-2013, 04:06 AM   #16
Forum Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 61
QuoteOriginally posted by noser Quote

1. A digital K-1000; a basic no-bones FF thing that would be intended for manual shooting. Recapture the market of every single student and enthusiast out there. A sort of 'instant classic' slam-dunk.
Remove autofocus from the camera, add a large bright viewscreen - optimized for manual focus, put in a non-cripled k-mount, no AA filter, no live view, no tethering, put an emphasis on IQ. Aim at the retro/hipster/student market. Would make a very nice FF camera, lower price than the "full autofocus" version.

Have a second more "pro" camera, with all the goodies, autofocus, lv, movie modes (H.264), have an option to have GPS as part of the camera...


QuoteOriginally posted by noser Quote
2. A monster feature machine, which the k5 family almost is, but FF, pro video and audio monitoring / leveling, yadda yadda. I like the suggestions for a huge buffer and dual SD's with write interleaving. Waaaay better predictive AF. Faster sync. New pro flash. Huge OVF. That kind of stuff.
Then make a FF movie camera, not a DSLR, that will accept K-Mount lenses...

06-20-2013, 04:40 AM   #17
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
The market for a non-AF, "bare bones" FF system camera would be measured in the thousands to very low tens if thousands total sales over the lifetime of the body/sensor.

By the time all the engineering, design, manufacturing instruction, assembly training, separate supply chain was costed in, the low volume would mean a very high price. Not a lower price.

Makes no sense when you can simply manual focus on the current bodies. And because the FF sensor has such large files it requires big silicon and pipes which makes for a largish body, especially because SLR mounts have to hold some pretty weighty lenses. The RX-1 is small and loses a lot if SLR functionality and it is $2,800. There is your baseline price for losing market.

By shrinking the market you raise overhead per unit. Most of the components are pretty cheap as is save the FF sensor, so you save nothing. By losing volume customers you' drive the price up to D800 levels, RX-1 levels. Features don't really add much cost. The killer for FF is the low yield on the silicon which starts at 2.5x APS ideally, but is closer to 4x less per unit. When you factor in the added processing, buffers, pipes, etc. FF under the hood is about 6-8x APS. That means a baseline FF sensor and circuit board alone costs about as much as a K-50 in its entirety. And I am being generous to FF. The K-50 price point has magnitudes more market reach. As camera bodies pop over $1,000 per demand volume falls off a cliff, so really the only way to make up for volume is price. And the only way to justify that price is features.

Last edited by Aristophanes; 06-20-2013 at 06:23 AM.
06-20-2013, 05:57 AM   #18
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Calgary, AB CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 292
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
The market for a non-AF, "bare bones" FF system camera would be measured in the thousands to very low tens if thousands total sales over the lifetime of the body/sensor.

By the time all the engineering, design, manufacturing instruction, assembly training, separate supply chain was costed in, the low volume would mean a very high price. Not a lower price.

Makes no sense when you can simply manual focus on the current bodies. And because the FF sensor has such large files it requires big silicon and pipes which makes for a largish body, especially because SLR mounts have to hold some pretty weighty lenses. The RX-1 is small and loses a lot if SLR functionality and it is $2,800. There I your baseline price for losing market.

By shrinking the market you raise overhead per unit. Most of the components are pretty cheap as is save the FF sensor, so you save nothing. By losing volume customers you' drive the price up to D800 levels, RX-1 levels. Features don't really add much cost. The killer for FF is the low yield on the silicon which starts at 2.5x APS ideally, but is closer to 4x less per unit. When you factor in the added processing, buffers, pipes, etc. FF under the hood is about 6-8x APS. That means a baseline FF sensor and circuit board alone costs about as much as a K-50 in its entirety. And I am being generous to FF. The K-50 price point has magnitudes more market reach. As camera bodies pop over $1,000 per demand volume falls off a cliff, so really the only way to make up for volume is price. And the only way to justify that price is features.
I wasn't thinking about removing AF entirely; just making manual useable (split prism?) with the intent of accessing a market that wants FF, high quality, but not really all the bells and whistles that can get in the way of shooting. Something that would serve a market that doesn't want a $3500 FF, but wants FF at a more attractive entry price. It wouldn't need 6 fps, movie mode, or digital filters. Not a body for the soccer mom market that never gets out of auto mode, but an informed market (say schools and their students, enthusiasts, pros) that want a path that says they can invest in FF glass now and upgrade the body later if they decide they need advanced features.

