On 7/25/05 7:48 AM, "Kostas Kavoussanakis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> it, in spite of the challenge, simply because they made a head start. But >> watching the demise of Kyocera/Contax, the killing of the project was >> probably prudent and right. > > What do you think ar ethe chances of saying the same thing about the > 645D in 12-18 months? > >> making the FF DSLR. Now the sensor cost is coming down, and P might have >> found a good source or partner in the sensor supply > > Who would that be? Hi Kostas, I am no analyst and you are asking me questions to which I have no answer of my own :-). I was just passing some of the info I picked up in Japanese sites which might be of interest to the list members, and it was in response to what I thought was an unduly harsh bashing of Pentax, trying to justify that Pentax were not as bad as they were portrayed. I do not think there is any comparison between the first foray into an uncharted water like Kyocera did, vs. Pentax's entry into the 645D world. As I said, Pentax do have a captive market, although the size of which is debatable. This is the market P know well. For a conservative company like P to venture into this, they must have concluded that the risk was bearable, setting aside the argument whether they actually make money or not. My personal take is, given the popularity of the Pentax MF (645 & 6x7) in Japan, which includes a fair size of affluent amateur market, they probably had no choice but to do this anyway when everybody else was doing. If you isolate the market strictly by the number of sales alone, I believe Mamiya have the top share in Japan by a small margin and they already went for an expensive digital solution. Beyond that, although I do have a 645 kit, I really have not researched much into this particular market (I have no personal interest in it). Re question on sensor supplier, people are naturally speculating what Sony are going to do now that they ganged up with KM while they have been supplying the CCDs to Nikon and Pentax etc. Based on my observation, people think that Sony will not restrict their supply exclusively to KM which is a far smaller market compared with the total market they have been supplying. Nevertheless, you never know what Sony are really up to. I believe the current Pentax 645D project uses the Kodak CCD. I have no idea whether this is good or bad. Kodak has a track record in the MF digital back market. Whether P are going further into a closer collaboration with Kodak, I do not know. Maybe I can find out some info on the net, but Pentax being as they are, it is unlikely. Pentax once said early on that they consider sensors simply a commodity and will adopt the best available one for the application, or some such. Then with the advancement of CMOS sensor, like Canon did, things might change. Unlike CCD for which an expensive dedicated investment is needed, I understand that the CMOS is not too different from the memory chip, and buying a production line within certain spec would give you the in-house production capability (I am of course over-simplifying here). So after various alliances have settled down, sensor supply map might be quite different from today's. Re CCD suppliers, I do not know much about it either but there are at least 5 major ones in Japan, Sony, Sanyo, Sharp, Fuji and Panasonic (maybe more). If CMOS, I know Toshiba, for example, are making it. Some might have been focusing more on cell phone market. Nikon are said to be going in-house production and about to come up with a splendid sensor (name of which escaped me. But it is a well known rumour). Probably some variation of CMOS. Regarding the supply of CCD, there was an interesting article on the interview with the top honcho of Canon Digital Imaging Division, wherein he was laying out Canon's present strategy (mind you, the interview itself was conducted about 6 months ago which is rather a long time in the digicam world). Among many interesting things he described, as far as the sensor supply is concerned, he said Canon has absolutely no particular preference to their in-house CMOS. They overcame some of the disadvantages of the CMOS sensor (noise etc) and the in-house fab does give them some flexibility advantage in the production planning "at present", but beyond that, they are open minded. If somebody's CCD is considered appropriate, Canon will adopt it in a heartbeat. BTW, he did say that Canon themselves are shooting in the dark (sort of) in an effort to find the best optimum model in the expanding DSLR market (I think he was referring to the rebel market), and he literally said that it is a "one in ten" trial and error. He also said (not necessarily in the context of DSLR but more in terms of PS digicam I think) that Canon is aware that the market, particularly the entry level crowd demand the specs which look good on catalogue. So, Canon has been trying to satisfy the demand for higher MP for example (he was talking about the demand of ever higher MP while the sensitivity (ISO) stays relatively low), but no one company can change that trend until the market matures and settles. So, they are obviously going along with the MP myth for now (or being forced to do so). Interesting !?!? When I find time, I might post a quick and dirty translation (summary) of this interview. Cheers, Ken
