a cheap ff is what pentax should do

RonHendriks1966 · 06-13-2015, 12:03 PM

Originally posted by jatrax

And Ricoh does not give a flip about either of us.

That is true and why there is stil no FF with K-mount!

normhead · 06-13-2015, 12:09 PM

Nobody says anything can't be done anymore. People might have said something couldn't be done with existing technology, and for the most part , they are right. But people build new technology. SO, ya it couldn't be done, and then, now it can. S%@$ has no monopoly on those kinds of things. For example, why can't they build a competitive cell phone or iPad ,or computer, it should be right up their alley? If there is innovative competition or thinking outside the box, , for the most part S%@$ can't do $@!*.

zmohie · 06-13-2015, 12:18 PM

Originally posted by jatrax

Not seriously, well mostly not seriously. It is just that your concept comes up about every other week and always gets the same posts. It is one of those things that sound like they should make sense, but don't.

You are entitled to your opinion, mine is different. And Ricoh does not give a flip about either of us. But I were willing to bet on such things. Which I generally am not. There will not be a cheap Pentax FF. Have you been paying attention? They released one lens for it already and announced another. The DFA 150-450 costs $2,499. The DFA*70-200 has a price of $2,300. Do those sound like lenses that are going to go on a cheap camera? Not to me. They sound lenses that are going to go on a professional level camera in the $3,000 range. I am probably not a customer at that price, and it sounds like you are not either, but again Ricoh does not care. They do care about customers that can drop $8,000 on a camera system and be happy. If you want cheap buy a used Sony.

Things are changing quickly.I bought k5 at 1500$ now k3ii is 1100$.
..and an expensive lenses doesnot mean not making a cheap camera. the 3 fa ltds are expensive though there was a k200d ..
ok you dont buy a cheap camera niether a 3000$ so which one you may buy.

BlakeShellman · 06-13-2015, 12:28 PM

Not to hijack this thread but how much influence does this forum have over what Ricoh puts into their cameras?

**PJ1** · 06-13-2015, 12:36 PM

The idea has been floated before. But "No AF" won't sell new lenses, Other than that, a digital version of a film era MX (or K1000 if you prefer) with AF could be attractive for the student market.

Fogel70 · 06-13-2015, 12:45 PM

Originally posted by fuent104

Why do we assume leaving off features will not save money?

For every feature, doesn't someone have to conceive of it, get it approved at a meeting, write code for it, test it, and write an entry in the instruction manual for it?

I keep going back to Blackmagic Design's cinema cameras. Why have they been able to consistently design new, barebones cameras from scratch, with sensors that head no presence on the market, and no history of making our selling cameras, and do it at a lower cost than everyone else? Why is it that they can do this, but Ricoh cannot, despite having more of the pieces in place to do so?

Ill also add that Sony has done many things people said couldn't be done over the last few years. Remember when a mirrorless body was too small to fit a stabilization system?

It can be done on a small professional niche market where profit margins are high. Pentax has done that in the medium format segment.
But to do the same in a low profit margin market like consumer camera market is much more difficult.

mecrox · 06-13-2015, 12:45 PM

If someone wants inexpensive FF then where I live it's poss to buy a new D610 or 6D for barely more than the price of a new K3II. Simply turn off the settings you don't need. A Sony A7 Mk I is even cheaper, as is buying from the Hong Kong direct dealers who undercut the manufacturer's price by a third or so meaning that a new D610 is about the same as a new K3II. At your own risk but plently take it and don't complain. Cheap FF, relatively speaking, has been here for a while now. There's simply no point doing a stripped-down FF when it would never be cheaper than many pretty darn capable cameras already available new. And that's without even looking at the mountain of second-hand and refurb items out there. How little do you want to spend even for very recent kit? Just hit Ebay. MHO, the camera industry's #1 problem is lack of demand for the new products it does have, something which affects many other inudstries too of course. Lack of demand is a serious economic problem across the world so far as I can see.

