I can't see non-645 owners jumping to a 645D in masses. The 645D would be a low volume seller compared to a 24 x 36 FF body. If used glass is so readily available, Pentax would not be making money there.
OTOH, if a 24 x 36 FF priced-within-reason body was released, a large number of current Pentax owners would likely upgrade. Pentax has the lens know-how to make the lenses. I was under the impression that Pentax has sold quite a number of extremely nice 35 mm lenses over the years, A, FA, etc. It hasn't just been all consumer zooms and cheap 50mm primes. The market changes fast. I think Pentax missed the mark with the 645D. If it was released 2 years ago it might have had a chance. But, as you point out, much of the MF market has already gone to the high end Canons. Personally, I think releasing a high-priced, non-main-stream camera body right now would be just about the stupidest move Pentax could make. It's sales would be dwarfed by the continued popularity of high end Canons and now the D3. Pentax needs to sell as many bodies and lenses as possible, plus look competitve in the marketplace. I don't see the 645 filling that spot. Tom C. >From: Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s) >Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:41:07 -0400 > >Tom, > >One thing you are forgetting is that pro-level 645 glass is far more >readily available than the equivalent 35mm glass (outside of the FA >Limiteds, the 50/1.4 and 35/2). I can readily get lenses like the 35/3.5 in >645 mount, but not so much for the 20/2.8 or 85/1.4 in K mount, let alone a >28-70 f2.8 FA*. If Pentax wants to play in the Pro market, they will either >need to flood the market with a whole series of new pro-level 35mm lenses, >or go 645 which actually has the needed glass available used. > >100,000 28-80 f4-5.6's and a couple million 50mm f2's does not a pro lens >market make. The large number of consumer K mount lenses help prop up >Pentax's consumer market, but they're next to worthless to pro shooters. > >Also the market for an inexpensive 645 DSLR is mostly untapped. Mamiya is >the only real player there (with the ZD Back and 645ZD bundle) and they're >so strapped for supply that they're essentially ignoring the larger UK and >US markets in order to keep up with demand in Europe, Japan and Canada. If >they could keep up with worldwide demand, they'd probably start posting >numbers the size of the rest of the MF Digital market The issue there has >always been cost, not demand, keeping the market small, with MF shooters >moving to the 1Ds because it was the only economic choice for that level of >resolution. > >-Adam > > > >Tom C wrote: > > Are you sure those lenses are in production? Designed maybe, but I >would > > think otherwise in the same status as the 645D. They're not making >lenses > > for a camera that's not on the production line. > > > > I'm not expecting it or holding my breath, but to me it makes *more >sense* > > to produce a FF 24 X 36 body than the 645D. Here's why: > > > > 1. Canon and Nikon both now have FF bodies on the market. If Pentax can >get > > one out in short order they can be #3 to do so, ahead of Sony and >Olympus. > > That would be a big feather in Pentax's cap. > > > > 2. The sales of a 645D would be relatively small compared to the sales >of a > > FF 24 x 36 body because the market is smaller. Pentax 35mm body/lens >owners > > out number Pentax 645 owners by a large factor. Can't begin to guess >what > > it is, 100-to-1, 1000-to-1? > > > > 3. Moving to a 645 format is much costlier to non-645 system owners >because > > they must buy into a whole new system. I'd personally be more likely to >buy > > a FF Canon or Nikon 24 x 36 body if I was going to change systems. Last >but > > not least it would still fit in the same camera bag. :-) > > > > 4. Pentax can do the in body sensor crop when DA lenses are attached, > > preserving the usefulness of the DA lens series for those that have > > purchased them. > > > > 5. It can't be any harder for Pentax to design and manufacture a FF 24 x >36 > > body than the 645. They have all the basics. Yes they would need to > > reeingineer the image processing engine, have a larger LCD, and other > > firmware/hardware changes, but that's a given with any new camera model. > > The only thing really holding them back would be whether they can obtain >a > > sensor at a price point that will put the resulting product within reach >of > > a large number of customers. > > > > Like I said at the start. I'm not expecting it but it makes sense in a >lot > > of ways. > > > > > > Tom C. > > > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> > >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> > >> Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next >camera(s) > >> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 14:42:50 +0000 > >> > >> In fact, more likely than a full frame camera and a line of lenses is >the > >> 645D. Lenses for that camera are already in production. If Pentax wants >to > >> go pro, that seems to be the only logical way to do it. > >> Paul > >> -------------- Original message ---------------------- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> It wouldn't be logical from a marketing point of view to introduce a > >> camera that > >>> can't use the lenses that you've just introduced. The DA* 60-250 >hasn't > >> even > >>> seen the light of day yet. Plus, most of the full frame lenses seem to > >> have been > >>> discontinued. I suspect that the only ones being sold now are existing > >> stock. Of > >>> course we might one day see a full frame camera along with a new line >of > >> lenses, > >>> but I doubt that Pentax is ready for that now. > >>> Paul > > > > > > > > > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >PDML@pdml.net >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
