How much would you pay for a FF Pentax DSLR?

uccemebug · 08-06-2010, 06:05 PM

Having read several threads on FF DSLR interest here, I thought I'd put together a survey on actual interest in putting money where our mouths are.

This is just an exercise in testing forum-goer's real appetite for such a camera. I'll share the results after a week (or if I hit the 200 user limit, which I highly doubt). Note that I am avoiding the issue of feature set altogether and just want to anonymously gauge buyer interest.

Pentax DSLR survey #1

SpecialK · 08-06-2010, 06:57 PM

Kind of meaningless unless we know the features. Are you saying it's a FF K-7 or K100D?

It's like asking how much you'd pay for a motorcycle.

youky63 · 08-06-2010, 07:03 PM

You have your first client here.

Or more exactly, as explained on the other thread, I could have been if Pentax/Hoya strategy had been clearer. I answered to your survey has if it was for a "generic" FF system. I am switching to Canon end of the year. With 5DMkII + 24-105f/4 L IS + 135mm f/2 L + Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX + Samyang 24mm f/2.8 (and a few months later 70-200mm f/4 L IS).
Sorry for Pentax, they lost my cash.

mikemike · 08-06-2010, 08:16 PM

Originally posted by SpecialK

Kind of meaningless unless we know the features. Are you saying it's a FF K-7 or K100D?

It's like asking how much you'd pay for a motorcycle.

I think it is safe to assume that any FF would have K7 caliber features at a minimum.

uccemebug · 08-07-2010, 12:23 AM

Originally posted by SpecialK

Kind of meaningless unless we know the features. Are you saying it's a FF K-7 or K100D?

It's like asking how much you'd pay for a motorcycle.

I'm not interested in features with this question. I can't guess what they'd be, and it's irrelevant to the matter at hand. If we are the "thought leaders" or "tribe leaders" we Pentax DSLR enthusiasts should know what we'd spend on the camera so many of us are asking Pentax to buy.

future_retro · 08-07-2010, 12:33 AM

probably about 2000 body only, I'd expect it from Pentax. They'd have to come up with something really really great to warrant a 5D MKII price tag and maintain the Pentax bang for buck reputation

Mohawk · 08-07-2010, 12:50 AM

Pffft. I wouldn't buy one at all. A FF sensor holds absolutely no relevance to me.

I'm saving up for a 645D (prob. wait for a mkII); just bought my first lens.

PS. I just did a shoot with a 5D-wielding 2nd. The pics from the 5D were so-so, so who ever really thinks that FF is an APS-C slayer is delusional.

Steinback · 08-07-2010, 01:08 AM

Probably around $2k as an introductory price, though I would likely buy in towards the end of the camera's life cycle as the price drops to ~2/3 of that. I already own enough full frame AF lenses to cover my day to day needs.

Jasvox · 08-07-2010, 01:21 AM

What I would pay may vary depending on my impulses. I am getting great results out of my K-7 and feel that a larger sensor isn't necessarily going to make me a better photographer.

I think the FF Pentax is going to release when hell freezes over will be around $1795. Why that low...because Pentax isn't known as a digital FF player and a higher price isn't going to attract any first timers with Pentax. Also, FF isn't the "Holy Grail" anymore and the cost of technology to produce a FF body with another label on it is far less than it was 5 years ago. In my opinion, 90% of any FF sales will be to about 5% of current Pentax owners. (Not a good business decision by Pentax).

Jason

bertbert · 08-07-2010, 03:05 AM

Given K-7-like features and >20MP, i would in the vicinity of $1500-$2000.

**interested_observer** · 08-07-2010, 03:10 AM

In my approach to photography, there are two types of costs - a) lenses, which are more of an investment, and b) bodies, which are more of a cost. I describe it this way since lenses have a much longer life, can be low in electronics, thus less susceptible to the throw away cycle (features of the moment and electronic failures). Bodies, on the other hand, tend to have a shorter life cycle due to new features / technology, along with failures over time.

So, when you ask about body only costs, my body purchases will be made in a way to a) preserve my lens investments; and b) reduce my body costs due to new features and electronic failures. Therefore, under $1K is my price category. Thus, I tend to stay at least one generation behind, especially with the built in price declines (1 year in time equals approximately to a 50% price reduction). Plus, purchasing a new body every year, I do not need, nor does my skill level demand.

