The new FX must be below 2K, otherwise ...

VoiceOfReason · 12-25-2015, 01:21 PM

If they did a 42 mp K1 with the features I want then priced it for 1799 I'd pre-order it.

btnapa · 12-25-2015, 01:42 PM

Originally posted by VoiceOfReason

If they did a 42 mp K1 with the features I want then priced it for 1799 I'd pre-order it.

I would pre order it even if it was priced at $2,400. Heck, if it was priced at $1,799, I might order two!!

**jatrax** · 12-25-2015, 01:45 PM

Originally posted by btnapa

For instance, the K3II is at $729 at B@H and Nikon 7200 is at $1,100.

Not sure where you pick your numbers, from the internet you can find any number you want.

List Price:
Nikon D7200 = $1,195
Pentax k-3 = $1,295
Pentax k-3II = $1,095

So list price of k-3 was 8% higher than d7200 and k-3II was 9% less.

Market price? That is driven by time, demand and advertising. It appears that Nikon is able (or MUST) keep the price up after release. Pentax has consistently moved the price lower after introduction.

Based on these numbers the K-1 will have a list price of $3,299 +/- 10%. And since there is an unfulfilled demand I would expect prices to hold steady longer than many expect. All of this just speculation, and wishful thinking by many. But everything we actually KNOW, rather than guess is that Pentax is aiming for the high end, pro market with eventually a full system to match. They also seem to be able to be profitable at far lower volumes than Canon/Nikon require. Releasing a FF at a killer price would generate higher unit sales, which does not seem to be RIcoh's philosophy. There is no need or perhaps it is not even possible given their manufacturing capacity to try for high unit sales.

Perhaps I am completely wrong, but I would rather be pleasantly surprised than have to read through all the PentaxIsDooomed™ posts because wishful fantasies had the price too low.

btnapa · 12-25-2015, 02:05 PM

They have to price it such that they make money first. However, they have to take pressure from competitors, namely Sony, into consideration. No Pentax gloom-n-doom in my house. Historically Pentax video has been sub par compared to other similarly specified cameras but the still image quality more than makes up for it. I want excellent still image quality and Pentax has delivered at killer low prices.

I really think we are going to see an unbelievably low price for the K1.

I am not worried about production capacity. The Pentax user base is small compared to the other guys. I do not expect Canonikons to jump ship to Pentax. I think Pentax's first priority is to stop the bleeding (people jumping ship for FF with other brands) first.

kooks · 12-25-2015, 02:35 PM

I dont expect a sub $2000 price.. not at all, especially if is a 36MP ( or more ) sensor.. I could expect something between $2300 - $2500.

normhead · 12-25-2015, 02:39 PM

Look at the cost of the lenses for this camera. This is a big boy camera, it would be wise to quit dreaming about little boy prices.

The market for this camera are the guys like the guy I met yesterday at BIrd Kingdom. He was shooting with an A7r, but, he looked at my Pentax and said " I shot Pentax up until 12 years ago, and I still have all my led Pentax gear. I'm just waiting for the FF to come out." A high percentage of adopters are going to be guys like him. Everyone for some reason wants to assume, Pentax is going to have to compete with everyone else. This camera is going to fulfill a need for existing users out there in th Pentax community, it would be nice if it competed with everyone else, but it certainly doesn't have to. This guy has a full pro kit just waiting for a body. For him it would be a steal at $3k.

**jatrax** · 12-25-2015, 02:46 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by btnapa

I really think we are going to see an unbelievably low price for the K1.

I really think we are going to see an introductory list price of $3,000+.

Originally posted by btnapa

I think Pentax's first priority is to stop the bleeding (people jumping ship for FF with other brands) first.

That ship sailed years ago.

Originally posted by btnapa

I am not worried about production capacity.

