[Rorschach]

jsherman999 was stating the bleeding obvious to be honest. A 645D is an upgrade path for film 645 shooters, not for APS-C shooters. The 645D is not an upgrade path for K-mount shooters, as jsherman said, it might as well be a Nikon 645D as we can use nothing from our current K-mount system on the 645D other than perhaps a flash.

The other way around it works nicely though. I use Pentax medium format lenses on K-mount, and I am not the only one.

[froeschle]

Concerning Sony, Nikon and sensors:




https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/150827-facts-about-pen...ml#post1596959




sonyalpharumors | Blog | (SR4) Sony testing various fullframe prototypes. Nikon DX3 competitor coming (with built-in grip)

* Nikon has designed and made (via a third-party fab) sensors for the following cameras: D2h, D2hs, D3, D3s, D700, and D3100.

* Nikon was involved with customizing design in conjunction with Sony for the following cameras: D1, D1h, D1x, D2x, D2xs.

* Nikon used Sony sensors with little or no modification for: D100, D40, D50, D60, D70/D70s, D80, D90, D200, D300/D300s, D3000, D5000, D5100, D7000, D3x.

Nikon DSLR (Digital Camera) Comparison by Thom Hogan




Nikon D7000 has a Sony sensor (confirmed) | Nikon Rumors

We have a longstanding relationship with Sony. If the sensors for Nikon D3s, D3 and D700 are designed by Nikon, Nikon D3x and those of the small APS-C sensors are from Sony. We want to use our own sensors in SLRs most popular [small sensor APS-C, Ed], as the performance of our sensors are better. However, it will take some time as it takes to achieve economies of scale.

Nikon rep: two DSLRs will be announced by the end of August | Nikon Rumors

Now, as you can imagine, everybody asked for the D700 and D3 replacement schedule. Here is what the Nikon rep said: “Two new FX bodies will be announced by the end of August. Availability in Fall.”

Nikon D700 currently out of stock in all major US retailers | Nikon Rumors




sonyalpharumors | Blog | Sony A850 and A290 and A390 officially discontinued

Sony plans to halt production of the Alpha 850 (pictured) in July or August because the 24.6MP camera is too similar in specification and price to the flagship Alpha 900 model.

[Macario]

No; it's because the other film formats were too large, because lugging heavy camera equipment on the hiking trail made Oskar Barnack thinking



Nice try (despite the ), but none of your K-mount lenses will fit the medium and large format cameras. They will fit a FF Pentax, with the APS-C versions in crop mode (like Nikon). Again: the K-mount is a FF mount. End of story. Canon and Nikon users have an upgrade path, we don't (the 645D is not an upgrade if you already have the K-mount glass).



I can. The market of a FF Pentax differs from the FF Canon and Nikon markets. It's not that there's a solid "FF market" which caters to a only single group of customer. If that's the case, then Leica would be competing with Canon and Nikon also? I think you should realize yourself that Pentax does not want to be a second Nikon or Canon, but wants its own niche. Creating crippled 'me-too' cameras is out of the question for Pentax.

Yep, other film formats were too large, so he looked for a film format which was "good enough"and would make a small camera. And aso the lugging around doesn't really apply anymore (for a long time). As the 645 camras got small enough to shoot hand held, heck I even know people who shot hasselblads hand held. So yes the 135 format deffenetly was the film format that was "good enough"

[redrockcoulee]

A reminder that the 645D is not full frame nor is most if not all of its competitors. Guess Pentax will have to make a FF 645 in order for its users to have something to grow into. Do not even know what that means.

The non photographers I know who have bought a DSLR have based their purchases on advertisements and price. Their eyes glaze over when you even mention the higher end models of Canon or Nikon, they do not know nor do they care. Pentax needs more of these people than they do of full frame buyers and a large rebate with a two lens system along with some advertisements will do a lot more for that then will producing a larger sensor DSLR. For those starting off and thinking of a more expensive or advanced camera , a larger array of lenses is needed more than a camera for them to aim for down the road.