I have avoided SDM lenses due to their initial failures, but also in Pentax's system architecture, image stabilization has and is a body function, thus the lenses could be more mechanical optical and less electronics - no optical stabilization, and no AF motors (body based electro-mechanical screwdrive). This for me creates a very reasonable stable and cost effective system.

bertbert · 08-07-2010, 03:14 AM

Originally posted by interested_observer

... Therefore, under $1K is my price category. Thus, I tend to stay at least one generation behind, especially with the built in price declines (1 year in time equals approximately to a 50% price reduction)....

Meaning that a new $2000 Pentax FF would be interesting to you, since after some time the cost would be reasonable?

**interested_observer** · 08-07-2010, 03:24 AM

Originally posted by bertbert

Meaning that a new $2000 Pentax FF would be interesting to you, since after some time the cost would be reasonable?

... but only if it supported my lenses - which are screwdrive, a combination of DA, FA, A and K. In body stabilization, would also need to be supported - to me its valuable in wide angle with ambient low light - when I do not have a tripod.

TaoMaas · 08-07-2010, 03:46 AM

Originally posted by interested_observer

In my approach to photography, there are two types of costs - a) lenses, which are more of an investment, and b) bodies, which are more of a cost.

I agree with this. That's why it was a bit hard for me to answer this poll. There were too many variables. More than likely I'll opt for the cheapest body available in the future. Right now, I'm using a K10D. It works great for my purposes, but I spent more on it than I spent for my K2, MX, LX, and 6X7 bodies COMBINED. And, no...I didn't pick those cameras up after digital came on the scene and dropped the price of film cameras. But even though my K10D is less than 5 years old, it's already been surpassed by the entry level Pentax DSLRs in many respects. SO...would I buy a FF Pentax? That depends upon the price and what else Pentax offers. If Pentax comes out with a FF camera in the $1500-2000 range, but they still have a killer APS-C camera for around $500, then it's a no-brainer for me...I go with the APS-C and never give FF a second thought.

**Kerrowdown** · 08-07-2010, 10:19 AM

Lets see if they do it first, if its sensible money at the same level as competition, for what I do for a living I would probably buy a couple, as all my old school lens would work just fine.

08-07-2010, 12:23 AM	#5
uccemebug Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Tokyo Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 962 Original Poster	How much would you pay for a FF Pentax DSLR? Originally posted by SpecialK Kind of meaningless unless we know the features. Are you saying it's a FF K-7 or K100D? It's like asking how much you'd pay for a motorcycle. I'm not interested in features with this question. I can't guess what they'd be, and it's irrelevant to the matter at hand. If we are the "thought leaders" or "tribe leaders" we Pentax DSLR enthusiasts should know what we'd spend on the camera so many of us are asking Pentax to buy.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How much would you pay for this?	timstone	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	6	04-18-2010 10:56 AM
how much would you pay for ff?	philmorley	Pentax News and Rumors	70	02-16-2010 06:56 AM
How much to Pay for a LX?	sixstring	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	13	05-11-2008 03:49 AM
How much to pay for a 50/1.2	Arpe	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	14	05-30-2007 11:18 PM

08-06-2010, 06:05 PM	#1
uccemebug Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Tokyo Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 962	How much would you pay for a FF Pentax DSLR? Having read several threads on FF DSLR interest here, I thought I'd put together a survey on actual interest in putting money where our mouths are. This is just an exercise in testing forum-goer's real appetite for such a camera. I'll share the results after a week (or if I hit the 200 user limit, which I highly doubt). Note that I am avoiding the issue of feature set altogether and just want to anonymously gauge buyer interest. Pentax DSLR survey #1

08-06-2010, 06:57 PM	#2
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	Kind of meaningless unless we know the features. Are you saying it's a FF K-7 or K100D? It's like asking how much you'd pay for a motorcycle.

08-06-2010, 07:03 PM	#3
youky63 Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Osaka Posts: 143	You have your first client here. Or more exactly, as explained on the other thread, I could have been if Pentax/Hoya strategy had been clearer. I answered to your survey has if it was for a "generic" FF system. I am switching to Canon end of the year. With 5DMkII + 24-105f/4 L IS + 135mm f/2 L + Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX + Samyang 24mm f/2.8 (and a few months later 70-200mm f/4 L IS). Sorry for Pentax, they lost my cash.

08-06-2010, 08:16 PM	#4
mikemike Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: New Orleans Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,053	Originally posted by SpecialK Kind of meaningless unless we know the features. Are you saying it's a FF K-7 or K100D? It's like asking how much you'd pay for a motorcycle. I think it is safe to assume that any FF would have K7 caliber features at a minimum.

