Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-18-2017, 12:28 AM   #46
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,178
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
You're missing something: the K-1 already was "at the price of that sort of camera"; it's launch price being slightly lower.
Don"t be upset Kunzite, there is always a way to reduce the cost of a camera, what you get then is more like a Canon camera. The K1 is positioned in best value for the money kind of product, that doesn't mean cheapest. I guess the OP is talking about reaching the price of a apsc camera with a full frame sensor in int, for me that's classifies as low end full frame. Anyway, IMO, the Pentax user base got used to moderate prices since Pentax stayed a long time with apsc bodies and aspc specific lenses. A number of Pentaxians who wanted full frame when pentax did not offer one moved to Canon or Nikon to spend big money, the ones who stayed with Pentax had moderate camera budgets, and now are used to Pentax products being priced like apsc. That is a bit of a problem when apsc folks are asking for full frame priced like apsc. All that mean is that they have the budget for apsc only.

11-18-2017, 03:35 AM   #47
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 15,132
Upset? Where did that come from? You're one of those looking to "make" a cheaper camera, not me. FTR, I already have the K-1.

I'm just realistic: neither Canon nor Nikon are introducing FF cameras at lower prices than the K-1, despite their volume advantage. Should we expect Pentax to do it, then? We're talking about halving the price here, and I'm afraid the only method of doing it was nicely described by DPReview:
CP+ 2016: Things we found that had been cut in half: Digital Photography Review
11-18-2017, 03:53 AM   #48
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,606
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Upset? Where did that come from? You're one of those looking to "make" a cheaper camera, not me. FTR, I already have the K-1.

I'm just realistic: neither Canon nor Nikon are introducing FF cameras at lower prices than the K-1, despite their volume advantage. Should we expect Pentax to do it, then? We're talking about halving the price here, and I'm afraid the only method of doing it was nicely described by DPReview:
CP+ 2016: Things we found that had been cut in half: Digital Photography Review
I think biz-engineer's point is that if you want to make the K-1 "cheaper" then you have to make real sacrifices which probably aren't worth it to most users. People have this weird idea that you just leave off pixel shift or video or decrease the frame rate slightly and suddenly "poof" you have a camera that is 500 dollars cheaper. But the reality is that the only way to make a full frame camera cheaper are to cut corners on the build and decrease real specifications like buffer size.

It could be done, but I don't think it would be worth it.

The cheapest full frame camera out there is (I think) the original A7 which can be had for 998 on Amazon right now. But truthfully, I doubt Sony sells very many of them, even though they're cheap. People who are willing to spend a thousand dollars on a camera are willing to spend a little more to get a camera that isn't rock bottom in terms of build and specifications.
11-18-2017, 03:59 AM   #49
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,178
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
It could be done, but I don't think it would be worth it.
Well, for the end user, that's the total cost of the system that matters including lenses. Focusing on low cost of only one component of the camera system is the wrong approach because the overall performance of the camera system is limited by the least performing element. So while it makes sense to have apsc bodies cheaper and also with cheaper lenses, it makes not sense to save a few hundred bugs on a camera body and use expensive high quality full frame lenses on it. To me it's interested to see folk focusing only on a camera body or only one lens, while the idea of interchangeable lens camera is to have the flexibility to adapt various lenses to camera bodies.

Finally , the Pentax lineup is one of the most value added partition because, as a user, depending on your budget and size allowance, you can select either apsc, or full frame or medium format each system offering a significant additional quality for the spending. When looking at Canikon, from a 6D to a 5DIII, you have to spend something like 2K to get a tiny benefit.


Last edited by biz-engineer; 11-18-2017 at 04:06 AM.
11-18-2017, 04:52 AM   #50
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 15,132
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I think biz-engineer's point is that if you want to make the K-1 "cheaper" then you have to make real sacrifices which probably aren't worth it to most users.
Sure, except the reference price is higher instead of lower.
That might be accurate. Get the K-1, take out everything that distinguish it from the competition, match it with an incomplete lens line - what could possibly go wrong?
11-18-2017, 05:18 AM   #51
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,183
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
More than anything else, Pentax has telegraphed that full frame is not going to be a cheap option for Pentaxians. For the time being, they are only releasing expensive lenses for it and there is not particular point to releasing a 1000 dollar full frame camera if all of your lenses are sold for more than that.
If it makes the total cost of investing in a Pentax FF system cheaper than the opposition, then I'd have thought that would be a significant point. I expect the K-1 (perhaps with a couple of small enhancements, to justify rebadging it as the K-1ii) to fall in price significantly when its replacement as K-mount range-topper is announced. A consequence, I imagine, will be a re-adjustment of the APS-C range, I suggest with the Kp moving down-range and a new higher-spec replacement to justify staying with APS-C at around the same price as the discounted K-1(ii)
11-18-2017, 06:17 AM   #52
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,606
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Sure, except the reference price is higher instead of lower.
That might be accurate. Get the K-1, take out everything that distinguish it from the competition, match it with an incomplete lens line - what could possibly go wrong?
I had assumed that the target price for this thread was something in the 1100 dollar range. Clearly that is achievable, but it would be a stripped bare camera and as you say, it would be odd to pair such a camera with Pentax's current lens line up.

11-18-2017, 07:06 AM   #53
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by timw4mail Quote
I wouldn't want to live in the 70s either...but I like the controls of those cameras more than the more screen-focused interfaces of later cameras.




Manually setting most things on the K-1 requires more effort than with dedicated knobs. I like the K-1, but I just find the idea of a Digital K1000, or MX fascinating.

