[Barry Pearson]

I know a lot of weekend warriors who have great vision and really know the craft, but like you they don't want to be in business. I actually have used a couple of them as second shooters. The fact that they are hobbyists means that they are not a real threat to me or my business. They are not competition. They don't have the desire or the contacts to turn it into a business.

Now that (being a second shooter) I would consider! Not necessarily for the money, but I would learn a lot.

Last year and this I paid to be on several workshops and training courses with professionals for the learning experience. It isn't just about technical details, although that sometimes applies. (After one course I was so enthusiastic that I set up my own studio at home). But it is also about absorbing a stricter philosophy. I now set the bar much higher on what I consider worth keeping, then I pursue that higher standard each shoot.

[Barry Pearson]

Are you prepared to buy a EOS 1DX level camera, at a EOS 1DX-level price? Just saying "I want this and that" is not enough.
But if you are, then I will correct my statement: Barry is asking for 12fps, and I'm afraid he's asking in vain because Pentax cannot compete yet at that level.

However, the discussion was upper-limited to D800 level ans you asking for 12fps (and maybe even being able to pay for it) is out of context.

What I originally said was "I find 7 fps inadequate in my K-5IIs. I would like 10 fps at least, preferably more such as 12 fps or more". (My original target was at least 10 fps).

Then I said "Of course it will cost a lot of money. But that doesn't mean it "is pro territory" and it doesn't mean "nobody is asking for that". Even some hobbyists are asking for it, just as some hobbyists are already using the Canon IDX". (I know two such hobbyists).

Yes, I'm asking for 10 fps at least, preferably more. Even if Pentax launched such a camera, they couldn't charge the same price that Canon do, because when you buy a Canon at that level you are buying into a top-level system (lenses, etc) and a service infrastructure. I doubt if Pentax could charge two-thirds of the the price that Canon charge for a 12 fps camera. And they would charge even less for a 10 fps camera.

At that price, I would consider it. That is significantly less than I paid for one lens (Sigma 500mm f/4.5 APO EX DG) earlier this year. And yes, I know that Pentax are not about to launch such a camera this year. In future years - who knows? Never underestimate the hobbyist - we don't stick to tidy theories about who would buy what!

[Kunzite]

Of course it is pro territory, as only pro cameras can offer this. A pro-level mirror mechanism is required, and an AF system capable of working at high speeds, and electronics able to transfer the data - all expensive stuff. I'm talking about proper 12fps, with AF and metering (which, I assume, is what you want).
And if Pentax knows they can't sell a product for the projected price, but only much lower, they simply won't make it. I would like to see them competing at that level, but it won't happen for now.
I'm sure it won't happen for their first FF DSLR, in any case.

[RonHendriks1966]

What I originally said was "I find 7 fps inadequate in my K-5IIs. I would like 10 fps at least, preferably more such as 12 fps or more". (My original target was at least 10 fps).

Then I said "Of course it will cost a lot of money. But that doesn't mean it "is pro territory" and it doesn't mean "nobody is asking for that". Even some hobbyists are asking for it, just as some hobbyists are already using the Canon IDX". (I know two such hobbyists).

Yes, I'm asking for 10 fps at least, preferably more. Even if Pentax launched such a camera, they couldn't charge the same price that Canon do, because when you buy a Canon at that level you are buying into a top-level system (lenses, etc) and a service infrastructure. I doubt if Pentax could charge two-thirds of the the price that Canon charge for a 12 fps camera. And they would charge even less for a 10 fps camera.

At that price, I would consider it. That is significantly less than I paid for one lens (Sigma 500mm f/4.5 APO EX DG) earlier this year. And yes, I know that Pentax are not about to launch such a camera this year. In future years - who knows? Never underestimate the hobbyist - we don't stick to tidy theories about who would buy what!

Not this decade!

[Barry Pearson]

Of course it is pro territory, as only pro cameras can offer this. A pro-level mirror mechanism is required, and an AF system capable of working at high speeds, and electronics able to transfer the data - all expensive stuff. I'm talking about proper 12fps, with AF and metering (which, I assume, is what you want).
And if Pentax knows they can't sell a product for the projected price, but only much lower, they simply won't make it. I would like to see them competing at that level, but it won't happen for now.
I'm sure it won't happen for their first FF DSLR, in any case.

