[Scintilla]

2) My personal opinion is that Ricoh will support APS for the short term, 5 - 10 years. I can't imagine how many new APS lenses will be released because FF will surely take up some engineering capacity. Besides, Ricoh already has nearly one of everything that can work on APS.

Except a fast normal...

[biz-engineer]

Just look at what they've done with the SDM lenses (16-50 SDM etc), they've not released a new version of the 16-50 SDM with faster and more reliable AF motor. What they've done was to release new and different lenses (18-135 , HD 16-85 etc...) is order to trigger new sales, and more or less abandoned the notoriously unreliable SDM lenses. I think they are doing the same with the new Pentax FF, the current APSC line will be slowly and indirectly abandonned by designing new products that will better suit the trend of the market demand. For instance, it could be that APSC DSLR is less and less in demand, and MILC is on the rise; so while putting development resources on a new MILC (new mount), they might just indirectly drop the APSC line of the past. Sorry guys if you don't like it , but that's what Pentax are doing, they don't continue to support old style products for the sake of users being content of what they already have: the goal of Ricoh imaging is to make money by selling new things, not by maintaining already purchased product lines.

[6BQ5]

Just look at what they've done with the SDM lenses (16-50 SDM etc), they've not released a new version of the 16-50 SDM with faster and more reliable AF motor. What they've done was to release new and different lenses (18-135 , HD 16-85 etc...) is order to trigger new sales, and more or less abandoned the notoriously unreliable SDM lenses. I think they are doing the same with the new Pentax FF, the current APSC line will be slowly and indirectly abandonned by designing new products that will better suit the trend of the market demand. For instance, it could be that APSC DSLR is less and less in demand, and MILC is on the rise; so while putting development resources on a new MILC (new mount), they might just indirectly drop the APSC line of the past. Sorry guys if you don't like it , but that's what Pentax are doing, they don't continue to support old style products for the sake of users being content of what they already have: the goal of Ricoh imaging is to make money by selling new things, not by maintaining already purchased product lines.

You have a good point. People buy lenses once. From that perspective, everyone is a potential buyer until they buy. Then Ricoh will have a little less interest in you. I mean, if you have one DA * 55mm then how likely are you to buy a second copy? Lenses are not consumable items like food, clothes, soap, etc. If you happen to have a sizable collection of lenses with no plans to buy more then Ricoh is definitely not interested in you. They got all the money out of you that they can. Their only hope is to either produce more new lens designs or have you buy more new bodies. The upcoming FF fits perfectly here. It's a new body that will trigger sales of new lenses. FF lenses are also an opening for Ricoh to simplify their lens line up. Imagine instead of having some APS and some FF lenses that don't always work fully on every body they would have all FF lenses that work on both current/existing APS bodies and all upcoming FF bodies.

[biz-engineer]

The upcoming FF fits perfectly here. It's a new body that will trigger sales of new lenses.

Yes, exactly what I wanted to say, but you say it more clearly.

[6BQ5]

Another point I wanted to make is the threshold a new lens must cross for it to be appealing to someone who may have a wide collection of lenses. If you have the three FA Limiteds and Ricoh updates the line with a Rev 2 of each then what would it take for you to buy the revised copy? The FA 77 and 31 are darn near perfect as-is. Most people here on the forum would not upgrade if the Rev 2 lens had a DC motor or WR seals. If the optics in the lenses go from near-perfect to perfect-perfect then I think only a small majority of current owners would upgrade. This Rev 2 lens would be targeted to people who are new to the K-mount ecosystem.

So, if you're stocked up on APS lenses with no intention to upgrade then Ricoh says thank you for your enthusiasm and positive word-of-mouth advertising before they turn away to focus on someone else. I mean, they'll turn away politely because they don't want to be rude or upset you. There's no money left to get from you.

If you're a K-mount APS user and thinking of upgrading then after thanking you for your enthusiasm they'll probably sit down with you and see what it would take for you to upgrade to FF and keep buying more stuff. They'll encourage you.

If you're new to the system then a marketing specialist will take you by the hand and show you whatever product you want to see. You are fresh meat! Question, demos, etc. Go for it!

Finally, if you're a high level pro then you'll get a paid dinner at a nice restaurant where you can negotiate terms and gear.

