[Big Dave]

One thing that should be cut is the silly Wifi. I don't use it, so take it out. I hate paying for stuff I never use.

Just joking

Actually there are popular electronic features that don't add much to manufacturing costs. Wi-fi and video are two of them. A menu optional mirror delay is another one. A advanced user camera needs those expected features. A wi-fi card is just a band-aid.

[npc]

Because you like Optical Viewfinders and auto-exposure? The Sony isn't major competition for anything Pentax. I investigated, looked at the images folks post, read about their experiences, saw on various forums the problems that led people to sell their Sony equipment, and said to myself.. "Self, this ads nothing to your life, but would make it a lot harder."

It was close, but in the end, Sony really wasn't competition for Pentax. And still isn't.

Just wondering - what's wrong with the auto-exposure on a7? Do you refer to not being able to use shutter priority or program/automatic with pentax lenses ?

[mee]

One thing that should be cut is the silly Wifi. I don't use it, so take it out. I hate paying for stuff I never use.

Just joking

Haha yes and that is the mentality around PentaxForums... if I don't use it, it shouldn't be included. I'm glad Ricoh does NOT (seemingly) frequent PF for user feedback, we'd have one Frankenstein monster of a camera body.. if any thing. include that, no dont include that bleh bleh bleh bleh bleh

As long as I can disable these extra features, why not have them included? That's a plus if one ever does decide they have a need for them.. they're there. And also it is a plus if one ever resells the camera body.. perhaps those extra features are marketable to potential buyers.

[jatrax]

And also it is a plus if one ever resells the camera body.. perhaps those extra features are marketable to potential buyers.

That is a good point I had not thought of. If you make the camera too specialized you limit the pool of original purchasers. But you also limit the pool of second hand purchasers, thus reducing the residual value even faster than it already goes down.

---------- Post added 06-20-15 at 08:17 PM ----------

Actually there are popular electronic features that don't add much to manufacturing costs. Wi-fi and video are two of them. A menu optional mirror delay is another one. A advanced user camera needs those expected features. A wi-fi card is just a band-aid.

I was making a sarcastic joke Dave. I'm fine with whatever features they put in. Everything is optional except the light tight box that captures an image

[Rondec]

Actually there are popular electronic features that don't add much to manufacturing costs. Wi-fi and video are two of them. A menu optional mirror delay is another one. A advanced user camera needs those expected features. A wi-fi card is just a band-aid.

There is just a common theme on the forums, where people post requests for a camera missing all of the features that they personally don't use -- somehow thinking that if all of those features were left off a camera that the price would come down to where they could afford it. It's kind of a funny idea. As of right now, if you want really cheap, APS-C is where it is at.

[biz-engineer]

What people forget to be aware of is that the cost of digital camera sensor increases must faster compared to film. APSC was defined as the frontier for mass affordable cameras, u4/3 is costed for large adoption.
So, for cameras using larger image sensors , stripping down the features of the camera won't help that much, except that such camera model would squeeze the gross margin of camera vendors even more.
Full frame is borderline, that's why Pentax with their tiny market share , waited so long to introduce one. Personally, it's not so sure that I'll buy a full frame, because I can rent a 645Z + Lenses for a few hundred $ when I need it for an event.

[michelec]

posted this at dpr and i thought it may discuss her
>>>>
Instead of the unbenefit attempt of challenging nikon and cannon in the full frame sector. I suggest releasing a cheap full frame with a price that doesn't exceed 1000$ without the following common features :
1- No video.
2- No flash.
3- No built-in GPS.
4- No WiFi
5- No touch screen
6- No flipped screen
7- No PS.

Just put 24mp sensor inside a body that has Pentax standard and this includes OV.
I think a camera with that price would be the most suitable to compete with the market and will attract many people from other brands. It would also make Pentax sell more lenses.
Moreover, releasing this camera soon will give Pentax the time to release a camera full of new technology. I think Pentax has to go this way before Sony. It would also save time and money for Pentax. Your thoughts ..? Or am I dreaming ..?

I think I would add a feature: a viewfinder that does not make me sigh when I hold my ME-Super.
I would like a simple camera that would take my full frame lenses, like an M 1.4 50, A 1.8 20, A 2.8 28.
But ... the one thing I miss the most with my K-r is that I need to get back home to send a picture to my friends.
There should be a simple solution to get pictures inside photo.app on the iPhone and into Android.
Something like a simple Bluetooth connection to make the camera team up with a phone, even if it limited to "share last picture".

