|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
09-04-2016, 09:55 AM
|
| |
Would you go the hybrid route and still want OVF, you can use a semi translucent mirror, like Sony did and if contrast as well as on sensor PDAF is great, you can remove the dedicated AF sensor for OVF... That would help compensate the size/cost of hybrid. But sure that overall you'd get darket viewfinder in OVF mode.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
09-04-2016, 09:16 AM
|
| |
That good question. For me personally: FPS from 8.3 doesn't matter and that not my stuff really. 4K video, again not my stuff. I quite understand some would be interrested and I think we need at least the 4K tag even if not perfect so that the camera doesn't get trolled by reviewers.
But what would make me think seriouly:
- A real progress on AF This is quite easy: 33 AF point of K1 or greater and the optical system introduced for K1 that enlarge the coverage area. We would be near D500 coverage. With update algoritms and maybe a bit more AF point, Ricoh could also provide comparable performance AF to D500.
- A real progress on high iso, Basically what was started with K1 and K70 maybe futher improved and combined with BSI or something. So that in practice we gain at least 1EV.
Make both together, and really I'll take one once the price settled a bit after the early adopters wave.
What will make it buy as soon as I can get the money would smaller/lighter with EVF. You can make it FF even if you want, no issue I'll grab the improved high iso as I'll be able to select in the viewfinder what area I want to see anyway for APSC lenses; Make it quite smaller, 500g instead of 800g and ensure the LV AF is decent, as this will be the only one available. You'd need at least the performance we have on OMD10, or something so that quite reliable. This in K-mount, of course. Instant buy for me.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
09-03-2016, 01:42 AM
|
| |
I agree.
For me, option 1 is a dangerous, in particular if there no entry level FF to replace the APSC flagship. K70 only a real upgrade to K5 and K50/K30 and K3-II still a worthy upgrade to K70 beside being 3 years old.
No continuing the APSC line will deny an upgrade path to most people until there an FF body at 1000$/€ or less. What that mean is many people that can't justify (or don't want) an FF for 1800€/$ will buy nothing.
If we continue the logic, most there are 100% sure there will be no downsized version of K1 and that we will not get a K1 until 3 more years. Basically nobody targeting highend will buy another camera before 3 years: the one that have K3 or K3-II already and stay in APSC or can't spend to much, have 0 options and the one that can, already did and will not buy a camera that not significant improvement over K1. If D810 vs D800 is any clue, that might be difficult so a good share may keep their K1 for 5-6 years. it will be more that the K1 entry level will be now afordable in 3 years (some think this isn't even going to happen: K1 will keep high price for VERY LONG time !).
People could buy lenses but for now we get only dedicated or extremely expensive FF lenses that APSC users are not very interrested in.
The company need money. They need their clients to spend money.
This could be huge gain in market share but again this is mostly an APSC affair. As again most of the sales are APSC. This require a presence is most brick and motar shops, lot of marketing and likely to fix a few things (better AF, better video) before it can really happen. I don't see that and that would take years anyway and the market shring continuously. If market share of Pentax twice in 3 year, that may mean they may sell only 20-30% more in the end. And they'll need the camera bodies to sell.
While likely a good seller, we can't hope of K70 to do that all by itself. In particular when the review show that while the high iso stuff put Pentax APSC body back to other APSC performers (A6300, D500, D7200) and is good, the whole video/in sensor pdaf sensor stuff is barely working. 1 single lens, AF in Live view still quite slow... Nothing to make non Pentaxian people dream if they ever going to read a review of it.
So for me to get some cash flow Pentax need either a cheap FF or a new APSC flagship. The target price would be similar, around 1000$/€ with the difference that the APSC body will be expected to be much more advanced for everything except sensor size and will go down in price faster and that a cheapo FF would be quite basic and keep its price for a long time.
Many here think a cheap FF would hurt K1 sales more and for this to be significant, I guess much more in their mind than it would raise sales from people not with Pentax yet wanting a cheap FF (increase market share) or from APSC user that find K1 too expensive. I do not agree, but if we follow this logic that cheapo FF is not acceptable in the short term, the only remaining solution is new APSC flagship. A very capable one. That people will want to updgrade too.... Maybe even that some K1 users will want to buy for some uses.