I bought a K-r for several reasons and none of them was because Pentax has a higher end model for me to grow into. Having shot with a D1X and then a D200 for over 5 years along with a D2H and D2X and having had the opportunity to use the D3 since they came out (never seen the reason for it yet) I was looking for an inexpensive and very compact camera that I could take along when I was using my other cameras and especially if it used Pentax lenses. I have no desire for a full frame camera. First of all the cost difference between it and the K-r exceeds my entire Hasselblad system and I much prefer it to a DSLR. Second it would most likely be larger in which case I could have staid using the D200. For me the lenses are little problem as all my lenses are F or M with the exception of the DA35 which works with my film camera. My wife on the other hand would loose her two most used lenses if she was to switch. At the job I used the D200 switching to full frame would have been a negative as I was using the 18-200 and at times at the job I wanted as small and as flexible systems as possible as changing lenses was not an option. If I was to get a digital back for my 500 CM I would not consider it an upgrade from my film backs, just an additional tool just like colour is to black and white.

In summary I think that a full frame Pentax would not bring in new customers especially at the lower price end where it is needed the most as that builds up the base and they most often start from scratch meaning all new lenses as well. As far as how much it is needed for the existing DSLR users, I have no idea on that. But just because you think you need it does not mean that people buying their first digital will even give it a thought and as such I do not think that it is a proper justification for expecting Pentax to make the FF camera. Other justifications may be much more appropriate. I have no expectations of upgrading to either the full frame camera or even above the K=r for the forseeable future as although in 5 plus years of shooting digital and over 30 years of film including large format, the camera is compact and I can shoot in total manual mode, not much else I need. At it fits nicely in with my MF and LF kits which to me is the most important thing about any camera, it does what you NEED it to.

[eddie1960]

The non photographers I know who have bought a DSLR have based their purchases on advertisements and price. Their eyes glaze over when you even mention the higher end models of Canon or Nikon, they do not know nor do they care. Pentax needs more of these people than they do of full frame buyers and a large rebate with a two lens system along with some advertisements will do a lot more for that then will producing a larger sensor DSLR. For those starting off and thinking of a more expensive or advanced camera , a larger array of lenses is needed more than a camera for them to aim for down the road.

.

I agree with the need for an entry model. I actually think this has to happen well before FF to grow the user base. given the nature of things that could well end up being the KR with the replacement falling in at a higher price. this really should have been done with the Kx as i think it would have maintained margin longer on the kr
A $500 1 lens kit, and $6-650 2 lens kit with a DAL 50-200 would be an excellent way of drawing new users you the brand. At a store level the 3 body setup gives you flexibility in the sale and a good number of the people in on the $500 low margin kit could be moved to a step model . right now of course it doesn't happen because it's a big jump KR to K5 and of course below the KR there is nothing for the budget buyer (I know there are even cheaper canikons but it is easy to show the value of a kx for instance over a base level older rebel

[jsherman999]

There is actually no evidence Sony *will* sell a sensor to anyone; in fact, all the evidence points to Sony reducing sales to itself (the discontinuance of the A850)

Much more plausible is that Sony didn't see the point of continuing with two FF DSLR bodies with specs so similar, when the majority of A850 buyers would have just bought an A900 if that were the only option. Plus, they may be coming out with another FF body in 2012 that fits into the A850 slot, possibly a translucent mirror body.

Dumping A850 because Nikon told them to seems far-fetched to me in comparison.


.

"Sony officially announced (via Amateur Photographer) that “Sony plans to discontinue its full-frameAlpha 850 DSLR this summer and has already stopped making its Alpha 290 and 390 DSLRs, less than a year since they were announced.” and “Sony plans to halt production of the Alpha 850 (pictured) in July or August because the 24.6MP camera is too similar in specification and price to the flagship Alpha 900 model. ”

from ---> link



.

[filorp]

I bought a K-r for several reasons and none of them was because Pentax has a higher end model for me to grow into

i get your point, but.... even if i bought my first dslr without even wondering about buying higher model, now the situation has changed.... and im shure it happend for many of us.... i have k5 and best pentax lenses in the market (in betw 3xFALimiteds) so whats next.... the answer is simple: nothing. 645 is very specific beast it has some advantages but it has some flaws even comparing to k5... like high iso shooting, so 645D isnt for me not for a while at least. What Pentax is doing to keep me along..... nothing. Marketing should create a desire to acquire new gear.... and it doesnt matter if you are a photo gear geek or pro shooter.... everything is about to create a desire.... to stay with and to buy new gadgets.... so logical conclusion should be FF sooner or later....