[rawr]

somehow thinking that if all of those features were left off a camera that the price would come down

That certainly didn't work with the Nikon Df.

[kadajawi]

Here's the issue, a lot of us know we can get by with a lot less than the current feature set. We need what we used to have...

ISO on a dial on top of the camera.
Aperture control on the lens, preferably with a DoF scale.
Shutter speed on a dial on top of the camera.
An auto exposure system with EV override.
A way to capture and save the image.

That is all a camera needs to be.
Adding a rear screen with the ability to chimp is a nice extra.

For some reason that I don't understand, everyone seems to think this would be more expensive... or wouldn't sell.
Someone should give it a try. Some camera company is going to get back to building basic cameras. Whether or not it could be Pentax is a different question.

Add a removable prism assembly so you could look down through a top viewfinder and life would be peachy keen.

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 was. 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.

It should be possible to make it impossible to change things like WB when you don't want it without removing those features. Deactivate them in the menu for example.

The problem is removing all features won't make the camera cheaper to make... and the loss of customers would increase the price. If they can make the proposed camera for $1000, they can make a fully featured camera for the same price. The reason why you see cheaper entry level cameras with fewer features is usually because the manufacturer simply wants to offer a cheap version and is willing to sacrifice profits... they make up for it with expensive versions where those features are reactivated.

Reusing the same parts would save money... hence the same OVF in K-50 and K-3...

---------- Post added 21-06-15 at 14:44 ----------

BlackMagic isn't the only company that came from nowhere and now produces high end-ish cinema cameras. There is the Digital Bolex. The KineRAW from China. RED started from scratch. Some kickstarter projects...

[Mothballs]

The first Full Frame Pentax needs is a Flagship: The monster that they are intending to build is perfect. Every single option, feature, and possible edge you can shove into a camera.

But yes, someone needs to make a stripped down full frame, and Pentax is the best bet; they already have weight in stripped down cameras with the K1000 having existed for so long.

Here's a basic rundown of what I'd aim for;
-10-16MP sensor: Tried and true. Not cutting edge, but easily obtainable, good, and budget compared to using the newest of the new.
-Dial controls for Shutter, Exposure, ISO and a thumb wheel for aperture control.
-No modes, very stripped down options; It takes pictures, might possibly shoot video. That's it.
-No AF

The goal is making a cheaper camera, but at the same time you have a secondary target for photography students. The K1000 was a great learning tool because it was simple, and newer photographers, especially in this day and age, tend to get distracted by menus and options and fiddling. It's also a major way to hook into nostalgia, which is Lomography and Zenit have shown, can make you pretty successful. There is a huge base of Manual focus users, students and hobby photographers to tap into.

The First Pentax Full Frame needs to be the best of the best. This would just need to simply be "Good." The K1000's longevity and success didn't come from it being the cutting edge.

[npc]

A cheap FF is what the expensive FF will be after an year or two on the market.

[jeff knight]

There is just a common theme on the forums, where people post requests for a camera missing all of the features that they personally don't use -- somehow thinking that if all of those features were left off a camera that the price would come down to where they could afford it. It's kind of a funny idea. As of right now, if you want really cheap, APS-C is where it is at.

A cheap FF is what the expensive FF will be after an year or two on the market.

+1 I just love plain-spoken common sense observations that you can't possibly argue with!

[Mothballs]

+1 I just love plain-spoken common sense observations that you can't possibly argue with!

I'm going to hope that this is sarcasm.

APS-C =/= FF for starters.

Secondly, if the used camera market around here has shown me anything, it's that people still think their *IST is worth $500. That FF camera is going to be worth quite a bit for a lot longer than a few years.

This is true of it being new or used.

[monochrome]

*ist IS worth $500.

[fuent104]

BlackMagic isn't the only company that came from nowhere and now produces high end-ish cinema cameras. There is the Digital Bolex. The KineRAW from China. RED started from scratch. Some kickstarter projects...

You're correct, but Blackmagic is the company whose camera most closely resembles the proposed stripped down DSLR. Digital Bolex's camera (very unfortunately) has virtually no traction in the Hollywood film biz, and RED's products are much more high-end. Blackmagic are the only people who I'm aware of that have created stripped down products, offered it for a low price, and been extremely successful.