You don't have to, Ricoh does. They do not appear to have much excess capacity. That is not bad really, as we are in a shrinking market. Those with large capacity that need to be paid for or kept running are at a disadvantage in this market. Ricoh just needs to sell as much as they can make, at the highest possible price. And with limited production capacity there is no incentive to under-price anyone. Note how they have priced all recent introductions. All have been priced very close, sometimes above the comparable equipment from the competition. Then the price has been dropped to move product at the rate they want. This tells me they are setting the list price far above where they need to be to be profitable, getting the best margins they can and then dropping the price to move the inventory out on schedule for the next product.

It is all great fun to want a $1,799 FF Pentax. But this is IMHO just a fantasy. Maybe I am wrong, after all no one but Ricoh knows. But when I see wishful thinking on one side of an argument and facts pointing the other way on the other I go with facts. At $1,799 I will pre-order one. At $2,000 I will almost certainly pre-order. Above that? I will have save some more. And I think I will need to save a lot.

---------- Post added 12-25-15 at 01:48 PM ----------

Originally posted by normhead

I'm just waiting for the FF to come out." A high percentage of adopters are going to be guys like him. Everyone for some reason wants to assume, Pentax is going to have to compete with everyone else. This camera is going to fulfill a need for existing users out there in th Pentax community, it would be nice if it competed with everyone else, but it certainly doesn't have to. This guy has a full pro kit just waiting for a body. For him it would be a steal at $3k.

Exactly. Ricoh knows this. They can run the line for months and months just to fulfill the pent up demand of guys with a full kit of FF glass sitting on the shelf.

kooks · 12-25-2015, 03:10 PM

Originally posted by normhead

Look at the cost of the lenses for this camera.

well.. Pentax 24-70 is $1295 and Nikon is $2395, Canon is $1800 .. and lets remember that the 150-450 dropped from $2500 to $1600 .. so lenses cost are kind of tricky.. yes they are more expensive than what pentaxians are used to.. but still below of that Canikons have..

disconnekt · 12-25-2015, 03:12 PM - **1 Like**

For the people who want to buy a FF "Right now at this very moment!" for 2g's or less, might as well just get a Nikon's D610 or D750 or Canon's 6D because those are the only FF's out now currently under 2k.

As I see it, Pentax isn't going to release a "Pro Full Frame DSLR" camera that's "Comparable to mid/high-end XYZ Camera by XYZ Camera Maker" for 2g or less anytime soon, especially if it's going to be 36MP's or more. It's more likely to be at least 3G's+ when first released, then lower to mid-2G's after about a year or so.

Kunzite · 12-25-2015, 03:14 PM

Originally posted by jatrax

That ship sailed years ago.

If this forum looks empty to you, perhaps you have all of us on ignore by mistake

Originally posted by btnapa

I am not worried about production capacity. The Pentax user base is small compared to the other guys.

Sure, the K-1 and the FF lenses doesn't mean they'll suddenly jump to Canikon production volumes. A small increase in production is manageable, no worries here.
FTR, Ricoh planned for this fiscal year about 55 million USD to "Increase production of digital cameras ,etc. ".

**jatrax** · 12-25-2015, 03:42 PM

Originally posted by kooks

Pentax 24-70 is $1295 and Nikon is $2395, Canon is $1800 .

The "Pentax" 24-70 is a Tamron and everyone knows that. And it is priced comparably with Tamron 24-70 for other brands. If it had a * maybe they would price it the same as Canon 'L' but they can hardly do that when it is so easy to compare to the Tamron price for lenses for other mounts.

The *70-200 will be what should be compared to Canon 'L'.

kooks · 12-25-2015, 06:20 PM

Originally posted by jatrax

The "Pentax" 24-70 is a Tamron and everyone knows that. And it is priced comparably with Tamron 24-70 for other brands. If it had a * maybe they would price it the same as Canon 'L' but they can hardly do that when it is so easy to compare to the Tamron price for lenses for other mounts.

The *70-200 will be what should be compared to Canon 'L'.

