Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-27-2007, 07:28 AM   #16
New Member
BeerCur's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: PA (OS Philly), USA
Posts: 14
QuoteOriginally posted by stewart_photo Quote
Are you certain about calling your camera the K12D? Using the current Pentax numbering system, the more advanced cameras have the smallest numbers. Therefore, a camera more capable than the K10D would need a number smaller than 10 (K8D, K5D, or similar), while a K12D would be slightly less advanced.
When do you think K(-10^100^100)D will be announced? If they don't announce it by November I'm jumping ship, and going with the Xtreme 80X40 double jabber thingy optimized

08-27-2007, 02:13 PM   #17
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: London
Posts: 1,067
Hi Flash

Your idea sounds quite nice in theory, when you say that:

QuoteQuote:
What Pentax needs to do to leap-frog ahead of the competition is to come out with a body that is fully upgradeable; one that a user could take to a good shop and have them replace/upgrade the sensor, the automation innards, etc.
But, and it's a BIG But.....I seem to remember back in the 'mists of time' when the initial idea of 'digital imaging' first surfaced, the concept centred around the belief that film users would retain their 35mm lenses and bodies and simply attach a separate removable/interchangeable digital back, thus maintaining compatibility with their existing equipment. However, things didn't quite pan out that way for a number of reasons.
1. Sensors were in their relative infancy development wise. Had digital full-frame 36mm x 24mm DSLR's even been available at that time, NO ONE (even Professionals) could have afforded them. Kodak DCS Pro 14n RIP !
2. The accountants in these huge photographic corporations soon realised that they could generate absolute megabucks and keep shareholders very happy by manufacturing APS-C and compact 'Point & Shoot' cameras for the masses. The rationale being:
"What the hell do ordinary folks need full-frame DSLR's for ? Hell, I bet most of them never make prints larger than 6" x 4" anyhow !"
Accountants 1, General Public 0 !!!
But in all honesty they had a point. I reckon that Digital SLR's form a relatively small percentage of all cameras sold on a world-wide basis ? Photographic companies are primarily in business to generate ongoing profits and the idea of constantly upgrading or retrofitting old bodies would hold very little attraction for them. Far better that they release a shiny new product every six to nine months and keep the factories going flat-out !

Best regards
Richard

Last edited by Confused; 08-27-2007 at 04:40 PM.
08-27-2007, 03:07 PM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philippines
Posts: 1,399
QuoteOriginally posted by Confused Quote
Hi Flash

Your idea sounds quite nice in theory, when you say that:



But, and it's a BIG But.....I seem to remember back in the 'mists of time' when the initial idea of 'digital imaging' first surfaced, the concept centred around the belief that film users would retain their 35mm lenses and bodies and simply attach a separate removable/interchangeable digital back, thus maintaining compatibility with their existing equipment. However, things didn't quite pan out that way for a number of reasons.
1. Sensors were in their relative infancy development wise and had digital full-frame 36mm x 24mm DSLR's even been available at that time, NO ONE (even Professionals) could have afforded them. Kodak DCS Pro 14n RIP !
2. The accountants in these huge photographic corporations soon realised that they could generate absolute megabucks and keep shareholders very happy by manufacturing APS-C and compact 'Point & Shoot' cameras for the masses. The rationale being:
"What the hell do ordinary folks needs full-frame DSLR's for ? Hell, I bet most of them never make prints larger than 6" x 4" anyhow !"
Accountants 1, General Public 0 !!!
But in all honesty they had a point. I reckon that Digital SLR's form a relatively small percentage of all cameras sold on a world-wide basis ? Photographic companies are primarily in business to generate ongoing profits and the idea of constantly upgrading or retrofitting old bodies would hold very little attraction for them. Far better that they release a shiny new product every six to nine months and keep the factories going flat-out !

Best regards
Richard
Agreed about the comment on happy shareholders. I would think that companies can place a smaller profit margin on modular bodies than whole camera bodies.

Even now, when prices between low-end DSLRs and high-end P&S's are beginning to overlap, it's still in the better interests of shareholders to release whole bodies than modular ones.

While it is a marketing coup for Pentax if they pull this one off, I'm not seeing it happen, at least, not in the near future.
08-27-2007, 04:01 PM   #19
Busiko
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by Tbear Quote
How successful do you think a Pentax camera with the following capabilities would be on the dSLR marketplace?

1) Similar specifications to the D300
2) In body SR
3) Full weather-sealing
4) Priced $100 less than the D300
That would not be successful. Pentax has to aim higher than that. You have to lead not follow.

08-27-2007, 04:25 PM   #20
Veteran Member
stewart_photo's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Posts: 1,864
QuoteOriginally posted by Tbear Quote
Aren't we getting a bit carried away with semantics? (snip)

LOL! Perhaps, Ted. However, I ignored your thread for a couple of days because your title mislead me into thinking you were discussing a camera below the K10D. That doesn't appear to be your intent, but the title combined with the current Pentax numbering system certainly suggested it.

stewart
08-27-2007, 04:36 PM   #21
Veteran Member
stewart_photo's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Posts: 1,864
QuoteOriginally posted by BeerCur Quote
When do you think K(-10^100^100)D will be announced? If they don't announce it by November I'm jumping ship (snip)

Oh, no. I'm not going there again. As I said in another thread, the crystal ball is put away and I'm out of the prediction business. However, having said that, I'd be quite astonished if we don't see a new, enhanced, camera model well before November.

stewart
08-27-2007, 05:53 PM   #22
VAV
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hyderabad
Posts: 149
QuoteOriginally posted by Confused Quote
Hi Flash

Your idea sounds quite nice in theory, when you say that:



But, and it's a BIG But.....I seem to remember back in the 'mists of time' when the initial idea of 'digital imaging' first surfaced, the concept centred around the belief that film users would retain their 35mm lenses and bodies and simply attach a separate removable/interchangeable digital back, thus maintaining compatibility with their existing equipment. However, things didn't quite pan out that way for a number of reasons.
1. Sensors were in their relative infancy development wise. Had digital full-frame 36mm x 24mm DSLR's even been available at that time, NO ONE (even Professionals) could have afforded them. Kodak DCS Pro 14n RIP !
2. The accountants in these huge photographic corporations soon realised that they could generate absolute megabucks and keep shareholders very happy by manufacturing APS-C and compact 'Point & Shoot' cameras for the masses. The rationale being:
"What the hell do ordinary folks need full-frame DSLR's for ? Hell, I bet most of them never make prints larger than 6" x 4" anyhow !"
Accountants 1, General Public 0 !!!
But in all honesty they had a point. I reckon that Digital SLR's form a relatively small percentage of all cameras sold on a world-wide basis ? Photographic companies are primarily in business to generate ongoing profits and the idea of constantly upgrading or retrofitting old bodies would hold very little attraction for them. Far better that they release a shiny new product every six to nine months and keep the factories going flat-out !

Best regards
Richard
don't know if the above is fact or another example of the legendary creativity of accountants ... it sounds like a case of mistaken identity and as an accountant, I am inclined to credit the Marketing folks with the idea, approved post-fact by the accountants
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, d300, dslr, pentax, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:46 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top