24mp full frame K mount camera, possible?

Kunzite · 08-16-2016, 07:59 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by harryzero

Not OVER the current price. Just £1000 for a FF basic spec body with weather seals. Maybe with. FGZ compatible hot shoe as I have flash gun.

Let's double-check your math.
The K-1 is £1600 at SRS Microsystem. You can compromise on quality (build, flexible tilt LCD, plastic everywhere including on critical components) and you'd lower the price a little. However, removing features like video will increase the price, and not by an insignificant amount - this can be seen with the Nikon Df, which is a D600-level camera with a D800-level price.
Remove autofocus, and you'd get a product so niche, you'd have to pay Leica prices for it.

---------- Post added 16-08-16 at 06:04 PM ----------

Originally posted by Barry Pearson

Why?

You don't have to use them!

I'm afraid what he wants is an extremely cheap body, cheaper than anything on the market; and removal of features is how he thinks it could be done. It can't; without features there's no volume, and without volume there's no low price.

It's hopeless. The only realistic solution is to buy a second hand Canikony, or to raise the budget (eventually waiting a few years for the K-1 price to fall).
Or perhaps an APS-C solution is better suited.

Last edited by Kunzite; 08-16-2016 at 08:08 AM.

mohb · 08-16-2016, 08:14 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

but because Pentax isn't a big enough company

Originally posted by Kunzite

It wasn't a "no effort spared" camera, it wasn't an NX1 or K-M 7D which would bury a company because they're too ambitious. It is an affordable camera designed to be sold in 7,000 units per month (or about 1% of the DSLR market).

It always puzzles me why so many posters fail to grasp the common sense behind these two quotes. Pentax isn't Canikon

harryzero · 08-16-2016, 11:47 AM

Originally posted by Barry Pearson

Why?

You don't have to use them!

Why? I suppose I just don't want to pay for them (the frills). My K7 and a fine range of K mount lenses; some manual (Tamron SP 24mmmwith PKA mount) is ok, but in the current climate I would prefer to invest in something that is an investment in true wealth. Maybe when the dust settles and the right Pentax DSLR arrives I will sell out (true wealth) to buy.

**jlstrawman** · 08-16-2016, 12:01 PM

Originally posted by harryzero

Maybe when the dust settles and the right Pentax DSLR arrives I will sell out (true wealth) to buy.

Save yourself the anguish. Join the "flock". Baaaaaaah.

Barry Pearson · 08-16-2016, 03:32 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by harryzero

Why? I suppose I just don't want to pay for them (the frills).

Ah!
So it isn't the frills that you object to, it is the price of the camera?

I am happy with the K-1. I would still have bought it at a higher price.
But I wouldn't have bought the K-1 you prefer at any plausible price.

If Ricoh could only satisfy one of us, they were right to choose me!

**Rondec** · 08-16-2016, 04:11 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Kunzite

Let's double-check your math.
The K-1 is £1600 at SRS Microsystem. You can compromise on quality (build, flexible tilt LCD, plastic everywhere including on critical components) and you'd lower the price a little. However, removing features like video will increase the price, and not by an insignificant amount - this can be seen with the Nikon Df, which is a D600-level camera with a D800-level price.
Remove autofocus, and you'd get a product so niche, you'd have to pay Leica prices for it.

---------- Post added 16-08-16 at 06:04 PM ----------

I'm afraid what he wants is an extremely cheap body, cheaper than anything on the market; and removal of features is how he thinks it could be done. It can't; without features there's no volume, and without volume there's no low price.

It's hopeless. The only realistic solution is to buy a second hand Canikony, or to raise the budget (eventually waiting a few years for the K-1 price to fall).
Or perhaps an APS-C solution is better suited.

This is the thing. People have the impression that you can cut out a lot of features that they don't personally need and the price of the camera will just plummet. The thing is that a lot of the features are just software. A K-1 sensor is capable of video, whether or not Pentax chooses to enable it. Leaving off the tilt LCD might save a little bit, but on the other hand, you might sell a few more units based on the K-1 having this and the D800 not having it.

A digital K-1000, which some folks have asked for, would actually cost 3000 dollars minimum retail, because there would be only a handful sold.

Pentax has to sell in the current market place, not the market place of 1990 or 2000. What current digital SLR doesn't offer video or auto focus? There are probably a couple that Leica offers and certainly on the medium format level there are more, but most modern cameras offer all these things, if nothing else, because everyone else is offering it.

surfar · 08-16-2016, 04:24 PM

Originally posted by harryzero

I have 2 compacts with Leica lenses that give every bit of quality that my DSLR kit gives me

Then buy the K1 and use it as a compact with changeable lenses, or buy into the Qs

**jatrax** · 08-16-2016, 05:22 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Barry Pearson

I am happy with the K-1. I would still have bought it at a higher price. But I wouldn't have bought the K-1 you prefer at any plausible price.