In fact it is a "tamron" close brother.. and that is my point, we cant judge the camera price by the current lenses price 'cuz that is not going to give us a clue about the real price.

**monochrome** · 12-25-2015, 07:02 PM

Originally posted by kooks

In fact it is a "tamron" close brother.. and that is my point, we cant judge the camera price by the current lenses price 'cuz that is not going to give us a clue about the real price.

You've been walking that dog an awfully long time. Let's just stop until CP+.

They're not building * lenses to stick on a pedestrian $2,000 camera. Done and done.

VoiceOfReason · 12-25-2015, 07:09 PM

No one knows the price. No one will know the price until possibly February at CP+.

kooks · 12-25-2015, 08:18 PM

Originally posted by VoiceOfReason

No one knows the price. No one will know the price until possibly February at CP+.

True!.. so we cant assume that is a $2000 or that is a $3000+ camera. It just funny how people assume that is going to be an extremly expensive camera just because of the lenses, and to be honest we can not do that, perhaps if they say about the sensor or other features we cound "guess" an estimated, but thats it..

And @monochrome did i said that is GOING to be a $2000 camera?? no.. so dont assume things that i havent said.. My GUESS is someting between $2300 and $2500.. and is just that.. a GUESs.. and about the * lenseS.. well, there is just 1.. and is not even out in the market, so as I said, we cant not guess the price of the new camera based on the lenses price because the NEW lenses that are out for sale as today goes from $1300 to $1700... i remember you again.. the 150-450 came from $2500 to $1600 in less than a year.. so.. at this point nothing is for sure.

12-25-2015, 02:05 PM	#19
btnapa Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 1,616	Prices I quoted are current selling prices at BHphotovideo They have to price it such that they make money first. However, they have to take pressure from competitors, namely Sony, into consideration. No Pentax gloom-n-doom in my house. Historically Pentax video has been sub par compared to other similarly specified cameras but the still image quality more than makes up for it. I want excellent still image quality and Pentax has delivered at killer low prices. I really think we are going to see an unbelievably low price for the K1. I am not worried about production capacity. The Pentax user base is small compared to the other guys. I do not expect Canonikons to jump ship to Pentax. I think Pentax's first priority is to stop the bleeding (people jumping ship for FF with other brands) first.

12-25-2015, 03:14 PM	#25
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by jatrax That ship sailed years ago. If this forum looks empty to you, perhaps you have all of us on ignore by mistake Originally posted by btnapa I am not worried about production capacity. The Pentax user base is small compared to the other guys. Sure, the K-1 and the FF lenses doesn't mean they'll suddenly jump to Canikon production volumes. A small increase in production is manageable, no worries here. FTR, Ricoh planned for this fiscal year about 55 million USD to "Increase production of digital cameras ,etc. ". Last edited by Kunzite; 12-25-2015 at 03:24 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Macro It must be Spring.......	eaglem	Post Your Photos!	4	10-16-2014 03:22 PM
Flood of new members and pictures ... the K3 contest Fx	jpzk	General Talk	4	04-29-2014 07:05 PM
What is the "FX" mark below K-5 RAW botton at L side	kales	Pentax News and Rumors	18	09-21-2010 04:42 AM
The gods must be crazy	slowpez	Post Your Photos!	11	01-31-2009 01:28 PM

12-25-2015, 01:21 PM	#16
VoiceOfReason Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Mishawaka IN area Photos: Albums Posts: 6,124	If they did a 42 mp K1 with the features I want then priced it for 1799 I'd pre-order it.

12-25-2015, 01:42 PM	#17
btnapa Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 1,616	Originally posted by VoiceOfReason If they did a 42 mp K1 with the features I want then priced it for 1799 I'd pre-order it. I would pre order it even if it was priced at $2,400. Heck, if it was priced at $1,799, I might order two!!