I was actually thinking in terms of increasing the market size, not shrinking it. I don't claim to have the answers, just hoping we could identify what minimum feature set could do that.

If it turned out that it was more like a $2000 price but a smaller niche market, the other way to justify a slightly higher price is quality. Metal body, sealed, perfect ergonomics, and a shooting style where the camera 'gets out of the way' of the photographer. I've heard a few pros make the comment that they chose Nikon for those reasons; they felt the camera just faded away and let them focus on creative shooting, as opposed to Canon where they felt like the ergonomics/features are always in the way or working against them.
06-20-2013, 06:34 AM   #19
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by noser Quote
I wasn't thinking about removing AF entirely; just making manual useable (split prism?) with the intent of accessing a market that wants FF, high quality, but not really all the bells and whistles that can get in the way of shooting. Something that would serve a market that doesn't want a $3500 FF, but wants FF at a more attractive entry price. It wouldn't need 6 fps, movie mode, or digital filters. Not a body for the soccer mom market that never gets out of auto mode, but an informed market (say schools and their students, enthusiasts, pros) that want a path that says they can invest in FF glass now and upgrade the body later if they decide they need advanced features.

I was actually thinking in terms of increasing the market size, not shrinking it. I don't claim to have the answers, just hoping we could identify what minimum feature set could do that.

If it turned out that it was more like a $2000 price but a smaller niche market, the other way to justify a slightly higher price is quality. Metal body, sealed, perfect ergonomics, and a shooting style where the camera 'gets out of the way' of the photographer. I've heard a few pros make the comment that they chose Nikon for those reasons; they felt the camera just faded away and let them focus on creative shooting, as opposed to Canon where they felt like the ergonomics/features are always in the way or working against them.
You are making an assumption that people don't want features. It's features that make the market broader. Don't like them, turn them off. That way they don't "get in the way". What you think is an impediment is what makes the sale to someone else. They are like $200-400 worth of features.

So not only are you making the error assuming there is a broad market that can and will do without features, you are also making the error in assuming that all those added features add to the price.
They do, but they add so much more market breadth they assure sales volumes that drive down the price per unit.

There's lots of demand for FF. Problem is there's not a lot of demand for cameras at $2,000 and above. Price is the problem but taking away features makes it worse, not better.

Nikon is just as loaded with features as Canon.

06-20-2013, 08:21 AM   #20
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
Well the trimmed down camera would be a mirrorless Full Frame camera like K-01 with a Full Frame sensor inside and no special electronis to add. That would work like a charme, but I think the market for such a machine is limited. On the other hand the investment to make it are also limited, since it's just the K-01 with a larger sensor.

The DSLR with Full Frame is different, because off an already crowded market with lots off competitors. I don't see Pentax going into the 1Dx/D4 market so that leaves us the basic route of 6D/D600 or the studio/allrounder option D800/5Diii. With only camera to come in the first stage I would choose the basic-route. Make it a little more fancy with some electronics and wheatersealing.
06-20-2013, 08:57 AM   #21
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 6,929
QuoteOriginally posted by FlickPhotos Quote
K-5ii/iis is .avi. For some reason the K-30 is the only Pentax DSLR that is NOT .avi
AVI is a container format (supporting several video codecs) for the audio and video codec. Most likely it is a motion jpeg (MJPEG) video in that AVI file.
06-20-2013, 09:24 AM   #22
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Well the trimmed down camera would be a mirrorless Full Frame camera like K-01 with a Full Frame sensor inside and no special electronis to add. That would work like a charme, but I think the market for such a machine is limited. On the other hand the investment to make it are also limited, since it's just the K-01 with a larger sensor.

The DSLR with Full Frame is different, because off an already crowded market with lots off competitors. I don't see Pentax going into the 1Dx/D4 market so that leaves us the basic route of 6D/D600 or the studio/allrounder option D800/5Diii. With only camera to come in the first stage I would choose the basic-route. Make it a little more fancy with some electronics and wheatersealing.
A D600 clone would suit Pentax just fine. You save nothing by cutting features that the D600 has because for every feature cut you'd lose more customers than it's worth. Like it or not, all the features in today's cameras, are a consensus of the market unified in a few products. It's not practical to have a DSLR-with-video and a DSLR-without-video market when the competition has an exact same price model where you can just ignore video.

Canon users buy FF to shoot $12,000 200-400mm f/4 lenses. The market is such that most buyers who can afford a $2,500 camera body + accessories can also afford some pretty fantastic glass.

