[jswilson64]

As others have said, how much I'd be willing to pay comes down to features.

The primary thing I shoot with my DSLR is wildlife. So I'm comparing features to other "wildlife" APS-C cameras, like the D500 and 7DmkII.
If Pentax wants D500 money (~$1500 MSRP) it'd better deliver at least D500 performance: 10fps minimum, with a buffer capable of holding at least 3 seconds of JPEG+RAW (more is better) and quick buffer clearing. I have my doubts as to whether Pentax can meet those marks - the K3ii came out after the 7DmkII but the Pentax burst performance doesn't quite get there.

[noelpolar]

As others have said, how much I'd be willing to pay comes down to features.

The primary thing I shoot with my DSLR is wildlife. So I'm comparing features to other "wildlife" APS-C cameras, like the D500 and 7DmkII.
If Pentax wants D500 money (~$1500 MSRP) it'd better deliver at least D500 performance: 10fps minimum, with a buffer capable of holding at least 3 seconds of JPEG+RAW (more is better) and quick buffer clearing. I have my doubts as to whether Pentax can meet those marks - the K3ii came out after the 7DmkII but the Pentax burst performance doesn't quite get there.

If looking for an action camera and not locked into a lens..... I'd now probally buy a non pentax solution..... whilst still, enoying my other pentax stuff. I tend to have one camera always dedicated to my DFA 150-450..... so no real reason for that setup to be pentax.... and the 150-450 is a bit exe here for what it is. If pentax stuff keeps escalating in price I may just sit on what I have and maybe in a few years scratch an itch elsewhere.

[Fontan]

Ok, so 1.5 x faster AF and 100g lighter than K-III, 10 FPS, 24 mps, 2 SD slots, an articulated screen (ok - just joking), brighter VF that can blinds you - will anyone pay $2000? Really? I would have a hard time swallowing that.

[clackers]

Ok, so 1.5 x faster AF and 100g lighter than K-III, 10 FPS, 24 mps, 2 SD slots, an articulated screen (ok - just joking), brighter VF that can blinds you - will anyone pay $2000? Really? I would have a hard time swallowing that.

Yep, this would've been the heart of the matter.

A $1200 product would be just a replacement of the out of production K-3, an incremental improvement.

A significant features and performance upgrade will push it into K-1 pricing territory, at least at launch.

Which way do we all think the marketing analysis at Tokyo went?

[howieb101]

Well for me it has to be compelling feature wise or I can just continue with what I've got.

That means other than the improved viewfinder it needs more AF points and greater af point coverage. Decent buffer and battery life.

Really the most important compelling upgrades for me are said AF improvements along with better AF-C tracking.

Other than ok AF and poor video the current camera's are still good enough.

[Fontan]

Well for me it has to be compelling feature wise or I can just continue with what I've got.

That means other than the improved viewfinder it needs more AF points and greater af point coverage. Decent buffer and battery life.

Really the most important compelling upgrades for me are said AF improvements along with better AF-C tracking.

Other than ok AF and poor video the current camera's are still good enough.

Well - newly released DF-A 85/1.4 with improved SDM is coincidentally about $1,900. Would anyone here rather pluck down 2K for that than K-new? Obviously those who didn’t buy K-1 wouldn’t consider buying this lens though. Just another cool thing a Pentaxian can buy with two grand.

[Serkevan]

Yep, this would've been the heart of the matter.

A $1200 product would be just a replacement of the out of production K-3, an incremental improvement.

A significant features and performance upgrade will push it into K-1 pricing territory, at least at launch.

Which way do we all think the marketing analysis at Tokyo went?

Problem being that everyone else is doing the same at much lower prices. Who is asking 2000 USD for an APS-C body today?

[clackers]

Problem being that everyone else is doing the same at much lower prices. Who is asking 2000 USD for an APS-C body today?

Well, for starters, the K-1 street price is more like $1800, that's the full frame alternative for someone right now who thinks they've outgrown their K-5 or K-3 or whatever and are looking to 'upgrade'.

As for APS-C, the Fuji XT4 is $1700, the D500 (still top of the line at Nikon), was $2000 at launch. And someone choosing the Sony A6600 is deliberately ignoring the full frame A7 II at much the same price.

So there's no question that companies have and still ask big prices for APS-C flagships that puts them into full frame pricing, IMHO it's what has Ricoh's research advised with the products it and the rivals currently have, should be the feature set and accompanying pricetag?

[Serkevan]

Well, for starters, the K-1 street price is more like $1800, that's the full frame alternative for someone right now who thinks they've outgrown their K-5 or K-3 or whatever and are looking to 'upgrade'.