08-07-2010, 12:33 AM	#6
future_retro Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Western Washington Posts: 572	probably about 2000 body only, I'd expect it from Pentax. They'd have to come up with something really really great to warrant a 5D MKII price tag and maintain the Pentax bang for buck reputation

08-07-2010, 12:50 AM	#7
Mohawk Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 109	Pffft. I wouldn't buy one at all. A FF sensor holds absolutely no relevance to me. I'm saving up for a 645D (prob. wait for a mkII); just bought my first lens. PS. I just did a shoot with a 5D-wielding 2nd. The pics from the 5D were so-so, so who ever really thinks that FF is an APS-C slayer is delusional.

08-07-2010, 01:08 AM	#8
Steinback Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: GTA, ON, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,673	Probably around $2k as an introductory price, though I would likely buy in towards the end of the camera's life cycle as the price drops to ~2/3 of that. I already own enough full frame AF lenses to cover my day to day needs.

08-07-2010, 01:21 AM	#9
Jasvox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 3,107	What I would pay may vary depending on my impulses. I am getting great results out of my K-7 and feel that a larger sensor isn't necessarily going to make me a better photographer. I think the FF Pentax is going to release when hell freezes over will be around $1795. Why that low...because Pentax isn't known as a digital FF player and a higher price isn't going to attract any first timers with Pentax. Also, FF isn't the "Holy Grail" anymore and the cost of technology to produce a FF body with another label on it is far less than it was 5 years ago. In my opinion, 90% of any FF sales will be to about 5% of current Pentax owners. (Not a good business decision by Pentax). Jason

08-07-2010, 03:05 AM	#10
bertbert New Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 21	Given K-7-like features and >20MP, i would in the vicinity of $1500-$2000.

08-07-2010, 03:10 AM	#11
interested_observer Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,707	In my approach to photography, there are two types of costs - a) lenses, which are more of an investment, and b) bodies, which are more of a cost. I describe it this way since lenses have a much longer life, can be low in electronics, thus less susceptible to the throw away cycle (features of the moment and electronic failures). Bodies, on the other hand, tend to have a shorter life cycle due to new features / technology, along with failures over time. So, when you ask about body only costs, my body purchases will be made in a way to a) preserve my lens investments; and b) reduce my body costs due to new features and electronic failures. Therefore, under $1K is my price category. Thus, I tend to stay at least one generation behind, especially with the built in price declines (1 year in time equals approximately to a 50% price reduction). Plus, purchasing a new body every year, I do not need, nor does my skill level demand. I have avoided SDM lenses due to their initial failures, but also in Pentax's system architecture, image stabilization has and is a body function, thus the lenses could be more mechanical optical and less electronics - no optical stabilization, and no AF motors (body based electro-mechanical screwdrive). This for me creates a very reasonable stable and cost effective system.

08-07-2010, 03:14 AM	#12
bertbert New Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 21	Originally posted by interested_observer ... Therefore, under $1K is my price category. Thus, I tend to stay at least one generation behind, especially with the built in price declines (1 year in time equals approximately to a 50% price reduction).... Meaning that a new $2000 Pentax FF would be interesting to you, since after some time the cost would be reasonable?

08-07-2010, 03:24 AM	#13
interested_observer Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,707	Originally posted by bertbert Meaning that a new $2000 Pentax FF would be interesting to you, since after some time the cost would be reasonable? ... but only if it supported my lenses - which are screwdrive, a combination of DA, FA, A and K. In body stabilization, would also need to be supported - to me its valuable in wide angle with ambient low light - when I do not have a tripod.

08-07-2010, 03:46 AM	#14
TaoMaas Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: Oklahoma City Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,574	Originally posted by interested_observer In my approach to photography, there are two types of costs - a) lenses, which are more of an investment, and b) bodies, which are more of a cost. I agree with this. That's why it was a bit hard for me to answer this poll. There were too many variables. More than likely I'll opt for the cheapest body available in the future. Right now, I'm using a K10D. It works great for my purposes, but I spent more on it than I spent for my K2, MX, LX, and 6X7 bodies COMBINED. And, no...I didn't pick those cameras up after digital came on the scene and dropped the price of film cameras. But even though my K10D is less than 5 years old, it's already been surpassed by the entry level Pentax DSLRs in many respects. SO...would I buy a FF Pentax? That depends upon the price and what else Pentax offers. If Pentax comes out with a FF camera in the $1500-2000 range, but they still have a killer APS-C camera for around $500, then it's a no-brainer for me...I go with the APS-C and never give FF a second thought.

08-07-2010, 10:19 AM	#15
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,818	Lets see if they do it first, if its sensible money at the same level as competition, for what I do for a living I would probably buy a couple, as all my old school lens would work just fine.