Fogel70 · 06-13-2015, 12:48 PM

Originally posted by BlakeShellman

Not to hijack this thread but how much influence does this forum have over what Ricoh puts into their cameras?

I bet Ricoh is much smarter than to listen to us.

Adam · 06-13-2015, 01:03 PM

99. no sales :P

**Rondec** · 06-13-2015, 01:12 PM

Originally posted by fuent104

Why do we assume leaving off features will not save money?

For every feature, doesn't someone have to conceive of it, get it approved at a meeting, write code for it, test it, and write an entry in the instruction manual for it?

I keep going back to Blackmagic Design's cinema cameras. Why have they been able to consistently design new, barebones cameras from scratch, with sensors that head no presence on the market, and no history of making our selling cameras, and do it at a lower cost than everyone else? Why is it that they can do this, but Ricoh cannot, despite having more of the pieces in place to do so?

Ill also add that Sony has done many things people said couldn't be done over the last few years. Remember when a mirrorless body was too small to fit a stabilization system?

I think the issue is that a lot of the code has already been developed. Someone in a different thread suggested that Pentax release cameras at different price points with various features turned off on the cheaper cameras. This feels like the same plan.

The other issue is the question of keeping up with the Jonses. If everyone else has certain features (excellent auto focus, live view, video, fast frame rates) and you decide to release a camera that is significantly underwhelming in those departments, then you had better have a significantly cheaper price too. However I very much doubt that Pentax can really get below the 6D/Nex A7/D600 price points. Meaning that they had better just make a camera that has features that those other cameras don't have and hope that photographers pick up on that fact and buy it.

Full frame cameras are already at 1000 dollars, but I don't know that Pentax could make money selling a full frame at that price point -- with or without features left off.

mee · 06-13-2015, 01:17 PM

Originally posted by BlakeShellman

Not to hijack this thread but how much influence does this forum have over what Ricoh puts into their cameras?

Outside of the printed questions and suggestions thread that Adam sometimes gives to the Ricoh reps during major conferences, I'd say none. We are pretty much talking to a brick wall with our opinions.. which is why I think now it is best not to get too overworked about each of our opinions..

normhead · 06-13-2015, 01:19 PM

Originally posted by mee

Outside of the printed questions and suggestions thread that Adam sometimes gives to the Ricoh reps during major conferences, I'd say none. We are pretty much talking to a brick wall with our opinions.. which is why I think now it is best not to get too overworked about each of our opinions..

And what fun would that be?

**jatrax** · 06-13-2015, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by zmohie

Things are changing quickly.I bought k5 at 1500$ now k3ii is 1100$.

Sorry, won't wash. That is APS-C market, not FF. Come back in 3-4 years and maybe Pentax FF prices will drop too. But you cannot compare the APS-C market that Ricoh (Pentax) has been in for years with a totally new market.

Originally posted by zmohie

and an expensive lenses doesnot mean not making a cheap camera. the 3 fa ltds are expensive though there was a k200d .. ok you dont buy a cheap camera niether a 3000$ so which one you may buy.

Ok, you have a point there. But I think for Ricoh 'FF' = professional high end. If you want a cheaper body then get APS-C. Those expensive lenses will work just fine. And the FA Limiteds were for film cameras, not digital. So just because you could use them on the k200d does not mean they were designed with that camera in mind. I don not believe they would have made them for only cheap APS-C bodies.

The DFA 150-450 and DFA*70-200 were designed specifically with the new FF camera in mind. And I think they show clearly what RIcoh has in mind for FF.

But neither of us knows, and maybe I am wrong and there will be a $1,800-2,000 FF camera. I honestly see no point in it being any cheaper than that it would just cannibalize APS-C sales. And if it does come in cheaper it will be because they cut corners on the sensor or processors or build quality. And that would be a bad thing IMHO.

