[biz-engineer]

With all due respect to the modern way of doing things, my biggest problem in photography right now is inadvertently hitting those arrows that control white balance or the selective focus point. Or lifting my finger off the button while changing the EV setting and changing my aperture. My opinion, when stuff like that is happening, things need to be simplified. I am really tired of losing images or not getting the image I wanted, because of inadvertent settings changes. When one of these things happen, I then have to figure out what i did wrong and reset things to the way they were. And many times, that has resulted in me missing photo-ops. I have missed wildlife images, because the selective focus point wasn't where I thought it is. Maybe I'm just stupid, but I don't need all this non-sense. I need a camera I can keep track of, because nothing changes unless I intend it to.

The exact same things happens to me with the K-3.

[zmohie]

pentax cant compet with sony which keeps the better sensor for themselves and can produce a camera every 6 monthes. so i think pentax can release a cheapy one soon with good qulity body as we used to from pentax then release the pro one with the latest technology.if pentax still waiting the d 750 will be less than 2000$ at the teleasing time of pentax full frame. almost companies are doing a similar things.there are samsung gallaxy edge and s6 etc...

[biz-engineer]

Basicly Pentax could have done that years ago. To make the camera cheaper, better to lose the parts that Cost money.

Yes and no. In terms of competitive situation, what happens is that in the business of imagers like Sony has big barrier to entry, due to the amount of semiconductor fab investments. In terms of cost, the full frame sensor is a big contributor and also a component where a large part of the profit is captured by the sensor manufacturer. So, in order to make a profit, camera manufacturers like Ricoh, Nikon, must provide valuable features that the photographer is willing to pay for. For instance, if you skim down the camera and lower the price, e.g a K01 with 24x36 sony sensor in it, it will grow the business of Sony semiconductors , but Ricoh will make no profit out of it. So, camera manufacturers have no other choice than build up more features on their cameras so that they can sell at a higher price and margin.

Now, I think normhead is right, if his point is that not all features valuable by the photographer necessarily involve additional components that cost money. Value may simply be the way the camera is layout , how straight forward it can be used etc.

[normhead]

Pentax doesn't have to compete with anyone... they just have to make good cameras. And they can do that. And I am getting really tired of hearing "Sony, Sony , Sony".. Sony sucks eggs, and I don't know how to put that better or more succinctly. I'll save you the 750 page analysis and just cut to the chase.

Please, stop saying that word. Hence forth to be referred to as the 'four letter "S" word.' camera company.

[boriscleto]

Basicly Pentax could have done that years ago. To make the camera cheaper, better to lose the parts that Cost money.

- SR is expensive
- the mirror is expensive
- interval Electronic hi-way is expensive

I would and did suggest K-11, mirrorless K-mount camera. But I would includes SR. Al those filters and things aren't the expenses. Want a fast camera is expensive. So just 1 fps in RAW as the K-01.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/189624-24-megapixel...11-coming.html

So this is what you want from Ricoh?
shopgoodwill.com - #22152289 - Suntone MM500 35mm film camera - 6/13/2015 6:00:00 PM

[6BQ5]

ok guys
almost of the features i mentioned up are not a photography features .they are a mobile featurs.
at any case the 1000$ will be the acceptal and standard price for most mid range camera/full fram or aps/c/.time will tell.

This camera already exists. I believe you can buy the previous generation A7 for about $1000.

[jlstrawman]

12. No Market.

+1

Amazing how people want to to play with the big dogs but don't want to pay the price of admission.

[biz-engineer]

Pentax doesn't have to compete with anyone... they just have to make good cameras. And they can do that. And I am getting really tired of hearing "Sony, Sony , Sony".. Sony sucks eggs, and I don't know how to put that better or more succinctly. I'll save you the 750 page analysis and just cut to the chase.

Please, stop saying that word. Hence forth to be referred to as the 'four letter "S" word.' camera company.

Exactly.

P.S.: a camera without sensor would cost less.

[zmohie]

it is an idea ..get it or refuse . but .. for some ..dont take things seriously!!!!

[Kerrowdown]

I've read the previous posts in this thread, many made me smile, some laugh out load.

Me... I would just like a robust FF Pentax that will allow my "Ladies" to get back to work, the way they did on my LX's.

[RonHendriks1966]

So this is what you want from Ricoh?
shopgoodwill.com - #22152289 - Suntone MM500 35mm film camera - 6/13/2015 6:00:00 PM

Maybe with the sensor insert that fits into the place of the film.......

It is nice yellow, but gives me a little plasticly feeling.

[Ray Hines]

I'd just like one that costs well below $1000 (US) as this would translate into £1000 (GBP). That's about $1556 (US). Companies always rip us off by just changing dollars to pounds. :-(

[normhead]

Exactly.

P.S.: a camera without sensor would cost less.

I can tell you what make a car is without mentioning who makes the spark plugs.

S%@$ has been on top of the world with their sensors... as a component manufacturer they do great things.

[jatrax]

it is an idea ..get it or refuse . but .. for some ..dont take things seriously!!!!

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.

[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?