[monochrome]

I get the markup requirements at each stage, but If Pentax is making a profit on a (final price) $1000 K3 after it gets through all the loading-docs markups, a K-FF doesn't incur any additional loading-docs markups that the K3 wouldn't - it takes the same path to the customer.



.

Volume. Parts pricing lever and R&D / unit amortization.It could be that they really couldn't afford to make the FF until they had sold the technology in enough K-3's and 645Z's.

[jsherman999]

Volume. Parts pricing lever and R&D / unit amortization.It could be that they really couldn't afford to make the FF until they had sold the technology in enough K-3's and 645Z's.

Well, I think what you're basically saying then is you think that the sensor/parts delta coming up through the supply chain (nothing really to do with the loading-doc markups after the bodies leave the factory) will be much higher than $800, that the sensor will cost much more than $200 - $400 more, etc, because the volume will be so low.

I just doubt that's the case. I think $800 delta between an aps-c K3 and a FF K3 already has a good amount of padding in it, enough to hold volume markups. Aside from the sensor, the parts just don't cost that much more to make, and a supplier trying to stiff Ricoh with an unrealistic markup based on 'lower volume' would be replaced. The sensor is tough to find alternatives for, some of the stuff Fujitsu supplies might be tough, I think everything else probably works under market forces and doesn't support price gouging, because there are alternative suppliers.

I could be wrong,... but I think the stopping point for Pentax entering FF prior to now was due to 1) insecurity about the DSLR market, 2) unstable ownership situation, 3) cost of developing new lenses.

In other words: I don't think the body-profit margin is a problem or ever really was.

Although you haven't convinced me of anything , you obviously know a lot about the supply/manufacturing/marketing side of things and if you even feel instinctively that it costs a lot more, I should take that into account. I've found that sometimes when people have a lot of experience with something, instinct/gut feelings should not be discounted, and facts often follow in support.

.

[Rimfiredude]

Why not just buy a Canon? I'm not being snarky - it's a real question.

$2,000 is an entry level FF camera (List) price at introduction. Certainly the street price for an entry level FF camera is 25% lower at end-of-product-cycle.

I have supported Pentax since the early 70's. I just hate the fact they go half way when introducing a new camera. Agreed, since the K3 they have become a contender, but they could give Canon and Nikon a run for the money if they played their cards right. Maybe, just maybe they are going for it this time. I surely hope they are because I can't see myself using anything other than a Pentax.

[monochrome]

I think $800 delta between an aps-c K3 and a FF K3 already has a good amount of padding in it,

Well - I don't know anything or i wouldn't be sitting here doing this.

Volume amortizes R&D. Lower volume = higher R&D cost / unit. There's a rumor the entire IBIS system is completely new, so they can't use K-3 / 645Z units to amortize that, etc., etc. Sony probably prices on total units of all sensors promised over a term-period. Story out there the next two generations of all Pentax cameras will be Sony, = volume pricing.

.My point is, if there is an $800 cost delta there's a $1,500 +/- (retail MSRP) price delta, which projects a $2,800 +/- intro MSRP for the FF. Given a NikonUSA List $3,299 - now on sale for $2,999 - D810 Body Only, $2,800 feels a bit high to me. Maybe a couple hundred less due to currency exchange, but high $2,000's.

These posters who say it should be $2,000 or they won't buy if it is more than $400 over the K-3 aren't gonna buy a K-2.

[Eyewanders]

Well - I don't know anything or i wouldn't be sitting here doing this.

My point is, if there is an $800 cost delta there's a $1,500 +/- (retail MSRP) price delta, which projects a $2,800 +/- intro MSRP for the FF. Given a NikonUSA List $3,299 - now on sale for $2,999 - D810 Body Only, $2,800 feels about right to me. Maybe a couple hundred less due to currency exchange, but high $2,000's.

These posters who say it should be $2,000 or they won't buy if it is more than $400 over the K-3 aren't gonna buy a K-2.

I'm sad that I think you're correct here, and I'm willfully ignorantly hopeful that you're incorrect.

[Poit]

Obviously, there is a lot of activity in this full frame section of the forum with people really excited for the announced full frame camera, and for good reason. It’s been a long wait.

How much is the actual full frame sensor worth to you? Do you expect a much more advanced camera when shelling out say $2500 for a camera, or is a K3 with a full frame sensor and some of the obvious advances enough for you? To me, the following categories are some of the bigger items where Pentax is currently behind the competiton. Do you expect improvements in any of these areas to make a camera have a $1500 premium over the existing model, or are minor tweaks enough?

