[VoiceOfReason]

I would add that people unwilling to spend lots of money are the most likely to not buy the camera, even if it meets their claimed price target. Why? because there will always be a cheaper camera - discontinued but still very capable models, for example. They would always have to pay more than something, for a Pentax.
While the risk of defection might be larger for high-spending customers if Ricoh would do it wrong, it's larger for low-spending customers if Ricoh would do it right.

I cannot agree with the idea that Pentax should raise their market share, fast, with their first FF DSLR. (I'd rather think the primary tool in raising market share have to be the higher volume APS-C). Significantly raising market share, i.e. getting newcomers and other brands' users is the most difficult thing to do - they would need to offer something better, at a lower price. They would need a line-up of affordable lenses, including a second hand market (how would they do that?), and including a line-up of high-end cameras and lenses (if only to reassure said users that there is an 'upgrade path').
Instead of that, Pentax would rather think of making a camera which works with an incomplete system i.e. targeted at the loyal Pentax users, and build on that. This is just the beginning, let's not forget that.

If it met my target price for what features I want (and I've stated what that is before) and was available for preorder right now I would preorder it right now and post the confirmation as proof. I have had a total of a little over 73k in deposits in my bank since Feb 27th. Yes, I can afford it, but I will only go as high as I feel comfortable with. I could get a 645z and a few lenses, but to be honest my skill doesn't support that. I have never done prints and have only made a bit of money from it.

[rawr]

Everyone seems to be assuming that Ricoh are only planning to release one FF model - and therefore they will have to make one super camera that is designed to be good at everything, and please everyone - reviewers, long-time Pentaxians, new buyers, pros, affluent amateurs, struggling students, sports photogs, wedding photogs, birders, landscape shooters, videographers, astronomers etc etc.

However it's quite possible they may be planning to release a sequence of FF's, to offer a more tiered product line, just like they do in APS-C, and just like everyone else is doing in FF. Maybe a 6D/D610 level FF first, then a 5D3/D810 tier camera shortly afterwards. Or the other way around. It could happen.

[jsherman999]

The cost is not in the slightly larger/faster/bigger parts, but in the engineering and re-tooling that goes into ANY new part. Whether it's for a FF or a Q, every time you have to re-design something, it costs a lot of $$. The price is dictated by the volume of units they want to amortize the cost over. .

Yes, but the retail price delta between most aps-c and FF models is still much higher than the re-tooling actually costs them.

I think sometimes people assume a 'FF camera' is made of platinum chassis and all hand-made parts , it's not - aside from the sensor, most of the parts do not cost that much more to produce. A $1000 retail price difference between say the K3 and the entry-FF (same specs as K-3, larger VF, FF sensor, etc) *more* than covers it.

There is relatively little extra R&D that goes into that body. They know how a DSLR goes together soup to nuts, they're using almost the same firmware and UI, there is very little extra actual cost (besides sensor.)

[VoiceOfReason]

Yes, but the retail price delta between most aps-c and FF models is still much higher than the re-tooling actually costs them.

I think sometimes people assume a 'FF camera' is made of platinum chassis and all hand-made parts , it's not - aside from the sensor, most of the parts do not cost that much more to produce. A $1000 retail price difference between say the K3 and the entry-FF (same specs as K-3, larger VF, FF sensor, etc) *more* than covers it.

There is relatively little extra R&D that goes into that body. They know how a DSLR goes together soup to nuts, they're using almost the same firmware and UI, there is very little extra actual cost (besides sensor.)

Pretty much.

[Pål Jensen]

However it's quite possible they may be planning to release a sequence of FF's, to offer a more tiered product line, just like they do in APS-C, and just like everyone else is doing in FF. Maybe a 6D/D610 level FF first, then a 5D3/D810 tier camera shortly afterwards. Or the other way around. It could happen.

I don't believe Pentax have the marketshare to support a line of FF bodies. Not enough customers for each one of them and a certain risk of cannibalization.
Having one body mean that Pentax can put all goodies into it without have to "cripple" it in order not to collide with other bodies in the line-up.

---------- Post added 03-13-15 at 03:17 PM ----------

Yes, but the retail price delta between most aps-c and FF models is still much higher than the re-tooling actually costs them. )

...developing costs as well and parts costs (big sensors are expensive). But the main issue is that FF cameras sell in far smaller volumes. Pentax can hope for a few 10 000's of their FF body at best. They have to cover all the costs and return a profit. Then there's also the cost of launching a FF-lens line-up that will take years to turn into profit....
There's no reason to expect Pentax, with their tiny markedshare, to be cheaper than comparable FF bodies from the competition.

[Kunzite]

If it met my target price for what features I want (and I've stated what that is before) and was available for preorder right now I would preorder it right now and post the confirmation as proof. I have had a total of a little over 73k in deposits in my bank since Feb 27th. Yes, I can afford it, but I will only go as high as I feel comfortable with. I could get a 645z and a few lenses, but to be honest my skill doesn't support that. I have never done prints and have only made a bit of money from it.