If I was to dream a bit, it'll need some 4K video, SR in video, improved LV AF toward K70 to match at least 70D there, the same improved high iso as K70 or a bit more refined. And for me there could be 2 options here:
- the classical DSLR path so with OVF and then introduce a new dedicated PDAF with more AF point (say around 50), newly tweaked algorithms and K1 coverage to have almost the same AF coverage in APSC as D500. That R&D saved for K1 successor !
- the EVF/mirrorless path that really NEED good LV AF and a decent EVF bundled but that will allows for a smaller/ligher body.
Some surprise would be quite nice. I don't know... Pixel shift that work handled and moving subjects thanks to very advanced algorithms, the 3thrd wheel of K1, SR that so efficiant that you can shoot handled shoot of 1s, A bokeh enhancement that would work directly on JPEG...
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
09-01-2016, 10:39 PM
|
| |
The APSC line overall has many lenses. We may not need neither dedicated APSC teles. After all DA*200, DA*300 seems to be FF design and nobody complained back in time. What would be nice to me overs the next years:
- DA16-50, DA50-135 f/2.8 lens to be upgraded with fast focussing and for the 16-50 also better optics if possible. And of course reliability.
- The successor of 12-24, promized for years to actually come with DC and WR.
- Maybe a new version DA15 with less field curvature.
If the first point hasn't been done in the 5 next years, then we will be able to say that Pentax don't focus on APSC anymore.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-31-2016, 11:14 AM
|
| |
If it is up, and reflected into final price, that a huge issue: Pentax is already not so well placed compared to the competition in France. Increasing prices would make the whole line up ininteresting: K1 same price as D810, K70 as expensive as D7200, K3-II prices at D610/A7 levels.
If you can get for the same price a D7200 with pro f/2.8 Nikon lens as K70 + 16-85, where the point?
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-28-2016, 01:20 PM
|
| |
For me, this is above 200-300g. FA31, F135 and 55-300 are the heaviest I have ;)
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-28-2016, 02:27 AM
|
| |
Why didn't they put the macro on that roadmap? DFA100WR and DFA50?
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-27-2016, 11:48 PM
|
| |
The 55-300 is a consumer tele with 5.5 zoom ratio. It quite sharp at 190, rougly until it keep f/4.5. At 300mm, closed down it is acceptable. But you have to factor the price, the size and finish. i don't think there a lens here that much better for the compromize. If you want the lens at 300mm that's DA*300 or DFA150-450.
The problem is 60-250 is much more expensive an heavier/bigger. Only APSC if you don't mod it and it is 250mm only at inifite making it in many occasion no better for reach than a 70-200. A DFA60-250 would be bigger to keep the quality on the border but as I understand, the latest patents are for a 100-300 f/4. Make sense it would be more different than the DFA70-200.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-24-2016, 11:32 PM
|
| |
Sure but Canon and Nikon both make a profit. Canon increase market share too. But Nikon profit is quite reasonable (arround 8%) even if market share didn't increase.. I suppose Pentax make a profit too...
Sony revenue is complex to analyse but I would be surprise if their FE and F line was at a loss, honestly. It look like it sell very well and the price for A7 and associated lenses let huge margins for profit.
So my question remain. Where are the many that are supposed to bleed money ? I often read something among theses lines but the "many" are not that often named... I would agree for Samsung NX line, but they never did well in photography anyway...
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-24-2016, 12:05 PM
|
| |
But who are the "many" ? Pentax lost lot of market share over the years but is profitable. And we say they do well.
Then Canon that increased market share and quite profitable too so they must do well too? Nikon has reduced their volume like most, but they are quite profitable for their imaging business. So they do well too. To me Sony always had financial issues but their camera product and sensor look to be rock solid and to gain market share. So I'd say they do well too.
And we already covered most key players...
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-23-2016, 11:10 PM
|
| |
I know and personnally I hate that complexity of EXR and its lack of compatibility with many raw editing software. It was not a success, and not used anymore... When I see the X10 shots from my father full screen, I most often see quite a difference in quality as opposed to his old K30 back in time or the K3. The X10 can work well for some uses, but I'd be more interrested then in an LX100 or an OEM 10 that are no bigger but offer more possibilities.
