Originally posted by Kunzite "Sacrificing quality"? What are you talking about?
Which Nikon version is "superior already", and why do you think so?
Customers also are buying new lenses, that's why they're called customers. Canon is selling new lenses (even new versions of old lenses), Nikon is selling new lenses, everyone is selling new lenses despite old lenses existing. Pentax is no different, it's not like they have monopoly on people refusing to use anything but old lenses.
Those are video cameras, perhaps you're with the wrong brand? Canon, Sony, Panasonic, JVC might be better for you?
Anyway, no strategy based on "same product but 15 times cheaper" is worth considering. Please rethink.
I meant I guess great camera engineers don't grow on trees, they are quite rare. Hiring some engineers without the experience and without others to teach them to develop a new camera would be bad, IMHO. I think they should grow their team, but in an organic way, slowly. The current release cycle is... slow, to say the least. For the number of different lines they have it's fine, but if they are adding another one...?
Canon users can't use 40 year old lenses, IIRC. They did a clean cut a while back. Also there are a ton of Canon and Nikon photographers, so even if few customers buy lenses, that's still a lot of lenses sold. Pentax has a much smaller market share, especially the FF part, if they end up doing it.
I am first and foremost photographer, but I also enjoy doing videography. And I want a tool that does both. I once called in for a job ad for a position as a in house photographer, and despite the ad not mentioning it they more or less said "if you don't do video, don't bother even writing us".
Pentax needs to consider the needs of pro photographers, and that is, often enough, stills AND video.
The Panasonic GH4 is around 2k (4k with that audio add on), and it is pretty damn good, competing with much, much more expensive cameras von Canon and Sony. And I guess people will buy it.
Originally posted by ElJamoquio I think it's a small leap from K-3 to D600, about a cm bigger in height and length. Definitely bigger though. The equivalent lenses are generally a hair smaller, going from Nikon FF to Nikon APS-C.
I think if Pentax's goal was a small FF they could do one in a space smaller than the K-3.
I have a tiny camera bag. Honestly it's less full with my FF stuff than APS-C - for APS-C, for me, I basically carry primes from 15 mm to 100mm. For FF I feel like zooms are good-enough-for-me.
Ok, that confuses me. Why are for FF zooms good enough, while for APS-C you need primes? Don't FF sensors have higher resolution, thus creating the need for better, sharper glass? Or am I mixing something up? Could it be more related to Pentax having great primes, and that's why you have them?
@Kunzite: I thought I replied already about the laughing stock. Hasselblad is a "laughing stock" because they have DRESSED UP a Sony camera. That's like encrusting a VW Golf in diamonds and then charging more for it than you would for a Mercedes S class. It's not making the actually quite competent car any better. What you fail to see though is that Hasselblad is probably earning pretty well with these cameras. You may laugh at them, but they'll be laughing all the way to the bank. Certain people don't care about the actual product all that much, they want exclusivity, expensive (sounding) materials etc. Vertu was selling old Nokia phones for $10000, at a time where most people were using iPhones etc. And they did really well. Now at least they also make smartphones that are decent, but a HTC One will be just as good... for a fraction of the cost. But it's not a Vertu, the back is not made from alligator skin, ...
If Pentax were to rebadge a Sony camera for example, because it's a low volume market and doing something unique would not be economically viable, the reaction may not be as harsh (unless Pentax adds stupid gimmicks like Hasselblad does). I mean Mercedes is rebadging Renault for example. Nissan is rebadging Dacia. And on and on and on. So what?
Arri is another example like Leica, maybe even more important. Leica is, these days, more of a boutique manufacturer, doing collectors items. Arri though with it's 1100 employees dominates the movie equipment market.
I don't think it would be wise for Pentax to compete in a market (FF) where there are 2 extremely well established brands, with brand loyalty and where people have bought into the system (thus making switching even harder). There are not so many new users, and usually they come from those established brands anyway. There is of course the advantage in Pentax offering FF in that people from the start see an upgrade path all the way, where they can keep at least some of their gear should they want to switch from APS-C to FF. i.e. using a FF Pentax to sell APS-C Pentaxes. But at this point... not sure it is worth it.
The mirrorless market is much more diverse. Canon is completely unimportant, Nikon is doing something a bit odd that doesn't seem to sell well. Panasonic and Olympus have one well established system, but they aren't absolutely dominating. Sony is there too, but they too aren't dominating. Samsung is a side note, and then there is Fuji and Leica battling it out for pure stills cameras that are a joy to use, cameras where user experience is all (IMHO). It is a very diverse market with many brands competing, but none of them have really caught on. I'd argue it'd be easier for Pentax to do a mirrorless APS-C (or perhaps mFT?) camera that has something new to offer. It could be like the K1000. A Nikon Df done right. Comes with a K mount adapter that gives full K mount functionality. Perhaps it's even easier to do a FF version (no bigger prism needed, no new bigger mirror mechanism needed). And different sensor versions, with essentially identical cameras but different sensors for different purposes (like the A7 series... I think Sony is on to something).
It is regular, cheap P&S that disappear from the market. They don't have much to offer over a smartphone. At least not enough. Wide zoom ranges, larger sensors, those seem to have a chance still, though they are a bit in trouble because on one side there are smartphones, on the other DSLRs/mirrorless cameras, and they are closing in from both sides.