Originally posted by ElJamoquio Revenue from ILC's has been up for each of the past seven years. I know DSLR revenue is down ~10% for 2014 but I think MILC revenue might be making up for it.
Checking the 2013 Shipment revenue numbers here:
http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/s-201401_e.pdf
so 2013 total ILC revenue is down 9.5%. For the first 5 mo. of 2014, its only down 5.5%, if you want to hang your hat on that one.
But yes you're right, mirrorless is helping to mitigate the revenue loss of dslrs. In Japan, mirrorless numbers are 60 % of dslr numbers, the highest of any other market per cipa.
Originally posted by Kunzite If such a camera would "sell in droves" we'd have one already. Yet we don't
I'm afraid there is no "obvious" and "easy" solution, no product which would sell by itself and generate lots of profit. I'm afraid "an up-spec'd mirrorless FF camera" is not so easy to sell - not against Sony's marketing machine, and cannot support itself; we should not think of it in isolation, but as a part of a system comprising more affordable, APS-C models and lenses.
Besides, DSLRs are still going strong (several times the size of the MILC market) and Pentax is growing despite the CIPA figures. It would be too early to give up on DSLRs, for the privilege of competing with several electronic giants on a small market for bottom prices
By the way, I'm fine with "boring", if by that you mean the kind of Pentax products I like. A hedgehog-shaped camera (spikes included) would definitely not be boring, but who would want to use that? (mirrorless cameras are slightly better
)
I get your point, but each of us often put out the details of the kind of camera we would like the next time around - so i did that and sure, i would buy it. I'm not interested in buying a camera above $2000, but get it into the D610, A7 range, and i would be interested. None of us, or maybe most of us do not know the exact wholesale cost of our cameras, but i assume that a mirrorless FF camera could be made for less cost than a DSLR FF. Thats why i asked for the mirrorless FF version. It amuses me when people ask for a full decked out camera and then add a low cost clause. Not going to happen.
Originally posted by JimmyDranox I would like a FF Pentax, a little bigger camera than K-3, with a big deep grip, with no more than 24Mp sensor. Personally, I don't care that Canon and Nikon already has such cameras, because I'm a Pentax user, only. I don't want to make a collection of all sort of cameras and lenses.
If Pentax decide to make a mirrorless FF, no problem from me, as long is a camera that can be hold steadily in the hands, with a big lens, mounted on it. I think that asking for a Sony A7 clone is not the right way. I have tried that A7 in a store, and is an ergonomic nightmare.
What's the sense of a small camera, which can be carry easy, if I can't keep it in my hands firmly? Especially if it has a lot of Mp, and any small movement will be seen on the picture.
What's the sense of a small camera, if I have to mount on it lenses that are bigger than it, maybe two fold, or more?
I will be glad if in the coming years I will see professional photographers on sport events, with Pentax FF and Pentax long, and fast lenses, like Canon and Nikon today.
PS. For people who wants small cameras, there are a lot of smartphones around.
I didn't ask for a low volume camera ala Nex. the body size would be the full registration distance of the K-mount, it would just be missing the pentaprism hump. so folks should be able to hold it just fine if they liked the K7/k5/k3 series.
Originally posted by Clavius ...With an empty mirrorbox á la K-01?! Bleh...
I'd prefer no empty mirrorbox, ala Sony Nex design. Then provide an intelligent electronic K-mount adapter to make up the registration distance to use all my DA lenses. But figured that most Pentax users would not go for that. On the other hand, there are obviously many loyal K01 users, so it can't be all that bad. It'd be cool to use that empty mirror space for extra battery space :-)
Guys, thanks for the dialogue!!!