As for APS-C, the Fuji XT4 is $1700, the D500 (still top of the line at Nikon), was $2000 at launch. And someone choosing the Sony A6600 is deliberately ignoring the full frame A7 II at much the same price.

So there's no question that companies have and still ask big prices for APS-C flagships that puts them into full frame pricing, IMHO it's what has Ricoh's research advised with the products it and the rivals currently have, should be the feature set and accompanying pricetag?

It's important to note that, notwithstanding Sony's old models being kept in the lineup at discount prices (their only true 'entry level' camera is that A7c abomination of a body), low-price-comparable-to-APS-C is a recent trend that comes from Canikony moving the market as much as possible into FF and doing the product differentiation there, instead of across formats. It's also been a trend of generally lowering prices in FF - the RP and Z5 are ridiculously cheap. The R6 isn't -that- expensive considering typical Canon pricing, the R5 has almost the same MRSP as the last two or three 5D iterations.


Fuji might be getting away with their X-T4 at that price because there's no other way to use their lenses and they have normalized having expensive flagships from the beginning, creeping up somewhat slowly from the $1300 of their X-T1 in 2014. (1300, 1500, 1500, 1700). Pentax is - presumably - asking its customers to go (1300, 1300, 2000).


To be clear, I'd personally (and I'm no financier) place the camera at about 1600 USD. I'm not saying it has to be the same price as the K-3, far from it, but there's quite a bit of wiggle room between the K-3 and the D500...

[Rondec]

It's important to note that, notwithstanding Sony's old models being kept in the lineup at discount prices (their only true 'entry level' camera is that A7c abomination of a body), low-price-comparable-to-APS-C is a recent trend that comes from Canikony moving the market as much as possible into FF and doing the product differentiation there, instead of across formats. It's also been a trend of generally lowering prices in FF - the RP and Z5 are ridiculously cheap. The R6 isn't -that- expensive considering typical Canon pricing, the R5 has almost the same MRSP as the last two or three 5D iterations.


Fuji might be getting away with their X-T4 at that price because there's no other way to use their lenses and they have normalized having expensive flagships from the beginning, creeping up somewhat slowly from the $1300 of their X-T1 in 2014. (1300, 1500, 1500, 1700). Pentax is - presumably - asking its customers to go (1300, 1300, 2000).


To be clear, I'd personally (and I'm no financier) place the camera at about 1600 USD. I'm not saying it has to be the same price as the K-3, far from it, but there's quite a bit of wiggle room between the K-3 and the D500...

I think a couple of things are clear. First of all, small improvements in auto focus, video, and other specs often bump the price of a camera quite a bit. You can get a KP for 800 dollars. To get D500 level specs with a better viewfinder (which is hopefully what we are looking at) you have to go above 1500 dollars. The size of the sensor is really immaterial. The Olympus OMD e1x is really expensive, even though the sensor is only micro four thirds, purely for this reason.

The second thing is that release price and street price are two different things. It is clear that Ricoh will release the camera at a high price, but will drop it that price over time to the point that it sells at the rate they want. I wouldn't be surprised if the release price is in the 1800 dollar range, but the street price after six months is 1400 or 1500.

A lot of this is speculation though. If this is just a KP with an extra card slot and a few more auto focus points, then 1000 is probably all they can get for it.

[Serkevan]

I think a couple of things are clear. First of all, small improvements in auto focus, video, and other specs often bump the price of a camera quite a bit. You can get a KP for 800 dollars. To get D500 level specs with a better viewfinder (which is hopefully what we are looking at) you have to go above 1500 dollars. The size of the sensor is really immaterial. The Olympus OMD e1x is really expensive, even though the sensor is only micro four thirds, purely for this reason.

The second thing is that release price and street price are two different things. It is clear that Ricoh will release the camera at a high price, but will drop it that price over time to the point that it sells at the rate they want. I wouldn't be surprised if the release price is in the 1800 dollar range, but the street price after six months is 1400 or 1500.

A lot of this is speculation though. If this is just a KP with an extra card slot and a few more auto focus points, then 1000 is probably all they can get for it.

Yeah, this is just a lot of "what if" wrapped in speculation, tied up with a lot of unknowns. But hey, we need to waste time while we wait for the actual specs, right?

[Rondec]

Yeah, this is just a lot of "what if" wrapped in speculation, tied up with a lot of unknowns. But hey, we need to waste time while we wait for the actual specs, right?

I think it is clear that this camera will have a new processing engine at a minimum which should mean better video, frame rates, and buffer compared to previous PRIME based cameras. We know it has a second card slot and a better viewfinder.

I think the big questions have to do with performance of auto focus -- both in live view and viewfinder and what other goodies Pentax throws in. Will SR be better? How about next generation pixel shift? GPS/Astro tracer? How are high and low iso performance? The list goes on, but I think all of those things will end up deciding if people choose to purchase this camera, even if it ends up being pretty pricey.

