Comments below:
Tom C.
From: Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]>
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s)
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:05:53 +0200
Tom 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.
REPLY:
1. The fact that Nikon and Canon have FF camera on the market doesn't make
it easier for Pentax to sell one. As Nikon and Canon FF bodies consist
together at about 1% of the market the potential sales volume for a Pentax
FF is minuscule indeed. I'm sure that the FF market share will increase but
not significantly in the next couple of years. As an FF Pentax will be
compared to Nikon and Canon FF camera it needs to be equal in other
departments as well; not just the sensor.
It's about brand image, not making it easier. I agree other things need to
be updated also. If Pentax were to have only 3 DSLR's on the market, $500
range entry level, $1000 dollar range mid level, $2000/2500 FF body, I
suspect those buying the high end will be > 1%. It would certainly be a
higher number than those buying a 645D.
2. Nobody knows the size of the MF based digital camera market as noone is
really selling any. Mamiya is a microscopic player several times bankrupt
and until a major player in digital cameras actually market an MF digital
camera, the market simply won't happen. Also, the size of the market is
dependent on the price of the 645D; an unknown at this point. My guess is
that a 645D at twice the price of an FF Pentax K-mount Nikon killer will
sell twice as much as that FF camera.
As for lenses; there are much more pofessional grade Pentax MF lenses out
there than Pentax K-mount pro glass. Most of the Pentax K-mount lenses are
kit zooms and the 50/2 lens. None of them use by folks likely to buy a FF
Pentax DSLR. All MF lenses are basically pro lenses in this regard and
Pentax got a significant market share in the MF world; up to 50%.
If there's really no market at present it would be rather foolish for Pentax
to sell to it, I think.
3. As Pentax MF cameras are among the most popular MF systems of all times
there are plenty of potential users for this camera. Besides, there are
those who will want a sensor twice the size of any Nikon and Canon thus
obtaining image quality not available from those brands; perhaps optimized
for resolution rather than speed or high ISO performance.
They are? I was pretty sure it was Hassleblad. If they're not making a
67D, for all those legacy 67 lenses, you can subtract those customers out of
your count.
5. It is much harder for Pentax to manufacture a K-mount FF camera than the
645D as the FF camera will need to compete with Nikon and Canon whereas the
645D will outperform Nikon and Canon in image quality and compete with
obscenely priced digital backs. In addition, the 645D is built around the
old 645 chassis, mirror, and finder system. Long since payed for. Its
electronics is derived from the K10D or coming K-mount bodies.
It also doesn't face the same demand for fast AF and image processing speed
as a Nikon/Canon FF competitor will as it will be targeted at high
resolution uses; typically landscape and studio use.
I doubt Pentax can produce a high MP MF camera for much less than it's
competitors. The 645D would be competing with those high end FF cameras
from Canon, maybe Nikon.
If they can use an old 645 design they can use the MZ-D design also. There
will always be spec differences, but the major ones are sensor size, MP,
noise, buffer size.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