+1 The K-1 came in well below the price I expected to pay. There are features on it I'll never use but so what? I do use the features I need and it is an amazing camera at that price.

Originally posted by harryzero

Why? I suppose I just don't want to pay for them (the frills).

The digital k-1000 idea just makes no sense. Very few would buy it at any price and because of the low volume the price would actually be higher, not lower. If you are looking for cheep rather than 'no frills' then wait a few years and buy a used one. Nobody is going to make a DSLR with less features in a market that is rapidly shrinking.

Kunzite · 08-16-2016, 06:53 PM

I'd say Ricoh Imaging was convinced not to do the "digital K-1000" when the people asking for it invariably were ending with "I'd only pay 1,000$/€/£ for it".

Barry Pearson · 08-16-2016, 11:02 PM

Originally posted by Kunzite

I'd say Ricoh Imaging was convinced not to do the "digital K-1000" when the people asking for it invariably were ending with "I'd only pay 1,000$/€/£ for it".

Chuckle!

I wonder if Ricoh asked the obvious follow-up question: "if that is all you are prepared to spend on the camera, how much would you budget for new Pentax lenses?"

And I wonder what the typical answer was?

Kunzite · 08-17-2016, 12:09 AM - **1 Like**

A very round number?
Zero is round

Simen1 · 08-17-2016, 12:17 AM

According to the lens selection and roadmap I don't think we get a K-1 lite anytime soon. But I do think we might get a higher end version maybe around 2500 $ in a couple of years while the price of K-1 decreases to around 1500$. Sometime after that the K-1 might be replaced/updated with a more cost efficient model. A K-1 lite with some better features and some less.

This thread might be thinking to linear about camera class, quality and price. I think Pentax will differentiate it more then linear features up or down. Maybe we get a K-1S with a futuristic/experimental style or K-1 Limited with classic style and minimal size.

disconnekt · 08-17-2016, 12:22 AM

I'm sure Pentax can & will do well having only 2 FF DSLR's out, the K-1 (a high MP camera for those who like/need it) and a 20-24MP camera (for those who need the higher FPS).
I'm sure Pentax will come out with 20-24MP range camera, which would probably be more of a beefed-up K3II.

harryzero · 08-17-2016, 12:32 AM

Thanks for all your input, comments re volume sales correlating to competitive pricing all a make sense. However I wasn,t seeking a cheap body, I was looking for a body that would demand more of my creative ability. Honestly, a few hundred quid over my 'budget' is of no consequence. Maybe a possible overdose of good feel factor generated from our Olympic success in Rio might push me into a K1 body purchase. Previous impulsive purchases have never been regretted.

Barry Pearson · 08-17-2016, 03:06 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by disconnekt

I'm sure Pentax can & will do well having only 2 FF DSLR's out, the K-1 (a high MP camera for those who like/need it) and a 20-24MP camera (for those who need the higher FPS).
I'm sure Pentax will come out with 20-24MP range camera, which would probably be more of a beefed-up K3II.

Why?

I'm struggling to identify a good reason for a Pentax FF camera with no more than 24 MP, and (from the statement "beefed-up K3II") more of an action camera.

I know that the top-tier Canikons fit that description, but that puzzles me too. Surely it will be easier for Pentax to (say) have a high frame rate with an APS-C camera than with an FF camera? It would have a smaller and lighter mirror and shutter. And I would have thought that fast-behaving APS-C lenses are easier to develop than fast-behaving FF lenses.

(I am aware that an FF camera gives a more useful field of view at the 150mm end of the 150-450mm lens, and at the 70mm end of the 70-200mm lens. That is one of the things I like about the K-1. But I can't see why that would encourage Ricoh to go that way).

Is there are good reason why, if Ricoh wants to develop and launch a 20-24 MP camera that is "beefed-up", they shouldn't do this in an APS-C camera? For example, a future APS-C flagship?