[RBellavance]

i have k5 and best pentax lenses in the market (in betw 3xFALimiteds) so whats next.... the answer is simple: nothing.

Does there absolutely have to be something "next" ? What is missing in your K-5 that would be magically solved by having a larger sensor ?

[filorp]

What is missing in your K-5 that would be magically solved by a larger sensor ?

the lack of fast wide angle, lack of fast standart prime and first of all... i need something to attache to my 3xFALimited beauties so i can enjoy of full frame it potentially gives me....

[Clinton]

What is missing in your K-5 that would be magically solved by a larger sensor ?

I don't think it would be *magically* solved. I would like the additional resolution, lower noise at higher ISO, and wider angle of view.

I'm not quite sure how this question is relevant.

[Aristophanes]

How are they risking a 'commodity pricing system' if they sell directly to both Nikon and Pentax at the same per-unit price?

How is Pentax going to bring Nikon volumes?

Pentax's market share in 135 and DSLR was always a fraction of Nikon or Canon (or Minolta). Simple market analysis tells you that if you start from a smaller base, and the camera body is $3,000, you're going to have very few purchasers.

There is no evidence that Pentaxians are more likely to buy into a $3,000 FF DSLR than any other brand. In fact, the evidence supports that less will buy in because the lenses are not there and to ramp up to full capacity optically will require years of effort and deferred purchasing.

Now, with the 645D there is plenty of time to do that precisely because sales lost to legacy glass from the old 645 system can be recouped by a $10,000 body starting price. Can't do that with FF.......unless you're Nikon charging $6,000 for a FF body.

That's why FF pricing is the way it is and why Sony dropped the lower end model A850 over the A900. FF prices aggregate have been going up, not down, which says Pentax would sell even fewer units as every price increase loses volume sales. Sony "gets it" and has chosen not to compete on price and volume.

Please try to understand that the Pentax FF market is not exactly the same market Nikon and Canon are competing in...

You're right. It is much, much smaller to start with, and almost no FF-capable legacy zooms made, the backbone of all FF systems at all price points.

The disposable income market for all cameras is a singular market. Pentax has no special charm within the broader market driving FF demand. Pentax is simply a brand with 3 owners in 5 years running at less than 5% DSLR market share.

The only basis for assuming that Pentaxians will be more likely to buy into FF than other brands can only be substantiated by all of us having substantially larger incomes to afford FF! but I thought Pentax was the 'value brand'. Or the WR brand, the Subaru of camera makers. Or the brand of Limited primes. It's a confused brand, that's for sure.

I am not saying FF will not be offered by Pentax in the future. I am saying that the market has to move towards small volume sales when FF sensor prices fall well below what they are going for now. To get there Pentax will have to forestall FF development until others create an economy of scale allowing for said price drops. The way Nikon, Sony, and Canon are protecting margins on FF, that will be years coming. $3,000 camera bodies do not sell by the bucketloads for any brand.

[Aristophanes]

"Sony officially announced (via Amateur Photographer) that “Sony plans to discontinue its full-frameAlpha 850 DSLR this summer and has already stopped making its Alpha 290 and 390 DSLRs, less than a year since they were announced.” and “Sony plans to halt production of the Alpha 850 (pictured) in July or August because the 24.6MP camera is too similar in specification and price to the flagship Alpha 900 model. ”

Translation:

Sony is making its customers pay more for FF because we found that offering a lower price point did nothing to increase sales volume given lackluster demand for FF in the overall market and was costing us bucketloads of money. Very few consumers can envision paying over $2,500 for a camera body. It's a tiny, tiny market. Now we understand.

At the time of the announcement the price difference between the two was about $650 (or the price of a K-r).

Subtext:

Nikon makes us more money as a customer buying FF sensors than we could making them for our own imaging division. Head Office made the call. Kill the A850 with no replacement announced, but keep strong sales to Nikon, our best customer.

We have a longstanding relationship with Sony. If the sensors for Nikon D3s, D3 and D700 are designed by Nikon, Nikon D3x and those of the small APS-C sensors are from Sony. We want to use our own sensors in SLRs most popular [small sensor APS-C, Ed], as the performance of our sensors are better. However, it will take some time as it takes to achieve economies of scale.