You will likely be persuaded to pay more than you think you're comfortable with. I will likely be persuaded to pay more than I think I'm comfortable with.

rawr, but they are planning to release only one model - in 2015. I'm not sure when they'll have the next one, perhaps in 2016?

[jsherman999]

I believe the only reason for them to cost twice as much is because that's what people are willing to pay.
Sure the penta prism is slightly larger....
Shutter is slightly more expensive due to larger movement means more power needed.
The body, they have designed several bodies before, shouldn't cost more than for an APS-C beside slightly more material.
Bigger buffer and even more cpu-power needed, yes that will add some cost.
Sensor will also add cost.
New SR version, they have already done several versions.

So yes it will be more expensive to manufacture, but the cost for the consumer is raised as high as they think they can get away with. And currently that is pretty high.

Yes.

Any sane company would price where they can, as high as they can while getting the needed volume.

That doesn't mean the body has to be priced that way. I think if there were some radical shift in the industry (to respond to disruptive non-DSR choices for example) we could see something like aps-c going away and FF DSLRs taking their place, priced only slightly higher than the current aps-c bodies. And the manufacturers would not be going bankrupt

I remember a guy telling me 10 years ago or so that no matter what happens, no matter what the volume, large 1TB hard disk drives could't come down below a certain price point (something like $800) because they were "too hard to make" and the parts and tooling cost too much and the platter non-failure yield volumes were problematic. I said I doubted it at the time, judging by how much they had dropped in the years previous.

Lo and behold, largely in response to a disruptor (SSD drives) 3TB HDD can be bought for $80 now. That isn't because of some radical advances in the established HD tech, it's because there was a shift in the industry and manufacturers started to sell the product much closer to the actual manufacture cost. We were just willing to pay more prior to that, because there was no alternative tech, and the HD makers could charge that much.

I think the same or a similar thing could happen with 'FF cameras'


.

---

Last edited by jsherman999; 03-13-2015 at 07:31 AM.

[VoiceOfReason]

You will likely be persuaded to pay more than you think you're comfortable with. I will likely be persuaded to pay more than I think I'm comfortable with.

rawr, but they are planning to release only one model - in 2015. I'm not sure when they'll have the next one, perhaps in 2016?

I'm cheap though.

[Pål Jensen]

I remember a guy telling me 10 years ago or so that no matter what happens, no matter what the volume, large 1TB hard disk drives could't come down below a certain price point (something like $800) because they were "too hard to make" and the parts and tooling cost too much and the platter non-failure yield volumes were problematic. I said I doubted it at the time, judging by how much they had dropped in the years previous.

Lo and behold, largely in response to a disruptor (SSD drives) 3TB HDD can be bought for $80 now. That isn't because of some radical advances in the established HD tech, it's because there was a shift in the industry and manufacturers started to sell the product much closer to the actual manufacture cost. We were just willing to ay more prior to that, because there was no alternative tech, and the HD makers could charge that much.

I think the same or a similar thing could happen with 'FF cameras'


.

...but then APS sensors and cameras will be even cheaper so that the cost balance will be the same. Besides, cameras aren't an entity where bigger is necessarily better like it is for storage. There's a size issue beside the cost. I for one, would rather use a smaller system for a certain quality level than a larger. As sensors are getting better the need for larger ones diminish.
We have had large cameras that take great images since the day photography was invented. The new thing digital have introduced is small cameras capable of excellent image quality. In the film days 35mm(FF) was the smallest for serious use; now the Q deliver as good result and the K-3 rivals the film 645.
The idea that FF will replace smaller formats is a faulty one; they are different format with strengths and weaknesses. They'll continue to coexist....

[rawr]

I'm not sure when they'll have the next one, perhaps in 2016?

Sure. But they may announce a camera road map, just like they do with a lenses. If they launch an expensive 36MP D810 clone as their flagship in 2015, they might publicize that they have a 24MP budget D610 clone planned for early 2016, just to offer fans the hope of something more affordable, and broaden their base.

Or they could pull out all the stops and do a Sony, and launch 24MP and 36MP FF models on the same day, like the A7 and A7r were. That would certainly make a splash.

[Kunzite]

I don't think they would show a public camera roadmap - and what you're saying sounds like an Osborne Effect - except it would be about price.
No, VoiceOfReason will pay. I will pay. We'll all pay, and Pentax/Ricoh once again would scratch their heads in amazement at the unexpectedly high demand

[VoiceOfReason]

Sure. But they may announce a camera road map, just like they do with a lenses. If they launch an expensive 36MP D810 clone as their flagship in 2015, they might publicize that they have a 24MP budget D610 clone planned for early 2016, just to offer fans the hope of something more affordable, and broaden their base.