08-17-2016, 12:17 AM	#147
Simen1 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Tromsø, Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 1,031	According to the lens selection and roadmap I don't think we get a K-1 lite anytime soon. But I do think we might get a higher end version maybe around 2500 $ in a couple of years while the price of K-1 decreases to around 1500$. Sometime after that the K-1 might be replaced/updated with a more cost efficient model. A K-1 lite with some better features and some less. This thread might be thinking to linear about camera class, quality and price. I think Pentax will differentiate it more then linear features up or down. Maybe we get a K-1S with a futuristic/experimental style or K-1 Limited with classic style and minimal size. Last edited by Simen1; 08-17-2016 at 12:23 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax Full Frame to Support All K-mount Lenses	PF Staff	Homepage & Official Pentax News	14	08-23-2017 02:06 PM
Irix 15mm f/2,4 for full frame K-mount	Simen1	Pentax News and Rumors	457	03-04-2017 07:55 AM
Sony Alpha a7 Mirrorless Digital Camera, Full Frame 24MP $398 Adorama	interested_observer	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	9	04-24-2016 11:14 PM
For Sale - Sold: Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 Full Frame K Mount	EricBrown	Sold Items	6	03-23-2016 06:58 AM
Leica announces 'M' 24MP live view full-frame CMOS rangefinder with movies	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	22	09-30-2012 01:17 PM

08-16-2016, 07:59 AM - 1 Like	#136
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by harryzero Not OVER the current price. Just £1000 for a FF basic spec body with weather seals. Maybe with. FGZ compatible hot shoe as I have flash gun. Let's double-check your math. The K-1 is £1600 at SRS Microsystem. You can compromise on quality (build, flexible tilt LCD, plastic everywhere including on critical components) and you'd lower the price a little. However, removing features like video will increase the price, and not by an insignificant amount - this can be seen with the Nikon Df, which is a D600-level camera with a D800-level price. Remove autofocus, and you'd get a product so niche, you'd have to pay Leica prices for it. ---------- Post added 16-08-16 at 06:04 PM ---------- Originally posted by Barry Pearson Why? You don't have to use them! I'm afraid what he wants is an extremely cheap body, cheaper than anything on the market; and removal of features is how he thinks it could be done. It can't; without features there's no volume, and without volume there's no low price. It's hopeless. The only realistic solution is to buy a second hand Canikony, or to raise the budget (eventually waiting a few years for the K-1 price to fall). Or perhaps an APS-C solution is better suited. Last edited by Kunzite; 08-16-2016 at 08:08 AM.

08-16-2016, 08:14 AM	#137
mohb Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,912	Originally posted by Rondec but because Pentax isn't a big enough company Originally posted by Kunzite It wasn't a "no effort spared" camera, it wasn't an NX1 or K-M 7D which would bury a company because they're too ambitious. It is an affordable camera designed to be sold in 7,000 units per month (or about 1% of the DSLR market). It always puzzles me why so many posters fail to grasp the common sense behind these two quotes. Pentax isn't Canikon

08-16-2016, 11:47 AM	#138
harryzero New Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 9	Originally posted by Barry Pearson Why? You don't have to use them! Why? I suppose I just don't want to pay for them (the frills). My K7 and a fine range of K mount lenses; some manual (Tamron SP 24mmmwith PKA mount) is ok, but in the current climate I would prefer to invest in something that is an investment in true wealth. Maybe when the dust settles and the right Pentax DSLR arrives I will sell out (true wealth) to buy.

08-16-2016, 12:01 PM	#139
jlstrawman Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Midwest US Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,058	Originally posted by harryzero Maybe when the dust settles and the right Pentax DSLR arrives I will sell out (true wealth) to buy. Save yourself the anguish. Join the "flock". Baaaaaaah.

08-16-2016, 03:32 PM - 1 Like	#140
Barry Pearson Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Stockport Posts: 964	Originally posted by harryzero Why? I suppose I just don't want to pay for them (the frills). Ah! So it isn't the frills that you object to, it is the price of the camera? I am happy with the K-1. I would still have bought it at a higher price. But I wouldn't have bought the K-1 you prefer at any plausible price. If Ricoh could only satisfy one of us, they were right to choose me!

08-16-2016, 04:11 PM - 1 Like	#141
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by Kunzite Let's double-check your math. The K-1 is £1600 at SRS Microsystem. You can compromise on quality (build, flexible tilt LCD, plastic everywhere including on critical components) and you'd lower the price a little. However, removing features like video will increase the price, and not by an insignificant amount - this can be seen with the Nikon Df, which is a D600-level camera with a D800-level price. Remove autofocus, and you'd get a product so niche, you'd have to pay Leica prices for it. ---------- Post added 16-08-16 at 06:04 PM ---------- I'm afraid what he wants is an extremely cheap body, cheaper than anything on the market; and removal of features is how he thinks it could be done. It can't; without features there's no volume, and without volume there's no low price. It's hopeless. The only realistic solution is to buy a second hand Canikony, or to raise the budget (eventually waiting a few years for the K-1 price to fall). Or perhaps an APS-C solution is better suited. This is the thing. People have the impression that you can cut out a lot of features that they don't personally need and the price of the camera will just plummet. The thing is that a lot of the features are just software. A K-1 sensor is capable of video, whether or not Pentax chooses to enable it. Leaving off the tilt LCD might save a little bit, but on the other hand, you might sell a few more units based on the K-1 having this and the D800 not having it. A digital K-1000, which some folks have asked for, would actually cost 3000 dollars minimum retail, because there would be only a handful sold. Pentax has to sell in the current market place, not the market place of 1990 or 2000. What current digital SLR doesn't offer video or auto focus? There are probably a couple that Leica offers and certainly on the medium format level there are more, but most modern cameras offer all these things, if nothing else, because everyone else is offering it.