FF sensor and bodyscosts and form factor are relatively known for all players. Price is the body problem for Pentax, but the more enduring issue for Pentax is the FF lens array, especially zooms, wide and long in particular.
06-20-2013, 09:51 AM   #23
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
A D600 clone would suit Pentax just fine. You save nothing by cutting features that the D600 has because for every feature cut you'd lose more customers than it's worth. Like it or not, all the features in today's cameras, are a consensus of the market unified in a few products. It's not practical to have a DSLR-with-video and a DSLR-without-video market when the competition has an exact same price model where you can just ignore video.

Canon users buy FF to shoot $12,000 200-400mm f/4 lenses. The market is such that most buyers who can afford a $2,500 camera body + accessories can also afford some pretty fantastic glass.

FF sensor and bodyscosts and form factor are relatively known for all players. Price is the body problem for Pentax, but the more enduring issue for Pentax is the FF lens array, especially zooms, wide and long in particular.
Well there are some troubles to overcome. I think most Pentaxians are on the cheap site. So offering the same as CaNikon is asking for troubles. Maybe making a few zoomlenses that have a max aperture off f3.5 (instead off f2.8) would make for a nice and affordable camera/lensline.

06-20-2013, 10:23 AM   #24
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,406
I definitely don't think a "D600 clone" is a good idea, maybe Aristophanes did not meant that literally - but a D600 competitor, it might be.
Actually I'd say they should do better, a fully featured camera in between the D600 and the D800, basically a full frame equivalent to whichever high-end APS-C body they'll have then.
What would not work, I'm certain, would be a FF camera which is not even competitive with discontinued FF models.
06-20-2013, 11:13 AM   #25
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
The D600 and 6D are entry level FF DSLRs with a max 1/4000 sec shutter.
06-20-2013, 12:42 PM   #26
Forum Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 61
OK - how about this...

A large bright viewfinder (like you find in the LX or ME Super) optimized for manual focus (split focus screen, prism etc). Add to that full functioning K-mount (not crippled). And remove the AA filter.

Heck if they did that for APS-C I would purchase it - but Full Frame would be fantastic.

Last edited by eirual; 06-20-2013 at 01:05 PM.
06-20-2013, 12:55 PM   #27
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by jogiba Quote
The D600 and 6D are entry level FF DSLRs with a max 1/4000 sec shutter.
Well offcourse fully magnesium-alloy body with a big viewfinder. Those are the basics, since it has to be on the same level as K-5 II and 645D.

No idea how expensive a large buffer is, but I would like it. And a new processor, faster then PRIME II.
06-20-2013, 12:59 PM   #28
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by jogiba Quote
The D600 and 6D are entry level FF DSLRs with a max 1/4000 sec shutter.
Well 645D is also 1/4000th and the number off times I use 1/8000th are limited. When it comes to costs that would be not the biggest deal to me.
06-20-2013, 01:17 PM   #29
Site Supporter
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: 1hr north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,480
QuoteOriginally posted by FlickPhotos Quote
3. Fabled automatic "crop" for DA Lenses (1.4 crop factor to produce a 25x18, 18Mpx RAW file)
I should really dislike this if my DA40 and DA70 can in fact cover a 24x36 sensor! Even if it does 90% of the full sensor I should hate to have automation ripping useful data from my captures.
06-20-2013, 05:24 PM   #30
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Well 645D is also 1/4000th and the number off times I use 1/8000th are limited. When it comes to costs that would be not the biggest deal to me.
I use 1/8000 sec on my Sony NEX-VG900 with F1.4 lenses wide open @100 iso on sunny days. The 645D does not need 1/8000 since it does not have any F1.4 lenses with F2.8 as it's fastest lenses. My VG900 has up to 1/10,000 sec in video mode and I have used it.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
aperture, body, buffer, exposure, frame, full-frame, ideas, lenses, m42, pentax, sensor, shots
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Full Frame rlatjsrud Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 24 06-19-2013 11:35 PM
For Sale - Sold: Full frame $1600 Canon EOS 6D full USA warranty, NIB pocketrounds Sold Items 30 06-04-2013 11:43 PM
Full Frame ? Dimage Pentax Full Frame 4 04-06-2013 07:48 AM
First full feature movie made with the hacked GH2 ! jogiba Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 10 07-16-2012 11:54 AM
Hopes for the future? Pentax full frame (ff), K-5, and lenses Clinton Pentax DSLR Discussion 35 09-05-2010 05:07 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:43 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top