Translation:

Sony and Nikon cooperate where necessary against the common enemy: Canon. Sony benefits from Nikon design and Nikon benefits from volume guarantees and pricing and likely FF exclusivity.

Subtext:

We are restricting the FF club to those who add value. Pentax is a non-player as they bring neither volume nor chip fab know-how, so why would we want to compete against them and drive down margins? We don't. Talk to Kodak.

[RonHendriks1966]

How is Pentax going to bring Nikon volumes?

The disposable income market for all cameras is a singular market. Pentax has no special charm within the broader market driving FF demand. Pentax is simply a brand with 3 owners in 5 years running at less than 5% DSLR market share.

Well there is a nice point in this one. Olympus stated that they wanted to keep there marketshare in Europe to maintain at 8 %. That was in 2009 and now it is about 4 % (or something like that). You make products and market them and make assumptions on the consumerbase to attract (pro's or amateurs).

It may not make sence to expand cameraline to more products at current marketshare, but it does when Ricoh will aim in future to a bigger shunk of the cake! For that you start also with investing, because with a strategy of defence you wont win markets.

[jsherman999]

How is Pentax going to bring Nikon volumes?

Why would they need to?

From Sony's perspective, they increase their sensor sales volume by at least 5% (initially, to grow) with one single signature, and they then have Ricoh on board for FF sensors. They also may want to establish a stronger relationship with Ricoh to get an inside position to sell them the sensors for this high-res document archival push they're reportedly making and have the 645D tech pointed at right now.

Their relationship with Nikon remains exactly the same. Any existing sensors that contain Nikon IP cannot be sold to anyone else, that goes without saying, but it's a huge leap from there to "Nikon controls who Sony can sell all FF sensors to."

There is no evidence that Pentaxians are more likely to buy into a $3,000 FF DSLR than any other brand.

How could there be definitive evidence if the body does not exist? There certainly is evidence that Pentaxians are buying 5Ds, D3s and D700's though, isn't there?

Now, with the 645D there is plenty of time to do that precisely because sales lost to legacy glass from the old 645 system can be recouped by a $10,000 body starting price. Can't do that with FF.......unless you're Nikon charging $6,000 for a FF body.

Again, you're speculating on two things here - how long it would take for ROI on a sub-3K body, and how long Ricoh would consider 'too long'.

Pentax-standalone was too small to do it without completely financing it. Hoya (it turns out) was just positioning Pentax imaging for a quick sale - they had no intention of investing and waiting for ROI. Pentax-Ricoh seems to be establishing itself for a long term revenue generation plan, probably leveraging emerging markets. A perfect incubator for a FF push.

That's why FF pricing is the way it is and why Sony dropped the lower end model A850 over the A900.

No, they dropped the A850 because it was almost exactly the same as the A900, but sold for a lower price. They had bunched up their products there, in a confusing way. BTW, the A900, which they kept, is priced right at where I expect the K-1 to start.

I am not saying FF will not be offered by Pentax in the future. I am saying that the market has to move towards small volume sales when FF sensor prices fall well below what they are going for now.

Should they try to leap in at that point, or start building toward it now, with FF lens announcements, a FF body release schedule?

I think what you're describing is simply what Ricoh is foreseeing.

$3,000 camera bodies do not sell by the bucketloads for any brand.

They don't have to sell by the bucketloads to make sense. In Pentax's case, it would strengthen K-mount, and help re-establish the brand, and develop a steady revenue stream after ROI schedule ends, something Ricoh seems to be interested in doing. Remember, the $124 million they spent for Pentax Imaging doesn't even make them break a sweat, Further investment toward that asset (which is K-mount) logically follows.


.


.

[Paolo.Bosetti]

The more I read on this kind of flaming threads, the more I convince myself that, form a market point of view (i.e. to actually make money, not just to make us pentaxians happy), the only viable FF route Pentax can follow is a MILC à la Leica M9, of course with K-mount so to take advantage of those existing D-FA lenses (and of DA too, as suggested above). A conventional FF dSLR would be pointless.
They would be probably come out with something smaller than Canikon FF tanks, and probably at a price tag (~$3500) in a market niche essentially free or, more precisely, only successfully occupied by Leica.
Personally, God only knows how much I would like a Leica, but those $10k to buy an M9 + ONE SINGLE lens are simply too much. But one third of that sum, and no need to buy lenses, would be a completely different matter...