[falconeye]

The main fault with this poll on this Forum is it excludes those who don't use English as a first or (much smaller sample) second language.

English is my fourth language, but I still think the poll is correct.

Due to aggressive US marketing campaigns, almost all vendors internationally launch new products in the US with an initial MSRP given. Therefore, people worldwide have opinions what that price should read like.

And although vendors try to discourage gray market imports, they happen and help the prices level worldwide. BTW, lens prices which aren't launched aggressively are typically lower in Europe than they are in the US, at least after a couple of months. After all, the vendors need to earn their money ...

As for the price ...
... the Pentax target group would not afford more than 2000$ US. I am almost sure the Pentax FF will launch at $1999,-.
After all, it was the reason Pentax gave why not launching FF earlier. Pentax *istD plus inflation sets the limit. The feature set will be according, which is why I won't expect 36MP+ in this first run.

---

Last edited by falconeye; 05-19-2015 at 01:12 PM.

[monochrome]

As for the price ...
... the Pentax target group would not afford more than 2000$ US. I am almost sure the Pentax FF will launch at $1999,-.
After all, it was the reason Pentax gave why not launching FF earlier. Pentax *istD plus inflation sets the limit. The feature set will be according, which is why I won't expect 36MP+ in this first run.

Perhaps, but I would then be mystified why Ricoh would bother to spec and price the 150~450 and the 70~200 where they did, especially the 70~200. Why not make it spec'ed and priced to compete with the Tamron? Wouldn't that be more in line with a D610-level FF camera? What of the posts from a historically very well informed source who specifically says it isn't the 24Mp?

Hasn't Ricoh specifically said (and certain 'Ambassador' posters here affirmed) they are targeting the full-on professional market with the FF - in this case the wedding professionals?

OTOH, Adam once replied on a thread it would not be a $2,800 camera.

[Kunzite]

As for the price ...
... the Pentax target group would not afford more than 2000$ US. I am almost sure the Pentax FF will launch at $1999,-.

Don't be.

[Class A]

Perhaps, but I would then be mystified why Ricoh would bother to spec and price the 150~450 and the 70~200 where they did, especially the 70~200.

Hasn't this been the Pentax approach for a while now?

Offer great value for money camera bodies and overcharge on the lenses. We already know that the new FF lenses are priced like Canikon products (without concessions made for cost savings possible by omitting in-lens stabilisation or the fact that Pentax, unlike Canikon, does not have the market position to command arbitrary amounts for their products).

A very attractively priced body would only follow this past pattern.

Personally, I'm sympathetic to the notion of manufacturers needing to ask for more than cut-throat prices that are not sustainable, but with respect to the FF body, Pentax will have to pay the price of being ridiculously late to the game (unless they include some kind of, yet unknown, game changer). Assuming that they cannot match the AF performance of Canikon, anyone but the most loyal Pentaxians will compare the price to a 6D, D600, D750. A slightly higher shutter speed, better build, in-body IS, etc. all may matter in theory, but I very much doubt any of this will matter in practice when it comes to actually competing in the market (as opposed to providing an atrociously overdue "thank you" to hardcore Pentaxians).

[Barry Pearson]

Personally, I'm sympathetic to the notion of manufacturers needing to ask for more than cut-throat prices that are not sustainable, but with respect to the FF body, Pentax will have to pay the price of being ridiculously late to the game (unless they include some kind of, yet unknown, game changer). Assuming that they cannot match the AF performance of Canikon, anyone but the most loyal Pentaxians will compare the price to a 6D, D600, D750. A slightly higher shutter speed, better build, in-body IS, etc. all may matter in theory, but I very much doubt any of this will matter in practice when it comes to actually competing in the market (as opposed to providing an atrociously overdue "thank you" to hardcore Pentaxians).

I want a camera at least as good as a D810, and if it is anything like that I will be comparing the price with that camera.

Obviously I hope for a D810-plus camera at a D810-minus price!

[Clavius]

As for the price ...
... the Pentax target group would not afford more than 2000$ US. I am almost sure the Pentax FF will launch at $1999,-.
After all, it was the reason Pentax gave why not launching FF earlier. Pentax *istD plus inflation sets the limit. The feature set will be according, which is why I won't expect 36MP+ in this first run.

You're expecting a 24mp camera for 2000$ from Pentax? Whilst sub-1000$ FF with 24mp has been around now for months? That would be quite painfull.

[aurele]

You're expecting a 24mp camera for 2000$ from Pentax? Whilst sub-1000$ FF with 24mp has been around now for months? That would be quite painfull.

Pentax has quite a user-base that still use film, probably a bit more than other casual brand (sony / Canon / Nikon).

So i think that some of this base user will get the FF no mater the price, so they can handle one "format" system once and for all.

[mecrox]

Hasn't this been the Pentax approach for a while now?

Offer great value for money camera bodies and overcharge on the lenses. We already know that the new FF lenses are priced like Canikon products (without concessions made for cost savings possible by omitting in-lens stabilisation or the fact that Pentax, unlike Canikon, does not have the market position to command arbitrary amounts for their products).

A very attractively priced body would only follow this past pattern.

Personally, I'm sympathetic to the notion of manufacturers needing to ask for more than cut-throat prices that are not sustainable, but with respect to the FF body, Pentax will have to pay the price of being ridiculously late to the game (unless they include some kind of, yet unknown, game changer). Assuming that they cannot match the AF performance of Canikon, anyone but the most loyal Pentaxians will compare the price to a 6D, D600, D750. A slightly higher shutter speed, better build, in-body IS, etc. all may matter in theory, but I very much doubt any of this will matter in practice when it comes to actually competing in the market (as opposed to providing an atrociously overdue "thank you" to hardcore Pentaxians).

