[RobA_Oz]

I've never not known where I was when taking my photos, so I haven't needed a GPS. If you don't know where you are, don't you seriously need more help than just a GPS in your camera?

Semantics aside, we are going round in circles in this thread. If we just edit out the word "need" and replace it with "want", can we get back to the far more important topic of arguing who wants a FF Pentax, and who doesn't?

Damn! Said the "F-word"!

[Anvh]

I've never not known where I was when taking my photos, so I haven't needed a GPS. If you don't know where you are, don't you seriously need more help than just a GPS in your camera?

I think some are just forgetful

[Docrwm]

I think some are just forgetful

Must be, or they just HAVE to have the latest technology just because it exists.

[selar]

Must be, or they just HAVE to have the latest technology just because it exists.

...and some people buy ceiling fans to attach to their dSLRs.

[Ex Finn.]

...and some people buy ceiling fans to attach to their dSLRs. :hysterical:

I know, pretty silly, but when done correctly it will make your Pentax hover like a kite-cam. Only limited by the length and weight of the power-cord.

[dmytty]

I don't think you quite understand how economies of scale work. This camera would be a very specialized device and would be outsold by the standard model by 1000:1, at least. It would be more expensive than the standard model, not cheaper.

To be clear, the cost of developing and producing a robust physical casing is quite low. Remember, there are far fewer openings due to removing the screen and physical controls (which could really be limited to an on-off switch and battery door). Removing the buttons, screens, prism viewfinder, etc removes a significant amount of cost. The result is a monolithic type casing with a lens mount, battery/sd card door, on/off switch, and maybe a hotshoe/external power.

My cost estimates:

Development
1. ~$20-30k for development and prototyping of a milled plastic/metal body casing
2. ~$100,000 for polycarbonate body mold and production line jigs

Production
1. Body cost of about $5 (polycarbonate is cheap material) - maybe 30% of the cost of a K30 body and all the doors, etc.
2. Assembly and Quality Control cost of about $20 - ~25% of the cost of a K30. This is a much simpler body.
3. Bill of Material (BOM) for battery/electronics-PCB/imaging sensor/ae/focusing ~ $150 - ~75% of the cost of a K30 BOM. Would use all of the same electronics and imaging components as the K30.

Figuring a production run of 10,000 pieces, development costs are ~$15 per body. The production costs are ~$175, or about half the cost of a K30 body. So, rounding off, Pentax could produce these bodies for ~$200/each - on the same production line as the K30.

Figuring a very handsome profit margin (better than the K30), Pentax could still sell the MonoK30 (ie the robust remote body) for $200-$300 less than the K30. At 30% smaller volume and dimensions, it would be instant buzz and instant competition for HD Hero/Pro type cameras.

Would a $500 MonoK30 'remote imaging' body with Pentax K mount be attractive to many photographers and videographers? I think so.

All in favor say 'aye'!

P.S. This is getting away from the embedded wireless elements so I'll post the MonoK30 as a new thread.

[elliott]

Yeah, you really don't get economies of scale.

[Anvh]

But that isnt a DSLR anymore...

And your missing cost for the software and firmware.

[dmytty]

Yeah, you really don't get economies of scale.

Your 1 line of text certainly reads more like a casual opinion rather than a well-supported analysis.

Tell you what, I'll build this thing if Pentax won't...and I'll offer you the first one for $500.

[dmytty]

Just like how the Mono Leica M9 is cheaper?

oh....

Leica M9 Rangefinder Digital Camera Body (Black) 10704 B&H Photo
Leica M Monochrom Digital Camera 10760 B&H Photo Video

Removing the anti-aliasing filters and color filter array from the imaging sensors does almost nothing to reduce the cost of the Leica. Removing screens, viewfinders, and buttons from a K30 body most certainly does.

[Anvh]

Yes sorry thought you meant a mono k30 there

But it shows that a product with less can cost more.


Why not buy a CCTV instead since that's the same thing ur suggesting actually.

[dmytty]

But that isnt a DSLR anymore...

Well, there's no viewfinder, but it can certainly use the same optical and imaging elements (ie phase focusing, etc).

And your missing cost for the software and firmware.

The rounding took care of that. I have done embedded systems programming. This is cheap stuff ($10-15K).

Would you buy it for $500? Can you see it being useful?

[Anvh]

Here you go your Mono K30
PENTAX RICOH Imaging Company


oops these are just lenses, bummer

[dmytty]

Yes sorry thought you meant a mono k30 there

MonoK30 was a bad name...changed it to RemoteK30.

But it shows that a product with less can cost more.

Certainly true, but not necessarily so. It's usually only because marketing people want to charge more/make more or restrict the market (ie limit cannibalizing). I would suggest that Pentax not take such a dim view...they need BUZZ!

[Anvh]

Well, there's no viewfinder, but it can certainly use the same optical and imaging elements (ie phase focusing, etc).

Look up what DSLR means

The parts your taking out makes it stop being a DSLR.