[clackers]

It's also been a trend of generally lowering prices in FF - the RP and Z5 are ridiculously cheap. The R6 isn't -that- expensive considering typical Canon pricing, the R5 has almost the same MRSP as the last two or three 5D iterations.

Yeah, this is a forced trend ... what we're witnessing is a WWE cage match.

Sony was the only company making FF mirrorless, and enjoyed the profits to match. Now the profits have tumbled for them - and all FF mirrorless makers - as they battle with Canon, Nikon, Panasonic and Sigma. It's a bloodbath where all seem to have been pushed further into financial losses, repeating the Canon/Nikon mistake of 2012-18 - pursuing marketshare between themselves with a high volume, low margin strategy.

It's worthwhile noting that the new products have failed to expand the market, Canon's chairman has pointed out that regrettably, going mirrorless did not arrest the slide in his company's fortunes and each MILC sale happening was at the expense of an existing DSLR one.

So, it'd be lovely from our point of view - Pentaxforum members - if the K-new was 'attractively priced' to get it into as many hands as possible, but that's the Canon/Nikon error again. It will need to have a high markup, IMHO, and Tanaka in his tweets hinted it would have flagship pricing.

How much? Close to the KP, close to the K-1?

One thing we can be sure is that they will have done extensive modelling. They'll need to have locked up an ROI case with the photocopy executives who are their masters, and the pandemic that will keep going right through most of next year until vaccines are deployed makes this harder, not easier!

Another thing that can be observed is that now Pentax and Fuji are the only companies still taking APS-C seriously. That's a differentiator that can be as useful in the short term as Pentax being the only company taking DSLRs seriously. Not all customers want to go full frame.

[Serkevan]

Yeah, this is a forced trend ... what we're witnessing is a WWE cage match.

Sony was the only company making FF mirrorless, and enjoyed the profits to match. Now the profits have tumbled for them - and all FF mirrorless makers - as they battle with Canon, Nikon, Panasonic and Sigma. It's a bloodbath where all seem to have been pushed further into financial losses, repeating the Canon/Nikon mistake of 2012-18 - pursuing marketshare between themselves with a high volume, low margin strategy.

It's worthwhile noting that they are not expanding the market, Canon's chairman has pointed out that regrettably, going mirrorless did not arrest the slide in his company's fortunes, each MILC sale happening was at the expense of an existing DSLR one.

So, it'd be lovely from our point of view - Pentaxforum members - if the K-new was 'attractively priced' to get it into as many hands as possible, but that's the Canon/Nikon error again. It will need to have a high markup, IMHO, and Tanaka in his tweets hinted it would have flagship pricing.

How much? Close to the KP, close to the K-1?

One thing we can be sure is that they will have done extensive modelling. They'll need to have locked up an ROI case with the photocopy executives who are their masters, and the pandemic that will keep going right through most of next year until vaccines are deployed makes this harder, not easier!

One thing that can be observed is that now Pentax and Fuji are the only companies still taking APS-C seriously. That's a differentiator that can be as useful in the short term as Pentax being the only company taking DSLRs seriously. Not all customers want to go full frame.

Oh, I'm certain that they have done their research - probably influenced mainly by the market in Japan which is different from elsewhere, as well. My main point is that "flagship pricing" for Pentax APS-C cameras was K-3 pricing - I'm not saying the K-New won't be worth more, I'm saying customers will groan at the sudden increase in price. But hey, for me it's all good if the K-New is priced to recoup R&D fully... as the counterpoint is that getting cash now will subsidize the next FF models a bit

Honestly, I think that this is all more or less irrelevant because the street price will drop relatively quickly (The KP got about a 35% cut in less than two years, give or take?), and in any case I think they will make more money by selling 16-50/2.8 PLMs at a thousand than they will make selling K-News .

[clackers]

I'm saying customers will groan at the sudden increase in price.

Yes, I agree, but the economics have changed. You can sell lots of cameras but go broke as a company - that's what happened to Olympus, and is happening to Nikon.

Sony customers of course have the right to say, where are the a3000 and a5000 budget APS-C lines, why are we forced to buy the A6000 flagships? The premium Nikon D500 has no successor, the Canon 7D Mk II flagship has no successor, full frame DSLR or mirrorless is the only upgrade to those bodies.

The answer IMHO is that company survival in this contracting market nightmare actually requires making customers groan, usually by price increases and culling product lines (for Ricoh, the Star lenses are no bargain, they're not value propositions, and the Q was cut, perhaps the wonderful 645 faces that too, we've no idea of its sales).