But everybody is different and has his own preferences ;)
Regards! :)
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-23-2016, 11:04 PM
|
| |
Comparing Q7, K30 and K1, really K30 and K1 are VERY similar and Q7 much different. Still the owner as no issue using his Q7 often.
If the quality or feeling or whatever was an issue with the Q7, he would only use his K30.
Same for Rupert thant use the X10/X20 90% of the time on his trip and the K1 10%. ;)
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-23-2016, 12:35 PM
|
| |
My father as an X10 ;) Very nice feeling but in a sense the picture quality doesn't live to the standard of this feeling. The lens is great, but the sensor is soso.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-23-2016, 11:45 AM
|
| |
It seems everybody working on 1" sensors now and the others have their solution in m4/3 and APSC.. With the smallest sensor with interchangeable lenses is a quite difficult position I think. Even more so when many compact camera will perform better, at least in theory.
I honestly think there more potential on a APSC or FF mirrorless keeping K-mount than on Q sized system... A serious attempt in 1" could work because you'd be on equal ground with many systems and could think very small... But if you don't develop a real range of lenses around it, then it just die.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-23-2016, 11:39 AM
|
| |
Well posts like your or current mine participate to that too ;)
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-22-2016, 12:10 PM
|
| |
My only issue with that is:
- no much cashflow in 2017 from the FF
- As typically II version in Pentax land are subtle change over the same basis, the price between the I and II can't be too different otherwise it make the II extremely ininterresting.
Funilly everybody assume a K1-II like K3-II or K5-II. Because we have seen that in the past. Like we have seen K30; K50, K70 released between flagship model... But then suddenly this whole idea is wrong. It will not happen. Then there no reason to think there would be a K1-II neither or that it will follow the same release cycle of APSC bodies. (II version after around 2 years, next real one after 3 years).
But everybody has it view on that; so the only way to know is to wait.
50MP FF cropped to APSC mean => 21.5MP.
I would love that !
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-21-2016, 11:20 PM
|
| |
They still share the same DNA. 645Z is a K3 with bigger sensor. Same processor engine, same AF... And now the same AF sensor is in K3, K3-II, 645Z and K1 just that there a few AF point that were enabled only on the K1.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-21-2016, 11:17 PM
|
| |
At some point there was K50, KS1, KS2, K3, K3-II, all current. While K3-II obviously the successor of K3, it is not clear KS2 is K50 replacement (that is the K70), and KS1 doesn't match neither K50, being the most different camera. There was really 4 model line at the same time. As K1 was not that popular, I guess they think K50 can play the role of KS1 just fine now and play entry level.
Still I think there some confusion from existing stock because we the models we have now, the most logical would be:
K50: entry: no articulated screen, K5 like technology
K70: as much K50 and KS2 replacement, still mostly K5 technology but with hybrid sensor and articulated screen.
K3-II: evolution of K3, flagship.
And then you can add model still available: K3 and KS2, I suppose they'll not be available that much longer.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-21-2016, 12:17 AM
|
| |
You assume having more models is costly but all manufacturers shown us it is not the case. Pentax produced K5-II and K5-IIs, we have KS1 and KS2 on top of the K70 line an K3-II line meaning there 4 current APSC DSLR model, not 3. Even manufacturers like Leica or Hasselblad have many models. If Pentax see a market for it, they'll make another FF. And taking a K1, removing the articulated screen (or putting the one of KS2), removing the 3third wheel and puting a cheapo 24MP sensor doesnt need much R&D... The AF would not change, neither metering or the OVF. For the processor, video etc, it will be up to the transtard to the next APSC flagship that wlll have required R&D. No more, no less. Most of the effort would be spend changing the casing. If by giving such kind of model they can increase revenue and benefit, they'll do it.
Not now, 2017 sound good maybe 1 year from now so it sell well for Christmass.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-21-2016, 12:10 AM
|
| |
Ok for the first one, that's a possibility. The second one is playing with words. For me a cheap Pentax FF will come, not just the K1 going down in price. You could call it a cheaper version of K-1 or not it will still be a cheaper FF. Anyway, the whole Pentax line from KS1 to 645Z share a good part of the technology.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-20-2016, 11:01 AM
|
| |
I see several reason for that:
- Pentax brand disapear
- A new very different product make the DSLR irelevant before it happen...