---------- Post added 06-13-15 at 01:26 PM ----------

Originally posted by BlakeShellman

Not to hijack this thread but how much influence does this forum have over what Ricoh puts into their cameras?

Probably very little. I had a conversation with a Ricoh person over on their own forum and she stated very specifically that they do not monitor PF at all. On the other hand Adam says they do. So maybe the lady I talked with meant only her group.

Anyway I really, really hope they pay little attention to us here. If they did they would just close the Pentax division as everyone here knows Pentax is Doooomed!

**boriscleto** · 06-13-2015, 01:59 PM

Originally posted by jatrax

Probably very little. I had a conversation with a Ricoh person over on their own forum and she stated very specifically that they do not monitor PF at all. On the other hand Adam says they do. So maybe the lady I talked with meant only her group.

Anyway I really, really hope they pay little attention to us here. If they did they would just close the Pentax division as everyone here knows Pentax is Doooomed!

They actually have someone who monitors their forum? I was under the impression that no one at Ricoh USA knew how to read.

**jatrax** · 06-13-2015, 02:09 PM

Originally posted by boriscleto

They actually have someone who monitors their forum? I was under the impression that no one at Ricoh USA knew how to read.

It did take two weeks to get a response, but when they did they were most helpful and solved my issue right away. I suspect the forum there was dreamed up as a 'good idea' but not enough resources (as in a full time moderator) were allocated to run it properly. Hard to budget for intangibles but expecting staff dedicated to other things to moderate and respond on a forum in their spare time is not going to end well. I think they would have done better to ask Adam for sub-section here and donated enough to cover moderation time and resources. But hard for a corporation to let something like that out of their control.

06-13-2015, 01:03 PM	#54
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,608	99. no sales :P Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Now that FF is here and what do we do with the cropped DA lenses?	pento57mm	Pentax Full Frame	63	04-11-2015 07:05 PM
What Should Pentax Do?	Cynog Ap Brychan	Pentax News and Rumors	1095	04-01-2015 05:10 AM
This is what Pentax should do	Rekusu	Pentax Medium Format	19	01-12-2015 01:10 AM
Sony A7ii -- what Pentax FF should look like?	MJSfoto1956	Pentax DSLR Discussion	59	11-25-2014 03:09 PM
Problem with (not cheap) eBay lens, what should I do?	StevePrime	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	26	12-08-2011 03:11 AM

06-13-2015, 12:03 PM	#46
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by jatrax And Ricoh does not give a flip about either of us. That is true and why there is stil no FF with K-mount!

06-13-2015, 12:09 PM	#47
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Nobody says anything can't be done anymore. People might have said something couldn't be done with existing technology, and for the most part , they are right. But people build new technology. SO, ya it couldn't be done, and then, now it can. S%@$ has no monopoly on those kinds of things. For example, why can't they build a competitive cell phone or iPad ,or computer, it should be right up their alley? If there is innovative competition or thinking outside the box, , for the most part S%@$ can't do $@!*.

06-13-2015, 12:18 PM	#48
zmohie Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: egypt Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 435 Original Poster	Originally posted by jatrax Not seriously, well mostly not seriously. It is just that your concept comes up about every other week and always gets the same posts. It is one of those things that sound like they should make sense, but don't. You are entitled to your opinion, mine is different. And Ricoh does not give a flip about either of us. But I were willing to bet on such things. Which I generally am not. There will not be a cheap Pentax FF. Have you been paying attention? They released one lens for it already and announced another. The DFA 150-450 costs $2,499. The DFA*70-200 has a price of $2,300. Do those sound like lenses that are going to go on a cheap camera? Not to me. They sound lenses that are going to go on a professional level camera in the $3,000 range. I am probably not a customer at that price, and it sounds like you are not either, but again Ricoh does not care. They do care about customers that can drop $8,000 on a camera system and be happy. If you want cheap buy a used Sony. Things are changing quickly.I bought k5 at 1500$ now k3ii is 1100$. ..and an expensive lenses doesnot mean not making a cheap camera. the 3 fa ltds are expensive though there was a k200d .. ok you dont buy a cheap camera niether a 3000$ so which one you may buy.