[Newtophotos]

1: can't answer

2: They will continue with aps-c. Why wouldn't they?

3: No, not anytime soon.

The body of the K-7 through K-3ii (5 models over 6 years?) seems to have changed very little. Do you feel deep down in your heart that the next generation will bring large changes to the body to include wifi, an articulated screen, and a rectilinear design similar to the K-S2? Or do you feel deep down that it'll be another update because they have concentrated all resources on the K-1 and D-FA lens?

[csa]

I bet Pentax are going to sell more Pentax FF than K-3 and K-3II combined, volumes similar to the K-5 (but double price and even more profit margin), so should they still sell the lower volume lower margin APSC DSLR product line or should they sell more quantities of higher margin products?

More customers can afford the "lower volumn, lower margin APSC DSLR", than those that can afford the much higher priced FF. So I seriously doubt that more FF will be sold that the K3-K3II.

[biz-engineer]

More customers can afford the "lower volumn, lower margin APSC DSLR", than those that can afford the much higher priced FF. So I seriously doubt that more FF will be sold that the K3-K3II.

You can be right if you look only at price, but price is not the only element of purchase, a number of customers buy based on value/price. A lot of Pentaxians are in their 40s or 50s and at this age, you start to be more concerned with health than with money. When you have worked 30 year and likely have money aside, you want to indulge yourself and you are not really interested in buying a cheapo camera, you want a nice product. A lot of owners of Harleys are in their 50s. They are some folks out there who purchase 645z. The reason why I believe that the FF might sell in same volume as the K-3 series is because I do believe that the total number of owners of previous camera models is significantly larger than the number of owners who upgraded to a K-3. Basically if you already own a K-5IIs, the benefit of buying a K-3 is very slim. I remember that the adoption of the K-5 was much faster than the K-3. I estimate the K-5 owners to outnumber the K-3 by 5 times. The reason why Ricoh (and Pentax would have done the same) is that they exhausted the APSC upgrade path before relaying it with a full frame.

[csa]

You can be right if you look only at price, but price is not the only element of purchase, a number of customers buy based on value/price.

Value/price is why many are now buying the K3, including myself. Don't disregard that price is not important; many cannot afford very high prices to indulge a hobby.

[biz-engineer]

Value/price is why many are now buying the K3, including myself. Don't disregard that price is not important; many cannot afford very high prices to indulge a hobby.

Maybe, I haven't done any market research, so , I only stated an opinion based on my gut feeling. Since about 15 years, I was upgrading my APSC cameras, and lenses, and it was entertaining to do so, however, I now clearly now what I need and I can buy components of better gear for the same total cost. I can see some people have a lot of different lenses for an APSC camera, for the same total spending, they could have had a full frame body and 3 lenses to cover the same photographic needs; now there's also the pleasure to purchase something new and the please to own lenses etc, but for framing and composing good looking images, it's not mandatory to own 15 different lenses on APSC....

[clackers]

, it's not mandatory to own 15 different lenses on APSC....

Go to your room, young man, and don't come back until you've apologized! Where's the Unlike button on this thing??? 😀

[kenspo]

it's not mandatory to own 15 different lenses on APSC....

Good thing i only have 11 left then.

[biz-engineer]

Originally posted by biz-engineer Quote , it's not mandatory to own 15 different lenses on APSC.... Go to your room, young man, and don't come back until you've apologized! Where's the Unlike button on this thing???

I apologize. Sorry, don't take it wrong; I've also written that "there's also the pleasure to purchase something new and the pleasure to own lenses etc". That's my experience as well, then I sold off what I did not need once I figure it out. Any, I wasn't targeting anyone and I did not expect such as reaction. After having sold half of what I owned , I still have 8 lenses, but I only use 3 to 5 of them. Pentax marketing was good, especially with the limited that are nicely built and well finished jewels and fed my LBA. I calculated how much I spent on APSC and figured out I could have had a D810 and 3 lenses for the same price.

[clackers]

Any, I wasn't targeting anyone and I did not expect such as reaction.

I was joking, BE.

I don't agree with all your posts, but definitely enjoy/get informed by them, and always want to read more. :-)

[pacu]

I calculated how much I spent on APSC and figured out I could have had a D810 and 3 lenses for the same price.

Or you could have spent far less and bought only a sony rx-100 which is more than most people need.