You are still thinking in terms of moving mirrors, aren't you?

[Kunzite]

I'm still on the Pentax forums, why are you surprised I'm talking DSLRs?
Your MILCs can't really do better, by the way. They can reach higher fps at a lower price point, but they're losing AF and metering - because those are done by the same sensor and have to be serialized with the image capture and transfer.

[Aristophanes]

What features could Nikon add better than a D600? Wait, they have several upper level cameras so they found an answer.

I asked about Pentax.

Speculations about the sensor are premature, as we don't know all the possible choices.

Only Sony as third party supplier has been able to pull off the effective ISOless gain read-outs from sensors. Canon is modestly behind. No one else is close.

Sony is so dominant in third party sensor sales it has something like 70% of the market and they produce by far the most FF and APS-C sensors in the world.

You're oversimplifying the price issue and no, crippling a product to meet a certain price point would not necessarily bring in more sales (and profit) than a somewhat more expensive product.

K-5ii's and D600's are not "crippled".

If you need to modify form factor to differentiate, then some choices may need to be made.

i'm not sure there are that many users that see much benefit it upgrading from APS-C with f/2.8 glass to FF with f/4 glass.

Exactly. Once one climbs the price ladder the market starts to split again between those who justify FF all the way and demand f/2.8 glass. And those who will deal with variable aperture zooms and f/4 L-glass equivalents.

You get the difference between a guy willing to spend $4500 more for a Canon 300mm f/2.8 over its f/4 equivalent.

THAT is where the money in FF is made.

If you cannot pump that premium on that upsell, you're selling f/4 and variables....in volume.

And volume = price.

To stay viable in the mid- to upper tiers of FF a supplier has to run dual lens lines, as they do in APS-C. That is exactly why Canon and Nikon have 3 or 4 FF bodies, to match up price point expectations.

Pentax can't even get a single body out the door. The issue isn't the body so much as the lenses. They need to determine their FF lens array to maximize volume and design a body around that.

An upper tier FF body close to a D800 or 6D creates demand for f/2.8 lenses Pentax simply cannot supply. So they lose those customers anyway to Canikon. (A problem Sony has)

And for those who are more price conscious, an upper tier body more expensive the the non-crippled D600 will create the "Why Pentax?" attitude. A $1,691 D600 is death to Pentax because the Nikon comes with access to every Nikon lens there is on the current market.

With the D600 selling now at lower than the MSRP of the K-5 there is no room for a brand with too few lenses and flash systems etc. to expect either existing or new customers to pay more and get less. It's a system camera. They'd pay a premium for less system.

Not gonna work.

---

Last edited by Aristophanes; 08-24-2013 at 03:25 PM.

[Pål Jensen]

With the D600 selling now at lower than the MSRP of the K-5 there is no room for a brand with too few lenses and flash systems etc. to expect either existing or new customers to pay more and get less. It's a system camera. They'd pay a premium for less system.

Not gonna work.

Your idea won't work either. The D600 is dumped because its function is to lure people into the Nikon FF system and hopefully upgrade to something that is profitable. Pentax have no such option. I don't think theres an inevitable correlation between a more expensive camera and zoom lenses with maximum aperture of F:2.8 (apart from the fact that people who buy expensive cameras probably have the buying power to buy expensive lenses; but a surprisingly large number are buying third party lenses anyway). How many F:2.8 zoom lenses do Pentax need? About two I would say; certainly no big deal.
Anyway, a D800 with big lenses is going to be...eh...big and heavy. A small and weather sealed Pentax FF camera with small and weather sealed lenses (like Limiteds) will be an alternative. Not everyone who wants FF or high resolution may want large cameras and lenses. I would expect an FF Pentax to be placed between the D600 and D800. It won't sell a lot but no Pentax FF will...

[rgknief60]

So the question is, if Pentax were to launch the full frame with 2 or 3 new lenses - what should they be?

How about a DFA 200mm f2.8 Macro...

[Pål Jensen]

How about a DFA 200mm f2.8 Macro...

They could relaunch the FA* 200/4 Macro. It won't be cheap though.

[rgknief60]

They could relaunch the FA* 200/4 Macro. It won't be cheap though.

People are already paying $2500-3500 for the used ones. One with an HSM would be sweet. I think it would even attract attention from outside the Pentax world!

