[Class A]

The impression is that its more mp of the same thing (ie. K5)
ISO performance is D7K/K5 like with the only good thing being able to zoom in more due to more MP.

That's not correct. The D800 has a full frame sensor. The per-pixel performance is comparable to the K-5's sensor but since the sensor is larger this translates into a 1 stop noise advantage (assuming the same exposure).

The DxOMark figures for the D800 and K-5 make it clear that higher resolution is not the only benefit the D800 has to offer (they are not "very close").

The 36mp creates as many problems as it tries to solve in real world shooting.

That is not correct either.
If you downscale your D800 images to K-5 image dimensions, the challenge to get a good image is identical to that of using the K-5.

The only difference is that the D800

• gives you the option to better see any imperfections due to camera shake, etc. (due to the higher magnification at 1:1 level), and
• allows you to get better performance (resolution), if you manage to create optimal shooting conditions.

If you do not pixel peep at the D800 images, they will look just as sharp/good as the ones you are taking now. In that sense, the D800 is not "more demanding", on the contrary, the increased sensor size and finer pixel grain (assuming the same output size for both D800 & K-5) are advantages in favour of the D800.

[Class A]

These #'s explain why Nikon charges $6,000/unit for a D4; demand is low.

I believe that Nikon charges $6000/unit for a D4 because they can (not because they must).

It's very difficult to spread a similar cost over far less units sold and still have healthy margins.

Maybe you are underestimating the potential in sharing resources, tooling, etc. for different models.

If Pentax offered two cameras, say K-3 and K-1, which are pretty much identical except for the sensor size, then there wouldn't be a need to amortise all K-1 related investments through K-1 sales only. Pentax even managed to share resources between the K-7 and the D645, so I believe there is a very good opportunity to share investments between two flagship APS-C and FF cameras.

We may see a proof-of-concept FF at PK 2012 from Pentax, with some vague 2013 launch rumours, but more likely 2014-15.

I don't think it would make sense to announce an FF model this much in advance. Pentax would be stalling some of their own APS-C sales without being able to sell an alternative product (with a higher margin).

[Class A]

A modular FF camera along the lines of the GXR, but designed my Marc Newson (don't bother laughing), would be a killer market move for Pentax.

It would definitely "kill" Pentax for me. If they let Newson create another ergonomically challenged product, I'll seriously consider jumping ship.

[pinholecam]

That's not correct. The D800 has a full frame sensor. The per-pixel performance is comparable to the K-5's sensor but since the sensor is larger this translates into a 1 stop noise advantage (assuming the same exposure).

The DxOMark figures for the D800 and K-5 make it clear that higher resolution is not the only benefit the D800 has to offer (they are not "very close").


That is not correct either.
If you downscale your D800 images to K-5 image dimensions, the challenge to get a good image is identical to that of using the K-5.

The only difference is that the D800

• gives you the option to better see any imperfections due to camera shake, etc. (due to the higher magnification at 1:1 level), and
• allows you to get better performance (resolution), if you manage to create optimal shooting conditions.

If you do not pixel peep at the D800 images, they will look just as sharp/good as the ones you are taking now. In that sense, the D800 is not "more demanding", on the contrary, the increased sensor size and finer pixel grain (assuming the same output size for both D800 & K-5) are advantages in favour of the D800.

Maybe I'm a miser. If I pay $3000for one, I don't expect to need to downscale

[slackercruster]

cost of the 24mp sensor will be the determining factor. Sony will not be able to price a 24mp in the territory of the D800/800E. if they do they will fail. the improvement look good on the camera but it's not a direct competitor for canikon without a pro network . I would peg the Sony at $2200-2500, So certainly a unique offering from Pentax in that range should be doable provided Sony makes the sensor available (even if Pentax has to pay $50-75 more per sensor)

How much do sensors cost?

[eddie1960]

Previously Flak has said FF sensors probably fall in the 450-500 range (that may be different with the D800 now) the rumour was the 645d sensor was originally $3000 (It too has likely dropped as it is well into it's life cycle)
apsc sensors BTW i think are significantly less than this (closer to the 100 mark)
So yep FF will have to be a lot more money but like anything else the tech drops in price as manufacturing processes improve and volumes increase. the reason for the pricing on some of the FF is partially due to their low volumes comparatively, but on D$ and 11d type bodies its also partly due to the "we can" charge this since there is no competition model - it's the reason they always keep their leading edge tech for those cameras (like AF, at least until this year when the D800 got the same AF AFAIK)

[QFish]

The only difference is that the D800 * gives you the option to better see any imperfections due to camera shake, etc. (due to the higher magnification at 1:1 level), and * allows you to get better performance (resolution), if you manage to create optimal shooting conditions.

Not only, try to rent anything Pentax ha ha . nobody cares about pentax here in NY!

[QFish]

What we all Pentax users need to make them thinking about us is World Wide Strike just try to imagine what impact would it be if we stop Buying, stop talking, stop everything about pentax for say a week !