It's not very likely that Ricoh will produce some total must-have knockout on their first venture into FF. Maybe all they can do is the best they can and price realistically, i.e. away from bargain basement but not OTT either. Other manufacturers already have almost every imaginable corner of FF covered somewhere, after all. And maybe it's just possible that Ricoh see FF as the beginning of a long march further up the market. APS-C is possibly no place to put too many resources if it becomes a complete commodity dominated by behemoths who are prepared to duke it out in the world of special offers, grey market sales and no economy spared. Ricoh can't go there: they don't have the scale and it's not their thing at all since they clearly want to build a brand that says quality. So, I'm expecting a good, solid, clearly well-made but not intergalactic supernova camera, with the accent on image quality as always for Pentax, and without deliberately deleted features a la Canonikon, at a fair price - i..e. in the same ballpark as everyone else but slightly below the average for the specs. Maybe this year, maybe in the first half of next year. It's a start, I think, and only the first step. Trying to break lock-in with the other outfits is very very difficult, surely, especially until a good lens catalogue is established.

[monochrome]

I want a camera at least as good as a D810, and if it is anything like that I will be comparing the price with that camera.

Obviously I hope for a D810-plus camera at a D810-minus price!

I expect a near-D810 featured camera (probably won't have the same flash or AF system yet) priced just below the D750. Don't forget Ricoh doesn't need to pay for professional support services globally, nor maintain substantial, expensive distribution locations and support staff.

[Barry Pearson]

I expect a near-D810 featured camera (probably won't have the same flash or AF system yet) priced just below the D750. Don't forget Ricoh doesn't need to pay for professional support services globally, nor maintain substantial, expensive distribution locations and support staff.

Fair enough. We'll see.

But when? Does anyone have an announcement date for the specification?

[rawr]

Does anyone have an announcement date for the specification?

The specifications are unknown, the release date of the camera is unknown, everything is still unknown.

There have been suggestions that the FF will be 36MP, but there have also been suggestions that there may be two FF bodies. Basically everything is still up in the air.

[Winder]

The specifications are unknown, the release date of the camera is unknown, everything is still unknown.

There have been suggestions that the FF will be 36MP, but there have also been suggestions that there may be two FF bodies. Basically everything is still up in the air.

Or it will have the 59MP Sony FF sensor. I believe it was Kenspro who said it would have the newest Sony FF sensor, and the 59MP would be the newest.

This image posted by Zeiss is cropped to 56MP. Its a sample for the new FE 85mm F/1.8.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/carlzeisslenses/17123880790/in/album-72157651844166820/

Maybe they release a 24MP and a 59MP. Skip 36MP completely. They can give users a $2,000 24MP body and a $3,200 59MP body.

[rawr]

the 59MP Sony FF sensor Maybe they release a 24MP and a 59MP. Skip 36MP completely.

A 59MP Sony sensor + the new Pentax high definition pixel shift tech would make an awesome DSLR detail machine.

But I doubt Ricoh would make a 59MP FF, at least not for a few more years. They already have a 50MP machine in the 645Z which is earning them good money, and no doubt has better overall IQ than any 'small-sensor' 59MP could deliver.

Plus Sony will likely give Nikon first dibs on their new 59MP chip, like they have done before with sensors, leaving Pentax to wait at the end of the queue. No great loss on this occasion, in my opinion. Let Nikon and Sony customers work out the bugs, and help bring the unit price of the chip down.

[Winder]

A 59MP Sony sensor + the new Pentax high definition pixel shift tech would make an awesome DSLR detail machine.

But I doubt Ricoh would make a 59MP FF, at least not for a few more years. They already have a 50MP machine in the 645Z which is earning them good money, and no doubt has better overall IQ than any 'small-sensor' 59MP could deliver.

Plus Sony will likely give Nikon first dibs on their new 59MP chip, like they have done before with sensors, leaving Pentax to wait at the end of the queue. No great loss on this occasion, in my opinion. Let Nikon and Sony customers work out the bugs, and help bring the unit price of the chip down.

Has there ever been any evidence that Nikon had first dibs? Nikon worked with Sony on the sensor for the D3x and Nikon rented fad space from Sony. Hoya might have been too cheap to buy the latest technology, so they waited or used Samsung, but I think most of the new sensor announcements from Sony came mid cycle for Pentax cameras. Sony was cranking out a new DSLR model every year with a new sensor. For DSLRs there has only been the K-5/K5II or the K-3 that would have been at price point for a cutting edge sensor. The other Pentax cameras like the K-x or K-r were price point bodies and that is why they didn't use the newest sensors.

FF can never replace MF even if it has the same resolution. Hopefully Ricoh has a true 645 coming and will get away from the crop 645. There is a look you get with larger formats that you just can't duplicate with smaller formats and processing. Since the market has trended towards low quality images (2MP web) I don't think most people really know how good large prints from a larger format look.

I have no idea what sensor Ricoh would use, but I wouldn't be surprised or disappointed if it was the 59MP..... or the 36, or the 24, or even a 12MP.

[VoiceOfReason]

Well, if they did have the 59mp sensor and it did ISO 50-whatever high thing, 51200 or 102,400 with really awesome dynamic range they might just be able to pry 3k from my wallet...