[Aristophanes]

Your idea won't work either. The D600 is dumped because its function is to lure people into the Nikon FF system and hopefully upgrade to something that is profitable. Pentax have no such option. I don't think theres an inevitable correlation between a more expensive camera and zoom lenses with maximum aperture of F:2.8 (apart from the fact that people who buy expensive cameras probably have the buying power to buy expensive lenses; but a surprisingly large number are buying third party lenses anyway). How many F:2.8 zoom lenses do Pentax need? About two I would say; certainly no big deal.
Anyway, a D800 with big lenses is going to be...eh...big and heavy. A small and weather sealed Pentax FF camera with small and weather sealed lenses (like Limiteds) will be an alternative. Not everyone who wants FF or high resolution may want large cameras and lenses. I would expect an FF Pentax to be placed between the D600 and D800. It won't sell a lot but no Pentax FF will...

There are 2 D600's in my lunchtime photo walk around photo club. No one is dumping them. They are there precisely because they are an affordable FF. One guy has the kit lens, the other a 70-200/2.8.

ONe of these guys, like me, possessed a D700 prior.

The D600 is a better value and modestly smaller.

I was in at my local shop this afternoon because it was right across from a kid's birthday party my son was at, and they had a Ricoh GR!!

So I got to try it out. Nice camera. Some guy ordered it but went with a Sony RX100 instead (fool) which is why it was sitting under the glass counter. Normally it is only a special order item.

I almost bought it.

But I digress.

This store has more D600's in stock than all other FF's combined.

2:1

It is selling in decent volumes, but all sales are generally down I was informed. It's not just 'net talk.

Most people buy the D600 kit I was also told, about 70%. Someone was in trying one while I was there.

It's an entry-level FF DSLR for those who can afford more than APS-C.

And in doing so, it is killing the former APS-C flagship price point and therefore killing revenues for APS-C only Pentax on a per unit basis.

In a saturated market with slowing or even declining sales it is value products that move. We're talking k-mount, I'm a thinking k-car.

They also had a K50 in and a K-30 on sale.

[Kunzite]

I asked about Pentax.



Only Sony as third party supplier has been able to pull off the effective ISOless gain read-outs from sensors. Canon is modestly behind. No one else is close.

Sony is so dominant in third party sensor sales it has something like 70% of the market and they produce by far the most FF and APS-C sensors in the world.



K-5ii's and D600's are not "crippled".

If you need to modify form factor to differentiate, then some choices may need to be made.



Exactly. Once one climbs the price ladder the market starts to split again between those who justify FF all the way and demand f/2.8 glass. And those who will deal with variable aperture zooms and f/4 L-glass equivalents.

You get the difference between a guy willing to spend $4500 more for a Canon 300mm f/2.8 over its f/4 equivalent.

THAT is where the money in FF is made.

Pentax only has to give Nikon a call - problem solved

Do you know what sensors are they (Pentax) evaluating? Do you know there wouldn't be a new sensor on the market, somewhere next year? Nope, you don't.

The D600 is not crippled, even though it's using an APS-C viewfinder; but for a $450 price cut, you won't get even that.

I doubt that market split truly exists. Sure, if one is so poor he can barely afford to pay $1650, it's cheap kit zooms for him; otherwise, there's nothing wrong with high quality f/4 zooms, nor with primes.
Does every Nikon D800 user buy a 300mm f/2.8?

[Aristophanes]

Does every Nikon D800 user buy a 300mm f/2.8?

That is where profits are. How much of that difference is actually labour and materials?

If Pentax is relegated to a system bereft of high margin, after market lenses and accessories, and they have low volumes made worse by higher priced bodies, then they have a revenue issue. They aren't competitive. They have less to put into R&D.

Pentax has to play in the volume market for equivalent margins per unit. They will not have the special glass to justify higher end bodies. They'd be making a low volume, presumably high margin D800 wannabe with nowhere near the system sales necessary to justify such limited gross revenues. It would be a $2400 body going up against a D600 at $1700 and the D600 comes with the whole system for $700 less. The Nikon owner has more left over for glass, perpetuating the cycle.

[Tonto]

Sigma is rumored to be working on a replacement for the current 24-70.

Hopefully without the added weight of OS for Sony and Pentax cameras, unlikely now though.