You choice. Beside, can we quote you once it there?
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-20-2016, 07:40 AM
|
| |
Like the guys that make the camera and lenses are the same... Like a cheaper version would cost that much R&D... Like we don't have already lenses in the roadmap... Like there only you in that world and as long as you got the camera you wanted there no reason to make a product that could satisfy other people needs.
There will be cheaper version of K-1, like it or not, question is only when.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-20-2016, 04:49 AM
|
| |
If past record any indication... A new APSC flagship between now and mid 2017. A K1-II in 2018 and a real replacement in 2019-2020... And of course the cheap entry level too, most likely 2017 as K1 would start to not sell that much anymore and K1-II still not available to bump the sale. But it could be 2018 if they are late or whatever else.
In the end the discussion is then what? Over +/- 6 month delay? Then if that we are more in agreement than anything else really.
But really if the entry level appear to late, the K1 will act as entry level at $1000-1200 and it is not the best choice for Pentax as this would REALLY hurt any possibility to sell a K1-II.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-20-2016, 04:13 AM
|
| |
What count is what you can buy and what they can sell. If the product is old and R&D cost already recoup it is even better. But if Ricoh plan for K1 to be sold at $1000-1200 after some time (and that it will happen sonner than latter) the problem will be how to justify a K1-II for $1800-2000 ? You can have a 24MP, without articulated screen, simpler 27 point AF, 2 wheels instead of 3 etc at $1000-1200 and a 36MP+ body at $1800-2000 with fancy features. But if you already have a 36MP+ body for $1000-1200 nobody will pay $1800-2000 for the 36MP++ body.
In 2-3 years, we may have lot of more MILC, even lower sales and more people invested in Sony/Canon/Nikon if you don't have anything to cover the missing market segment. Out of the 4 market segment in FF (entry level, mid level, high rez, sport/action), the K1 only fill the high rez (D810 like) and potentially the mid level (D750 like) because of price. But not entry or action/sports. As a consequence they loose at least 50% of the sales they could make on FF bodies. if you want a cheapo D610, you are not going to buy K1 and in 2-3 when D610 equiv will sell for $700 and top of the line APSC no more than $800 (like it is almost the case today for Pentax) a $1200 K1 would not still do it.
The customer base is Pentax APSC owners basically and a few switchers. APSC is driven by cost and that why it is 90% of the sales overall and until very recently about 99% of Pentax sales (let's not forget 645Z).
Pentax managed to sell a few percent of their APSC owner an FF. They'll continue overtime. Now they have to act on the fact that FF are cheaper and cheaper and that FF is ready to upsell the top 10% of APSC users so 90% APSC, 10% FF become 75-80% APSC and 20-25% FF in the 2-3 comming years and potentially 50% APSC, 50% FF sooner than later because of price mostly.
If people feel that for $1000 they only have a K3 successor in Pentax with APSC lenses that need a serious refresh (slow SDM...) on one side and on the other size shiny FF from Sony/Nikon/Canon, theses guy will invest in Sony/Nikon/Canon. There nothing around it short or having something in that segment.
You only see the lost sales to K1, that is 2-3% of their user base and would still want 36MP, the wonderull articulated screen, 33 AF point and so on. That's why you would release it only next year and why you would make it 24MP only and remove few other gimmicks. I see the 97% of APSC sales that you can upsell first with not so expensive FF and then over the years FF lenses they buy sooner or later but that they wont if they stay APSC.
$200 action camera or $300 smartphones do 4K already. I didn't say full sensor read 4K or 120FPS 4K. but 24 or 30FPS 4K, maybe even not progressive but 4K become key buzz world. And 4K don't even have to be there. Maybe the fancy accelerator unit that people rave about on K70 will do the trick...
Sony sell 24MP FF from reputed seller here for less than €1000, in 2 years it isn't going to cost more, but less. If you don't follow, you are out of the game. And the game is that APSC flagship is definitely going to be south of $€1000 and cheapo FF is going to be near $€1000. This is already there actually and will only accentuate in the future.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Industry and Professionals
08-20-2016, 03:56 AM
|
| |
Technically here summer start on 21 of June but I agree its picky. I am not so sure summer the best anyway as people are on vacation and already brought the gear for it in spring...
|