[jsherman999]

From Thom Hogan, Nikon guru relating to the D800 and D4:

"It's a delicate balancing act that Nikon has to go through. We're not talking mass market consumer item here, where you build huge, permanent capacity to meet insane demand (the current Apple model). A D4 is going to sell a few hundred thousand copies in its lifetime, a D800 maybe a million+. Sendai's current capacity is 5,000 D4's a month, 30,000 D800's a month. Best case scenario ... is that they could double production by doubling staff or making everyone work double shifts."


Niche product.

Interesting that you haven't recognized that this guestimation completely discounts your earlier assertion that Sony is working 'at capacity' to satisfy Nikon's FF sensor needs, and has no further capacity for Pentax-Ricoh. If Pentax would sell 10% of the D800 numbers, Sony could fill Ricoh's orders for a full year with only 1.5 to 2 months worth of Nikon's sensor volume. Thom Hogan, like you, and like me, does not know the precise Sony existing FF fab capacity, but if he is even suggesting that Nikon may be able to double their volume if they expanded internal factory capacity, doesn't that suggest that Sony is probably nowhere near 'capacity' in filling Nikon's FF sensor volume?

Pentax has about 5% of the DSLR market. So what's 5% of the D800 + D4 market?

You always assume Pentax has to stay at 5%, even up a tier from where they are now. I don't see why that would be so. When Pentax entered MFD, they doubled the annual unit sales in that tier - matched every other player combined, at least for the first 10 months. Pentax FF would not come close to that, but because there are fewer players in the FF tier than aps-c, we should be able to safely assume something more than the same 5% of Nikon's aps-c volume... I would guess 10%, perhaps more, depending on the quality of product. I think I did the math earlier - even at $500 profit per body (low estimate,) it meant something like $20Million profit in the first year on bodies alone at that volume, which would probably be considered part of a ROI schedule - an attractive schedule, especially when you consider increased (and higher-margin) lens sales.


.

[RioRico]

What we all Pentax users need to make them thinking about us is World Wide Strike just try to imagine what impact would it be if we stop Buying, stop talking, stop everything about pentax for say a week !

The forums would grind to a halt (except Non-Pentax and Politics+Religion). Many of us, probably including myself, would suffer severe psychological damage. Adam would go broke. Canon would prevail. Ay yi yi.

[kenyee]

I can't believe people use market share to determine if Pentax is able to make and market a FF. What was the Pentax market share of the DMF market? That didn't stop them releasing the 645D did it?

The 645D was actually a good idea at the time (at least in hindsight). No other MF backs or bodies had such great ergonomics, or were weather sealed, and no others catered to landscape shooters. The release of it also got lots of free marketing/publicity. Pentax also could come in at a significant price discount compared to competitors while still (I'm assuming) making enough to pay for it.
If the D800 had existed back then, I'm fairly certain Pentax would have thought twice about it. Even now, you see some 645D shooters (selling their 645D's for $7K on FM) are jumping over to the D800 for a more multi-purpose body that can probably get 80% of the 645D's image quality at 1/3rd the cost...

And for folks who really want FF now, I've seen some Canon 5DmkII's go for $1500-1700 on craigslist...so I guess they're now low end

[eddie1960]

The 645D was actually a good idea at the time (at least in hindsight). No other MF backs or bodies had such great ergonomics, or were weather sealed, and no others catered to landscape shooters. The release of it also got lots of free marketing/publicity. Pentax also could come in at a significant price discount compared to competitors while still (I'm assuming) making enough to pay for it.
If the D800 had existed back then, I'm fairly certain Pentax would have thought twice about it. Even now, you see some 645D shooters (selling their 645D's for $7K on FM) are jumping over to the D800 for a more multi-purpose body that can probably get 80% of the 645D's image quality at 1/3rd the cost...

And for folks who really want FF now, I've seen some Canon 5DmkII's go for $1500-1700 on craigslist...so I guess they're now low end

there's a 5D2 with 24-70 2.8 grip extra battery and cable release for $2000 locally (very tempting actually)

[kenyee]

there's a 5D2 with 24-70 2.8 grip extra battery and cable release for $2000 locally (very tempting actually)

If you do go for it, be aware that there are lots of crappy copies of the 24-70 (BF/FF softness issues as bad as Tamron's 28-75 :-)...the new version is a lot better...

[eddie1960]

If you do go for it, be aware that there are lots of crappy copies of the 24-70 (BF/FF softness issues as bad as Tamron's 28-75 :-)...the new version is a lot better...

the new version is 2 grand.

there is a body with grip and batteries for 1700, and the best value a 5d mk1 for 850

I just don't like the ergonomics. @ 850 though it would be a nice way to use my MF FF lenses (and Medium format lenses for that matter) with an adapter

[Aristophanes]

You always assume Pentax has to stay at 5%, even up a tier from where they are now. I don't see why that would be so. When Pentax entered MFD, they doubled the annual unit sales in that tier - matched every other player combined,

Thy did it on price alone with the 645D. That's not possible with FF. With MFD they had $3,000 of legroom. They have $200 with FF and that's not enough to stop someone who ways FF from going to Nikon for the much larger lens options, flash system, tethering, software compatibility, etc.

I expect Pentax FF to be less than 5% of Canikon because competing on features and price are both problematic. Very. Pentax FF would mostly be about retaining the installed base. I don;t see getting enough of the installed base until the price falls by about 30% from all players on average.