• Autofocus Performance
• Flash System Upgrade
• Video Performance Improvement
• Tethering

What other improvements are critical for you to spend over $2000 on a camera body? How much is the FF sensor alone worth to you? For my photography, the overall performance is most important, and a full frame sensor is only worth maybe $400 to me. For example, if you gave me a K3 with blazing Autofocus, a 1/250 synch speed and true group flash controls, excellent video specs, full wi-fi tethering, etc, I would pay more for that than for a K3 with a full frame sensor. How about you?

It's a difficult question, and equally difficult to quantify my thoughts or feelings into a dollar value.

I don't think the K-3 is a bad camera. For me I would like stronger AF performance (which is something I would expect in a $2,500 camera), and the better high ISO performance a FF sensor would bring. As a wedding shooter, ISO performance is worth quite a bit to me. Certainly more than $400.

The one thing you don't mention is the overall system. I would want to see evidence (and I think we are seeing it) that Ricoh/Pentax are willing to invest the R&D effort into a full pro system to be used with the FF (not just a decently-featured FF body and a few lenses). Perhaps even putting effort into a pro-support network. I understand and accept that such an endeavor, with substantial additional R&D and man-hours, comes at a cost. For that reason, as well, I would be willing to pay extra for the FF body as the cost of providing all the additional pro-elements would, in my mind, be worth it.

Realistically, I'd be comfortable paying $2,500 for a FF with incremental improvements to the K-3 and great ISO performance, as long as the company is making serious efforts to provide an ecosystem around it. I think they are.

[ElJamoquio]

Well - I don't know anything or i wouldn't be sitting here doing this.

Volume amortizes R&D. Lower volume = higher R&D cost / unit. There's a rumor the entire IBIS system is completely new, so they can't use K-3 / 645Z units to amortize that, etc., etc. Sony probably prices on total units of all sensors promised over a term-period. Story out there the next two generations of all Pentax cameras will be Sony, = volume pricing.

.My point is, if there is an $800 cost delta there's a $1,500 +/- (retail MSRP) price delta, which projects a $2,800 +/- intro MSRP for the FF. Given a NikonUSA List $3,299 - now on sale for $2,999 - D810 Body Only, $2,800 feels a bit high to me. Maybe a couple hundred less due to currency exchange, but high $2,000's.

These posters who say it should be $2,000 or they won't buy if it is more than $400 over the K-3 aren't gonna buy a K-2.

I just hope it's cost-competitive. If it's as good as the D810 then I'm ok with them charging $3.5k or whatever it is. If it's as good as the D610 then I hope they charge $1700 or whatever it is now.

[kooks]

I just hope it's cost-competitive. If it's as good as the D810 then I'm ok with them charging $3.5k or whatever it is. If it's as good as the D610 then I hope they charge $1700 or whatever it is now.

The problem here is that if they do a D810 performance at $3000 Pentax FF sales will eventually be just by some few hard Pentax users that have the cash to invest in this camera and perhaps the lenses.. And many people that have this cash has already swtch to Nikon or are using the 645Z.. So the point that comes to my mind is who is really going to buy a Pentax $3000 body? .. because they dont have a FF users base so Ricoh will have to start bringing new costumers.. with a $3000 body we can say good bye to the Nikon APS-C that might be thinking in FF because this users already have the D610 (if they go cheap) or the D810 ( if they are willing to spend more).. Sony users?? mmm well they have the A7ii at just $1700 .. Canon users? mmm they have the 6D and the 5Ds .. So who is really going to buy it? .. What is really going to be the target??

I really really preffer that this camera behaves more like a D610 but with some K3 tweeks .. because like this at least people will be attractive by the price factor.. Pentax will create a FF user base fast and start developing for a 2nd realease something more like a D810 .. but at least by then they will have some users that already tryed a Pentax FF and that are willing ( if they lked it ) to spend in a more advanced body... But releaseing a $3000+ body at the first release is going to be really hard to market... And im afraid that some people might even keep switching to A7s or D610s. :/ :/

Im not saying that Pentax cant have a pro camera, what im saying is that at this time ( 2015 ), Pentax is starting from zero.. and that is something to keep in mind if RICOH wants to play in the FF league for a long time.