08-16-2016, 04:24 PM	#142
surfar Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: mid nth coast,nsw Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,141	Originally posted by harryzero I have 2 compacts with Leica lenses that give every bit of quality that my DSLR kit gives me Then buy the K1 and use it as a compact with changeable lenses, or buy into the Qs

08-16-2016, 05:22 PM - 1 Like	#143
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by Barry Pearson I am happy with the K-1. I would still have bought it at a higher price. But I wouldn't have bought the K-1 you prefer at any plausible price. +1 The K-1 came in well below the price I expected to pay. There are features on it I'll never use but so what? I do use the features I need and it is an amazing camera at that price. Originally posted by harryzero Why? I suppose I just don't want to pay for them (the frills). The digital k-1000 idea just makes no sense. Very few would buy it at any price and because of the low volume the price would actually be higher, not lower. If you are looking for cheep rather than 'no frills' then wait a few years and buy a used one. Nobody is going to make a DSLR with less features in a market that is rapidly shrinking.

08-16-2016, 06:53 PM	#144
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	I'd say Ricoh Imaging was convinced not to do the "digital K-1000" when the people asking for it invariably were ending with "I'd only pay 1,000$/€/£ for it".

08-16-2016, 11:02 PM	#145
Barry Pearson Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Stockport Posts: 964	Originally posted by Kunzite I'd say Ricoh Imaging was convinced not to do the "digital K-1000" when the people asking for it invariably were ending with "I'd only pay 1,000$/€/£ for it". Chuckle! I wonder if Ricoh asked the obvious follow-up question: "if that is all you are prepared to spend on the camera, how much would you budget for new Pentax lenses?" And I wonder what the typical answer was?

08-17-2016, 12:09 AM - 1 Like	#146
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	A very round number? Zero is round

08-17-2016, 12:22 AM	#148
disconnekt Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: SoCal/I.E. Photos: Albums Posts: 1,699	I'm sure Pentax can & will do well having only 2 FF DSLR's out, the K-1 (a high MP camera for those who like/need it) and a 20-24MP camera (for those who need the higher FPS). I'm sure Pentax will come out with 20-24MP range camera, which would probably be more of a beefed-up K3II.

08-17-2016, 12:32 AM	#149
harryzero New Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 9	Thanks for all your input, comments re volume sales correlating to competitive pricing all a make sense. However I wasn,t seeking a cheap body, I was looking for a body that would demand more of my creative ability. Honestly, a few hundred quid over my 'budget' is of no consequence. Maybe a possible overdose of good feel factor generated from our Olympic success in Rio might push me into a K1 body purchase. Previous impulsive purchases have never been regretted.

08-17-2016, 03:06 AM - 1 Like	#150
Barry Pearson Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Stockport Posts: 964	Originally posted by disconnekt I'm sure Pentax can & will do well having only 2 FF DSLR's out, the K-1 (a high MP camera for those who like/need it) and a 20-24MP camera (for those who need the higher FPS). I'm sure Pentax will come out with 20-24MP range camera, which would probably be more of a beefed-up K3II. Why? I'm struggling to identify a good reason for a Pentax FF camera with no more than 24 MP, and (from the statement "beefed-up K3II") more of an action camera. I know that the top-tier Canikons fit that description, but that puzzles me too. Surely it will be easier for Pentax to (say) have a high frame rate with an APS-C camera than with an FF camera? It would have a smaller and lighter mirror and shutter. And I would have thought that fast-behaving APS-C lenses are easier to develop than fast-behaving FF lenses. (I am aware that an FF camera gives a more useful field of view at the 150mm end of the 150-450mm lens, and at the 70mm end of the 70-200mm lens. That is one of the things I like about the K-1. But I can't see why that would encourage Ricoh to go that way). Is there are good reason why, if Ricoh wants to develop and launch a 20-24 MP camera that is "beefed-up", they shouldn't do this in an APS-C camera? For example, a future APS-C flagship?