06-13-2015, 12:28 PM	#49
BlakeShellman Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 224	Not to hijack this thread but how much influence does this forum have over what Ricoh puts into their cameras?

06-13-2015, 12:36 PM	#50
PJ1 Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Toowoomba, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,486	The idea has been floated before. But "No AF" won't sell new lenses, Other than that, a digital version of a film era MX (or K1000 if you prefer) with AF could be attractive for the student market.

06-13-2015, 12:45 PM	#51
Fogel70 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Photos: Albums Posts: 3,062	Originally posted by fuent104 Why do we assume leaving off features will not save money? For every feature, doesn't someone have to conceive of it, get it approved at a meeting, write code for it, test it, and write an entry in the instruction manual for it? I keep going back to Blackmagic Design's cinema cameras. Why have they been able to consistently design new, barebones cameras from scratch, with sensors that head no presence on the market, and no history of making our selling cameras, and do it at a lower cost than everyone else? Why is it that they can do this, but Ricoh cannot, despite having more of the pieces in place to do so? Ill also add that Sony has done many things people said couldn't be done over the last few years. Remember when a mirrorless body was too small to fit a stabilization system? It can be done on a small professional niche market where profit margins are high. Pentax has done that in the medium format segment. But to do the same in a low profit margin market like consumer camera market is much more difficult.

06-13-2015, 12:45 PM	#52
mecrox Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Oxford, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,375	If someone wants inexpensive FF then where I live it's poss to buy a new D610 or 6D for barely more than the price of a new K3II. Simply turn off the settings you don't need. A Sony A7 Mk I is even cheaper, as is buying from the Hong Kong direct dealers who undercut the manufacturer's price by a third or so meaning that a new D610 is about the same as a new K3II. At your own risk but plently take it and don't complain. Cheap FF, relatively speaking, has been here for a while now. There's simply no point doing a stripped-down FF when it would never be cheaper than many pretty darn capable cameras already available new. And that's without even looking at the mountain of second-hand and refurb items out there. How little do you want to spend even for very recent kit? Just hit Ebay. MHO, the camera industry's #1 problem is lack of demand for the new products it does have, something which affects many other inudstries too of course. Lack of demand is a serious economic problem across the world so far as I can see.

06-13-2015, 12:48 PM	#53
Fogel70 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Photos: Albums Posts: 3,062	Originally posted by BlakeShellman Not to hijack this thread but how much influence does this forum have over what Ricoh puts into their cameras? I bet Ricoh is much smarter than to listen to us.

06-13-2015, 01:12 PM	#55
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,663	Originally posted by fuent104 Why do we assume leaving off features will not save money? For every feature, doesn't someone have to conceive of it, get it approved at a meeting, write code for it, test it, and write an entry in the instruction manual for it? I keep going back to Blackmagic Design's cinema cameras. Why have they been able to consistently design new, barebones cameras from scratch, with sensors that head no presence on the market, and no history of making our selling cameras, and do it at a lower cost than everyone else? Why is it that they can do this, but Ricoh cannot, despite having more of the pieces in place to do so? Ill also add that Sony has done many things people said couldn't be done over the last few years. Remember when a mirrorless body was too small to fit a stabilization system? I think the issue is that a lot of the code has already been developed. Someone in a different thread suggested that Pentax release cameras at different price points with various features turned off on the cheaper cameras. This feels like the same plan. The other issue is the question of keeping up with the Jonses. If everyone else has certain features (excellent auto focus, live view, video, fast frame rates) and you decide to release a camera that is significantly underwhelming in those departments, then you had better have a significantly cheaper price too. However I very much doubt that Pentax can really get below the 6D/Nex A7/D600 price points. Meaning that they had better just make a camera that has features that those other cameras don't have and hope that photographers pick up on that fact and buy it. Full frame cameras are already at 1000 dollars, but I don't know that Pentax could make money selling a full frame at that price point -- with or without features left off.

