[Wired]

There are still some important things many of us want to know. For example, I want to know how many frames per second the camera will achieve. There are a number of problems to be overcome: how fast can the mirror be moved and the shutter fired? And how fast can sensor data be moved around and buffered and process?

Will the frame rate be better or worse than the K-3? Will the Pentax FF camera achieve at least 8.3 FPS * 36 MP = 299 MP/sec sensor data rate?

Here are some numbers I have just posted elsewhere, based on what other cameras, from Canon, Nikon, and Sony, can apparently do: (FPS * MP = MP/sec), in descending order of data rate:

A77: 12 * 24 = 288
5DS: 5 * 51 = 255
1Dx: 14 * 18 = 252
A65: 10 * 24 = 240
K-3: 8.3 * 24 = 199
D810: 5 * 36 = 180
D4s: 11 * 16 = 176
D610: 6 * 24 = 144

I had thought the D810 was the camera I most wanted the Pentax FF camera to match. Now I'm not so sure!

If the Pentax FF camera achieved 8 FPS (which is obviously possible, even for an FF mirror-camera, although presumably expensive), and had a 36 MP sensor, it would need the same sensor data rate of the A77. Or am I missing something? And how much would that cost?

interesting data... 8fps would be awesome, but how much will we see the processor improve on the FF if at all? Even if it doesn't improve a class leading 36mp 6+fps would be very nice to have.

An 8fps, 36mp camera with a deep buffer (30+ raws minimum) would be a very good contender for professional sports and fashion runway!

[Kunzite]

8.3fps would be a lot to ask, I don't think we'll see that.

[Barry Pearson]

8.3fps would be a lot to ask, I don't think we'll see that.

As I posted elsewhere, in the same thread where I posted the above figures:

"I've just examined some bursts at airshows last year. And I wasn't getting 8.3 FPS. I think I was limited partly by K-3 AF performance, but mainly by the AF performance of the DA* 60-250mm. That is one of the reasons I've pre-ordered the 2 new lenses. So: what I really need is to push the FPS upwards as far as possible, by a combination of lenses and camera. 4 won't be enough. A RELIABLE 7 would probably be a significant improvement on where I am."

I think that is now what I want: a reliable 7 FPS, combined with much better AF in the lenses and camera.

Edit:

Since this is better than a D810, I would be prepared to pay more. Say £2500. (Although to be honest, I could even be nudged beyond that if it had some other "surprises"!)

[Kunzite]

I hope you'll get what you want, at a price I can afford

[jatrax]

I hope you'll get what you want, at a price I can afford

+1 ^^^^^^^^ LOL

Me too

[clackers]

If I were a Nikon person why in the world would I look at Pentax with a 3k price for just the body when I have that available?

They aren't the market.

Aps-c Pentaxians looking to upgrade are the target, and it won't be a big number (but high volume, low margin is something only the top two players pull off anyway - Samsung and Sony might try it but lose a lot of money in the process).

[rawr]

Here are some numbers

Interesting data.
The Samsung NX-1 is the winner though:

NX-1: 15 * 28 = 420

[VoiceOfReason]

They aren't the market.

Aps-c Pentaxians looking to upgrade are the target, and it won't be a big number (but high volume, low margin is something only the top two players pull off anyway - Samsung and Sony might try it but lose a lot of money in the process).

This is why I say release the body with a low margin and release the glass to feed LBA with its higher margin.

[clackers]

This is why I say release the body with a low margin and release the glass to feed LBA with its higher margin.

Won't work to the extent you think it will, VoR.

You're talking about the Sony FE-mount strategy, but the new camera is regular K mount.

Read the threads - people have eBayed and Amazoned and stocked up on FA20-35s, K55 1.8s, etc.

Pentaxians are canny!

[Kunzite]

A low margin camera is for people also expecting low margin lenses. And in the end, they'll find something cheaper elsewhere... discontinued models, perhaps even second hand - if price is what's driving them.

[VoiceOfReason]

I would think they would do like many have with the DA* lenses. If I bought a WR FF body and they released a WR wide angle and a WR long (as in up to 600mm) lens with great IQ I'd have to get one. Of course if they released something 150-600 or 200-600 and WR with good IQ I'd get one anyway.

[Barry Pearson]

This is why I say release the body with a low margin and release the glass to feed LBA with its higher margin.

They have announced two such lenses. How many people who only want to pay a low margin for the FF camera have pre-ordered those lenses? I suspect that the sort of people who have pre-ordered those lenses are the sort of people who can, and are willing to, pay the "full" price for the FF camera. (Such as me. And just for interest, I intend to sell my DA* 300mm f/4, in spite of its quality and the fact that it is an FF lens, because it is about to be superseded by my other lenses. I've already sold my FF Sigma 500mm f/4.5 APO DG EX to help pay for the new lenses).

I suspect many of the people who want a low margin FF camera want to use it with their existing FF lenses, whether older Pentax lenses or 3rd party lenses. In fact, one of the recurring themes when the camera was announced was "now I can use all my old FA lenses as they are meant to be used". There is a thread in which people state they are ready for the FF camera because they already have sufficient lenses.

An advantage Ricoh have is that they can assume that people with existing FF K-mount lenses are less likely to defect. So the Pentax people can set a higher-margin on the FF camera initially to ensure that it signals to Ricoh that Pentax cameras are profitable, then later on either release a lower-spec camera, or drop the price on the higher-spec camera, to pick up the people with older lenses.

It is easier to start with a high price and drop it if necessary, than start with a low price and raise it if the camera proves unexpectedly successful.

[Kunzite]

I want a Pentax FF DSLR so all the D FA lenses I would buy in the future would work as they are meant to be used!

I agree with Barry. It's unlikely that people who would not spend some $$$ on a higher end camera would spend the same amount or more, repeatedly, on high end lenses (there is of course nothing wrong with buying more affordable cameras and lenses). And people who would buy high end lenses would most likely want a camera to match.

[VoiceOfReason]

I have noticed that people from Europe are much more likely to want to pay higher prices. Probably because you're used to them. Okay, I would be happy with them releasing it at $2100, £2100, and €2100 (or make that €2700), that way we all get what we want! I simply hope the US dollar stays really strong against the yen when release time comes.

[Kunzite]

And people from Britain are most likely of all to pay higher prices (no offence, Barry - and I hope it won't be the case)
If for let's say 500 euro 'extra' I would get a significantly better quality/reliability (perhaps a bit of over-engineering) and performance, it would be money well spent. I would want to keep the camera for a while, so I must be happy with it - no cutting corners, please. My guesstimate (and hope) is that Pentax could achieve that for ~2500 euro.
We will eventually have a less expensive model; either by discounting the first model, or by launching a camera designed to be cheaper. But first, they would have to work on lenses IMO.