[ElJamoquio]

The problem here is that if they do a D810 performance at $3000 Pentax FF sales will eventually be just by some few hard Pentax users that have the cash to invest in this camera and perhaps the lenses.. And many people that have this cash has already swtch to Nikon or are using the 645Z.. So the point that comes to my mind is who is really going to buy a Pentax $3000 body? .. because they dont have a FF users base so Ricoh will have to start bringing new costumers.. with a $3000 body we can say good bye to the Nikon APS-C that might be thinking in FF because this users already have the D610 (if they go cheap) or the D810 ( if they are willing to spend more).. Sony users?? mmm well they have the A7ii at just $1700 .. Canon users? mmm they have the 6D and the 5Ds .. So who is really going to buy it? .. What is really going to be the target??

Why should they make a new APS-C camera? Nikon, Sony, Canon, Fuji, and Samsung already make them. It only appeals to those few Pentax users.

Honestly don't care where it ends up on the price spectrum... just hope it's a good offering. FF is the future of DSLR so I don't want Pentax to have a bad name.

[monochrome]

@kooks: It helps a lot to understand who Pentax's real customers are and how different they are from other camera companies.

In the interview embedded on the Forum homepage the executives said their first FF customers are the remaining Pentax users, then they want to get back former Pentax users who jumped to another brand but still have Pentax lenses. Then they'll build the new customer base.

Also, Pentax has a markedly different market share and customer profile in Japan than in the rest of the world. I once heard Pentax sells more cameras in Japan than the rest of the world combined. And in Japan ILC buyers are enthusiasts, whereas in the west camera buyers are much more likely to be casual users.

[kadajawi]

As for the processor I think it is safe to assume that they will either use the one in the K-3 or a newer version of that. And if it is a newer version we should be able to find it in the next APS-C flagship. They will want to make use of all the development costs.

[Racerdew]

I think there will be a good market for the FF camera body. It will probably be competitive at $2000 to $2500. Pentax has a 645Z that is super expensive and not practical for many uses. However it is an awesome machine! But they invested the money and the expensive lenses in that system. A full F body will be less expensive for Ricoh/Pentax and much more affordable for retail customers. I am really interested in incredible ISO range like you can get from the D5 III and other bodies. Pentax in its class does very well with higher ISO. But the big boys have a race horse in this category (FF). I am often shooting indoors without a flash. I want to see great focus ability and speed and great ISO range. I think they have something up their sleeve with a new system for imaging colors to make better images.

[kooks]

@monochrome perhaps you are right... But then I wonder if the said that their first FF costumers are going to be the remaining Pentax users that kind of means that this is not going to aim to a fully pro market cuz most pros are already shooting with FF or MF.. So Pentax users at this time most of them are enthusiasts, perhaps some of them are pros but I can bet that most of us are just enthusiasts.. So, are we going to buy a pro price camera just in order to use some old glass, cuz as far as i know maybe $1300 is the highest amount that Pentax users payed for a body? So are the remaining Pentax users enough to justify the development of a FF at first?? Don't know but seems kind of strange..


Perhaps I'm wrong but it just makes me wonder how are they going to market and sell this FF without playing that much with the price factor.. Something that for example Sony did pretty good for selling the A7..

[Rondec]

I am not expecting a full frame sensor in a K3 body. Ricoh has really invested well in the Pentax brand and to this point, with each of the cameras they have released once could see the plan, even if the execution wasn't perfect. In general, they have targeted a segment of the market where they felt their competitors were weak and released a camera that was specified well, well built and priced in a way that it drew folks in to the brand. They did this with both the K3 and 645z. I think the K-S2 will be the same.

In this case, it seems pretty clear that they are going to target the D810 level with their full frame. I would expect price to be in the 2700 to 2800 range, although I don't know for sure. I doubt highly that they will stick the K3s auto focus system in it, as it is expected at this price range that the auto focus points will cover more of the sensor area than the central part of APS-C that the K3 points cover. Probably will have a tilting screen. A new IBIS system was needed for this camera as well and I'm sure that was pricey.

In the end, this will give people options. If it is out of their price range, at least they will know in a year or two there will probably be used ones selling for a lower price. Choice is a good thing, although I think a lot of folks will do the analysis and decide that APS-C is good enough for the time being.

[kadajawi]

What if they develop an AF sensor for the FF and then put it in the next K-3?