It probably would not reduce cost, though.
You can set the knobs to what you want. The wasted "desktop" for the film advance lever and film rewind crank makes the top of SlRs extremely cluttered for not much purpose. I do like the size though. But that's not going to happen with all the electronic components.
11-18-2017, 08:34 AM   #54
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 12,273
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
Just keep the K-1 in the lineup and discount it to the mid $1000's alongside whatever might come next.

X2. This would be the simplest and in my opinion best way to do things, rather than bring out a K-1 stripper. The K-1 has lots of appeal, due to all it's features but technology moves on and I'm sure the replacement for the K1 will be be a new and improved model...as 1960's advertising was wont to say.

But there will still be a market for a K1. I've looked at the 'lesser' full frame models from both Nikon and Canon...D610, 6D....and I've not been impressed with the build quality, essentially the 'feel' in my hands. Undoubtedly they are very good cameras...but I think I would rather have an older, well built, well featured full frame camera body, than a basic full frame that doen't seem as robust as the more expensive full framers in the respective lines. Anyways, my opinion, I could be wrong and not reflective of the market.
11-18-2017, 09:18 AM - 2 Likes   #55
Pentaxian
Fenwoodian's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,872
.

Since going all in on digital in around 2000 I have not had a camera (or an auto-focus lens) that lasted more than about 5 or 6 years. That's why I only use Zeiss and Voigtlander manual focus lenses now - even with rough treatment they last generations.

To compliment my nearly indestructable MF lenses, I'd actually be willing to pay MORE for a stripped down full frame camera that was ultra simple and reliable.

I've got a 60-year old Minolta Autocord TLR camera that still shoots like it did when new. Give me a simple and bulletproof digital camera that will also work in 60 years.

My K1's are only a couple of years old and are already being to have little glitches show up. No way they'll make it to their 10-year anniversary.

Last edited by Fenwoodian; 11-18-2017 at 09:40 AM.
11-18-2017, 10:02 AM   #56
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 2,106
Dropping the shutter, mirror, penta prism and shake reduction and use all electronic gadgets instead might give room for a price reduction. And a truly brick-like robustness, nothing that moves inside.
11-18-2017, 10:09 AM   #57
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by Fenwoodian Quote
.

Since going all in on digital in around 2000 I have not had a camera (or an auto-focus lens) that lasted more than about 5 or 6 years. That's why I only use Zeiss and Voigtlander manual focus lenses now - even with rough treatment they last generations.

To compliment my nearly indestructable MF lenses, I'd actually be willing to pay MORE for a stripped down full frame camera that was ultra simple and reliable.

I've got a 60-year old Minolta Autocord TLR camera that still shoots like it did when new. Give me a simple and bulletproof digital camera that will also work in 60 years.

My K1's are only a couple of years old and are already being to have little glitches show up. No way they'll make it to their 10-year anniversary.
Buying a digital camera body isn't like buying a film camera. It's more like buying a 5 year supply of film with what you need to expose it. In the old film days I often spent $200 on film and processing on one 10 day vacation.

And I have 15-20 year old lenses that work just fine.
11-18-2017, 10:19 AM   #58
Pentaxian
timw4mail's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Driving a Mirage
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,670
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Buying a digital camera body isn't like buying a film camera. It's more like buying a 5 year supply of film with what you need to expose it. In the old film days I often spent $200 on film and processing on one 10 day vacation.

And I have 15-20 year old lenses that work just fine.
I'd argue that's more because everything is disposable these days, not because it's a property of digital.
11-18-2017, 10:25 AM   #59
Pentaxian
ZombieArmy's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,209
I say make a more expensive K-1 and dump some RND into a better autofocus and movie mode so it can trickle down to the APSC cameras, the only cameras I could really give a damn about at the moment.

At some point Pentax should improve their weaknesses.
11-18-2017, 11:11 AM   #60
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 15,132
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I had assumed that the target price for this thread was something in the 1100 dollar range. Clearly that is achievable, but it would be a stripped bare camera and as you say, it would be odd to pair such a camera with Pentax's current lens line up.
Yes, but that's the OP's - not biz-engineer's. And I would not say it's "clearly achievable", you cannot go too far in reducing the production costs for the risk of making a product unsaleable.

The only FF camera which managed to reach this price is, AFAIK, the Sony A7 - thanks to some extreme price reduction (wobbly mount, anyone?) and Sony's strategy to flood the market with multiple models. Its replacement has a street price of $1600, 3 years after its launch.

The problem is, people are looking at others' old, discounted, replaced cameras and then ask Pentax to match prices with a brand new model. Launch price vs. EOL price.
Yet if Pentax would somehow do it, what's stopping those people from looking at even cheaper cameras - gray imports, second hand, suspicious e-bay entries - and claim the Pentax is not "cheap enough"? There will always be a cheaper camera.
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!
af, aps-c, body, camera, cameras, dslr, features, flickr, focus, fps, frame, glass, head, k-1, k1, market, models, norm, pentax, photography, quality, ricoh, sensor, system, version
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K1 Alternative in a Lighter, slightly Reduced Spec Body LoneWolf Pentax Full Frame 32 05-24-2016 06:15 AM
If you were to do it all over again....what spec for post processing PC/MAC? raider Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 29 04-14-2016 09:18 AM
Full K-1 Spec list JPT Pentax News and Rumors 770 03-06-2016 03:03 AM
Spec comparison with Canon and Nikon rlatjsrud Pentax Full Frame 8 02-19-2016 10:57 AM
whats that spec of light? Gooshin Pentax DSLR Discussion 35 06-11-2008 05:40 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:28 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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