Or they could pull out all the stops and do a Sony, and launch 24MP and 36MP FF models on the same day, like the A7 and A7r were. That would certainly make a splash.

It probably wouldn't be a stretch to have them release a 50+mp one like the rumored upcoming Sony sensor that will also be in Nikon cameras, along with the 36 and 24 megapixel versions, with all having 90% of the same functionality. Of course I am an engineer, so what do I know about the photography industry.

[Barry Pearson]

However it's quite possible they may be planning to release a sequence of FF's, to offer a more tiered product line, just like they do in APS-C, and just like everyone else is doing in FF. Maybe a 6D/D610 level FF first, then a 5D3/D810 tier camera shortly afterwards. Or the other way around. It could happen.

I don't believe Pentax have the marketshare to support a line of FF bodies. Not enough customers for each one of them and a certain risk of cannibalization.
Having one body mean that Pentax can put all goodies into it without have to "cripple" it in order not to collide with other bodies in the line-up.

I can't deduce whether Ricoh will eventually have more than 1 Pentax FF camera at a time. I can see arguments either way. But I don't think they will have more than 2 at a time. They have a smaller number of APS-C cameras at a time than their major competitors, and I think that will be true for Pentax FF cameras.

If there are to be 2 of them, I expect them to launch the high-specification one first, for reasons I've already stated elsewhere. And it won't be cheap if they intend to bring out a lower-specification one later.

But before they can make a success of a lower-specification FF camera, they surely need a corresponding range of lower-specification and lower-price zoom FF lenses at the same time or earlier. They can't expect such a camera to be supported by primes plus the higher-specification zoom lenses we are seeing so far. Ricoh will want their own range of lower-specification FF lenses, and not rely on 3rd parties.

There are enthusiasts who prefer primes, but the sort of people who want lower-specification cameras appear to be the sort of people who will want perhaps 2 or 3 zooms, and perhaps no primes at all. I'll bet most of the people who buy the lower-level Pentax APS-C cameras tend to use them with zooms, not primes.

There is a "D FA Standard zoom" on the roadmap. Perhaps that is the first of a 2nd tier range of FF lenses?

(I realise that there some people who want a lower-price FF camera mainly to use with their existing FF primes, but there is little profit in that for Ricoh).

[aleonx3]

In April 2013 Jim Malcolm told me and a few others in a teleconference the Pentax value proposition had changed from good features at a lower price to better features (than the competition) at the same price, and emphasizing the Pentax Ethos (DNA, difference, whatever we call it) as the brand differentiator. That is a critical change in strategy. I believe those who want this to be a low-price / features-laden camera aren't aware of (or refuse to accept) the strategy change. Saying, "Pentax has always been a low-price competitor" may well be accurate, but it only reports the past - it does not accurately project the future. The Hoya strategy ended in fall 2011.

If that is all correct then we should expect one (or more) of three FF camera bodies:

1. Your D81x price point competitor with MORE FEATURES and better spec's (fully professional) in at least some of the major categories - AT THE SAME PRICE
2. D75x competitor with MORE FEATURES and better spec's (FF K-3) in at least some of the major categories AT THE SAME PRICE
3. D6!x competitor with MORE FEATURES and better spec's (FF K-50) in at least some of the major categories) AT THE SAME PRICE

I don't know which camera this will be, but I think from hints by certain posters the opening salvo will be the high-end camera.

If this logic isn't convincing - if [EDIT: you - not the Quoted poster] someone says you won't buy the first camera under any circumstances - then you won't buy the camera.

And I give up.

Interesting... those 'perceived' values (same as competitor with more features or same as competitor but priced less) probably applied to us as Pentax users only... to the rest of the world (eg. DPR or other photo-gear shops and Canikony users) they are considered less.
1) D81x price point as competitor with more features and better specs would still be considered inferior to the D81x/5Dmk3 and hence priced less
2) D75x price point as competitor with more features and better specs would still be inferior and hence priced less
3) D61x... like wise

For most of us Pentax users, we certainly would like to see the first release of FF in the 1) category... among the best.....
Pricewise, it will likely vary with the Regions around the world (Japan, Asia, NA and Europe); so those in Europe will be higher (I guess?) based on some of the folks' comments here.

These are just IMHO of course...

[monochrome]

nteresting... those 'perceived' values (same as competitor with more features or same as competitor but priced less) probably applied to us as Pentax users only... to the rest of the world (eg. DPR or other photo-gear shops and Canikony users) they are considered less.

Pentax openly stated in their interviews at CP+ with the upcoming release they seek to attract their current, loyal users and recently departed users who might still have Pentax lenses.

FWIW, posters who have more actual knowledge of the longer term plan (the outline of where Ricoh wants to take Pentax) say Ricoh is serious and the strategy is developed. In my opinon we really shouldn't expect Pentax to look anything like Canon, Nikon or Sony. Something else - maybe unique - but not directly competitive with the high volume business model.