12-25-2015, 01:45 PM	#18
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by btnapa For instance, the K3II is at $729 at B@H and Nikon 7200 is at $1,100. Not sure where you pick your numbers, from the internet you can find any number you want. List Price: Nikon D7200 = $1,195 Pentax k-3 = $1,295 Pentax k-3II = $1,095 So list price of k-3 was 8% higher than d7200 and k-3II was 9% less. Market price? That is driven by time, demand and advertising. It appears that Nikon is able (or MUST) keep the price up after release. Pentax has consistently moved the price lower after introduction. Based on these numbers the K-1 will have a list price of $3,299 +/- 10%. And since there is an unfulfilled demand I would expect prices to hold steady longer than many expect. All of this just speculation, and wishful thinking by many. But everything we actually KNOW, rather than guess is that Pentax is aiming for the high end, pro market with eventually a full system to match. They also seem to be able to be profitable at far lower volumes than Canon/Nikon require. Releasing a FF at a killer price would generate higher unit sales, which does not seem to be RIcoh's philosophy. There is no need or perhaps it is not even possible given their manufacturing capacity to try for high unit sales. Perhaps I am completely wrong, but I would rather be pleasantly surprised than have to read through all the PentaxIsDooomed™ posts because wishful fantasies had the price too low.

12-25-2015, 02:35 PM	#20
kooks Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: San José, Costa Rica Photos: Albums Posts: 794	I dont expect a sub $2000 price.. not at all, especially if is a 36MP ( or more ) sensor.. I could expect something between $2300 - $2500.

12-25-2015, 02:39 PM	#21
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Look at the cost of the lenses for this camera. This is a big boy camera, it would be wise to quit dreaming about little boy prices. The market for this camera are the guys like the guy I met yesterday at BIrd Kingdom. He was shooting with an A7r, but, he looked at my Pentax and said " I shot Pentax up until 12 years ago, and I still have all my led Pentax gear. I'm just waiting for the FF to come out." A high percentage of adopters are going to be guys like him. Everyone for some reason wants to assume, Pentax is going to have to compete with everyone else. This camera is going to fulfill a need for existing users out there in th Pentax community, it would be nice if it competed with everyone else, but it certainly doesn't have to. This guy has a full pro kit just waiting for a body. For him it would be a steal at $3k.

12-25-2015, 02:46 PM - 2 Likes	#22
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by btnapa I really think we are going to see an unbelievably low price for the K1. I really think we are going to see an introductory list price of $3,000+. Originally posted by btnapa I think Pentax's first priority is to stop the bleeding (people jumping ship for FF with other brands) first. That ship sailed years ago. Originally posted by btnapa I am not worried about production capacity. You don't have to, Ricoh does. They do not appear to have much excess capacity. That is not bad really, as we are in a shrinking market. Those with large capacity that need to be paid for or kept running are at a disadvantage in this market. Ricoh just needs to sell as much as they can make, at the highest possible price. And with limited production capacity there is no incentive to under-price anyone. Note how they have priced all recent introductions. All have been priced very close, sometimes above the comparable equipment from the competition. Then the price has been dropped to move product at the rate they want. This tells me they are setting the list price far above where they need to be to be profitable, getting the best margins they can and then dropping the price to move the inventory out on schedule for the next product. It is all great fun to want a $1,799 FF Pentax. But this is IMHO just a fantasy. Maybe I am wrong, after all no one but Ricoh knows. But when I see wishful thinking on one side of an argument and facts pointing the other way on the other I go with facts. At $1,799 I will pre-order one. At $2,000 I will almost certainly pre-order. Above that? I will have save some more. And I think I will need to save a lot. ---------- Post added 12-25-15 at 01:48 PM ---------- Originally posted by normhead I'm just waiting for the FF to come out." A high percentage of adopters are going to be guys like him. Everyone for some reason wants to assume, Pentax is going to have to compete with everyone else. This camera is going to fulfill a need for existing users out there in th Pentax community, it would be nice if it competed with everyone else, but it certainly doesn't have to. This guy has a full pro kit just waiting for a body. For him it would be a steal at $3k. Exactly. Ricoh knows this. They can run the line for months and months just to fulfill the pent up demand of guys with a full kit of FF glass sitting on the shelf.