06-13-2015, 01:17 PM	#56
mee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 7,403	Originally posted by BlakeShellman Not to hijack this thread but how much influence does this forum have over what Ricoh puts into their cameras? Outside of the printed questions and suggestions thread that Adam sometimes gives to the Ricoh reps during major conferences, I'd say none. We are pretty much talking to a brick wall with our opinions.. which is why I think now it is best not to get too overworked about each of our opinions..

06-13-2015, 01:19 PM	#57
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by mee Outside of the printed questions and suggestions thread that Adam sometimes gives to the Ricoh reps during major conferences, I'd say none. We are pretty much talking to a brick wall with our opinions.. which is why I think now it is best not to get too overworked about each of our opinions.. And what fun would that be?

06-13-2015, 01:23 PM	#58
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by zmohie Things are changing quickly.I bought k5 at 1500$ now k3ii is 1100$. Sorry, won't wash. That is APS-C market, not FF. Come back in 3-4 years and maybe Pentax FF prices will drop too. But you cannot compare the APS-C market that Ricoh (Pentax) has been in for years with a totally new market. Originally posted by zmohie and an expensive lenses doesnot mean not making a cheap camera. the 3 fa ltds are expensive though there was a k200d .. ok you dont buy a cheap camera niether a 3000$ so which one you may buy. Ok, you have a point there. But I think for Ricoh 'FF' = professional high end. If you want a cheaper body then get APS-C. Those expensive lenses will work just fine. And the FA Limiteds were for film cameras, not digital. So just because you could use them on the k200d does not mean they were designed with that camera in mind. I don not believe they would have made them for only cheap APS-C bodies. The DFA 150-450 and DFA*70-200 were designed specifically with the new FF camera in mind. And I think they show clearly what RIcoh has in mind for FF. But neither of us knows, and maybe I am wrong and there will be a $1,800-2,000 FF camera. I honestly see no point in it being any cheaper than that it would just cannibalize APS-C sales. And if it does come in cheaper it will be because they cut corners on the sensor or processors or build quality. And that would be a bad thing IMHO. ---------- Post added 06-13-15 at 01:26 PM ---------- Originally posted by BlakeShellman Not to hijack this thread but how much influence does this forum have over what Ricoh puts into their cameras? Probably very little. I had a conversation with a Ricoh person over on their own forum and she stated very specifically that they do not monitor PF at all. On the other hand Adam says they do. So maybe the lady I talked with meant only her group. Anyway I really, really hope they pay little attention to us here. If they did they would just close the Pentax division as everyone here knows Pentax is Doooomed!

06-13-2015, 01:59 PM	#59
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by jatrax Probably very little. I had a conversation with a Ricoh person over on their own forum and she stated very specifically that they do not monitor PF at all. On the other hand Adam says they do. So maybe the lady I talked with meant only her group. Anyway I really, really hope they pay little attention to us here. If they did they would just close the Pentax division as everyone here knows Pentax is Doooomed! They actually have someone who monitors their forum? I was under the impression that no one at Ricoh USA knew how to read.

06-13-2015, 02:09 PM	#60
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by boriscleto They actually have someone who monitors their forum? I was under the impression that no one at Ricoh USA knew how to read. It did take two weeks to get a response, but when they did they were most helpful and solved my issue right away. I suspect the forum there was dreamed up as a 'good idea' but not enough resources (as in a full time moderator) were allocated to run it properly. Hard to budget for intangibles but expecting staff dedicated to other things to moderate and respond on a forum in their spare time is not going to end well. I think they would have done better to ask Adam for sub-section here and donated enough to cover moderation time and resources. But hard for a corporation to let something like that out of their control.