12-25-2015, 03:10 PM	#23
kooks Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: San José, Costa Rica Photos: Albums Posts: 794	Originally posted by normhead Look at the cost of the lenses for this camera. well.. Pentax 24-70 is $1295 and Nikon is $2395, Canon is $1800 .. and lets remember that the 150-450 dropped from $2500 to $1600 .. so lenses cost are kind of tricky.. yes they are more expensive than what pentaxians are used to.. but still below of that Canikons have..

12-25-2015, 03:12 PM - 1 Like	#24
disconnekt Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: SoCal/I.E. Photos: Albums Posts: 1,699	For the people who want to buy a FF "Right now at this very moment!" for 2g's or less, might as well just get a Nikon's D610 or D750 or Canon's 6D because those are the only FF's out now currently under 2k. As I see it, Pentax isn't going to release a "Pro Full Frame DSLR" camera that's "Comparable to mid/high-end XYZ Camera by XYZ Camera Maker" for 2g or less anytime soon, especially if it's going to be 36MP's or more. It's more likely to be at least 3G's+ when first released, then lower to mid-2G's after about a year or so.

12-25-2015, 03:42 PM	#26
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by kooks Pentax 24-70 is $1295 and Nikon is $2395, Canon is $1800 . The "Pentax" 24-70 is a Tamron and everyone knows that. And it is priced comparably with Tamron 24-70 for other brands. If it had a * maybe they would price it the same as Canon 'L' but they can hardly do that when it is so easy to compare to the Tamron price for lenses for other mounts. The *70-200 will be what should be compared to Canon 'L'.

12-25-2015, 06:20 PM	#27
kooks Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: San José, Costa Rica Photos: Albums Posts: 794	Originally posted by jatrax The "Pentax" 24-70 is a Tamron and everyone knows that. And it is priced comparably with Tamron 24-70 for other brands. If it had a * maybe they would price it the same as Canon 'L' but they can hardly do that when it is so easy to compare to the Tamron price for lenses for other mounts. The *70-200 will be what should be compared to Canon 'L'. In fact it is a "tamron" close brother.. and that is my point, we cant judge the camera price by the current lenses price 'cuz that is not going to give us a clue about the real price.

12-25-2015, 07:02 PM	#28
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by kooks In fact it is a "tamron" close brother.. and that is my point, we cant judge the camera price by the current lenses price 'cuz that is not going to give us a clue about the real price. You've been walking that dog an awfully long time. Let's just stop until CP+. They're not building * lenses to stick on a pedestrian $2,000 camera. Done and done.

12-25-2015, 07:09 PM	#29
VoiceOfReason Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Mishawaka IN area Photos: Albums Posts: 6,124	No one knows the price. No one will know the price until possibly February at CP+.

12-25-2015, 08:18 PM	#30
kooks Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: San José, Costa Rica Photos: Albums Posts: 794	Originally posted by VoiceOfReason No one knows the price. No one will know the price until possibly February at CP+. True!.. so we cant assume that is a $2000 or that is a $3000+ camera. It just funny how people assume that is going to be an extremly expensive camera just because of the lenses, and to be honest we can not do that, perhaps if they say about the sensor or other features we cound "guess" an estimated, but thats it.. And @monochrome did i said that is GOING to be a $2000 camera?? no.. so dont assume things that i havent said.. My GUESS is someting between $2300 and $2500.. and is just that.. a GUESs.. and about the * lenseS.. well, there is just 1.. and is not even out in the market, so as I said, we cant not guess the price of the new camera based on the lenses price because the NEW lenses that are out for sale as today goes from $1300 to $1700... i remember you again.. the 150-450 came from $2500 to $1600 in less than a year.. so.. at this point nothing is for sure.