FF minimal requirements.

[tigrebleu]

Well, I agree with You, but "to be competitive" is another step above "minimal requirements". I'm not into marketing and economics etc, but I agree that some product CAN actually sell better IF it is competitive in specifications AND price than the product that is not so competitive but cheaper. Anyway, I would buy not-so-competitive Pentax product, fulfilling my minimal requirements, like I believe most of long-time Pentax shooters would do! That would be Pentax's strenght for selling new FF product. The problem could be new users, because Pentax is "out of fashion" for some time in Europe, so competitive or not so competitive product would not IMHO change sales that much. I vote for cheaper FF DSLR.

With minimal requirements only, Pentax will only sell to hard core Pentaxians who can live without fast AF, fast fps and all the other things that would make a Pentax FF competitive.

I believe this would result in a niche product (like the Pentax 645D or the Pentax Q), not a bad thing if you like paying the premium that comes with being in a niche (think of the Fujifilm X100, for instance). That means a Pentax FF could sell at around $3000, as much as the Sony A850/A900, Nikon D700 and Canon EOS 5DII, which would all offer something more than a Pentax FF.

However, to have a lower than $2000 selling price, you need to step out of the niche market and into the mass market. For this the camera needs to be competitive in order to make sales. Back to square one.

IMHO, a Pentax FF DSLR with only the minimum requirements would remain a niche product with a hefty price tag.

But I'm no market and economics specialist either. Maybe a Pentax FF could be cheap and could sell well. I don't know... I'm only a little photo business "know-it-all"!

--

If photography can be considered like painting, then I'm still at the preschool "paint with your fingers" level.

 

[Yamin Tedja]

Anyway, I would buy not-so-competitive Pentax product, fulfilling my minimal requirements

No, you won't; your nick is Pentax Never

I think his name means Pentax "Never" = (Now and forever)

Alex S.

 

[ManuH]

To have a FF body a company needs to have the appropriate AF system - speed, accuracy, consistency, CAF.

Wrong. The Canon 5D sold very well with just one center cross AF point. Pentax doesn't need to be on top of the game, the SAFOX XI+ (K-5, 645D) is good enough. Pentax will never appeal to sport shooters anyway, that's the realm of Nikon.

To have a FF body a company needs to have the appropriate lens line up - this means fast, high resolution lenses with good contrast and colour rendition lacking any AF issues. All the way from fish-eye to super telephoto.

Yes, this is more a concern, but there is already a lot of usable lenses. Even this at this point, a Pentax FF has more lenses than any of the mirrorless systems!

To have a FF body a company needs tethering support and third party producers support(the last one is not so important, but still many have their preferred third party gear)

Tethering is a minor point, not difficult at all. 3rd party is already there: there's many FF lenses from Sigma/Tamron that would fit.

What does Pentax do in this terms? The AF system is behind the competitors, noticeably and visibly.

I'm a bit fed up of hearing this. AF speed is not always relevant. For 99% of my photography the Pentax AF system is more than adequate. A lot of people even use MF, so...

The lens line-up is dated and no matter that some of these are really good lenses they are not on pair with the Canon's L glass or Sony's Zeiss glass both in terms of resolution and in terms of corrections.

Sure but not everyone needs this kind of lens.

Pentax does not develop its software anywhere near Nikon's or Canon's proprietary solutions.

I'm very glad for that! Canikon software is not that good, their usability is not good and many people prefer to use more mainstream developers such as Lightroom, DXO, etc. At least Pentax doesn't push anything I don't want.

Pentax is not supported any more by third party producers due poor ROI of theses producers and the poor ROI is due to its poor ranking in terms of sales - Very far behind the market leaders

Yes, this is an issue in some cases for sure.

I am not trolling or insulting Pentax - I use Pentax myself and like it, I am just being realistic regarding FF.

You see that from the POV how Pentax could be competitive. IMHO for the FF market they don't have to be competitive at all. Not at the expense of being unprofitable. They should see it from a niche market POV and try to build a camera that will be the best for that niche, just like the 645D is.

I would really love a FF Pentax, but then I would love some good lenses for it with sane pricing - the current outdated, but expensive line is comparatively overpriced imho.

IMHO there is nevertheless a lot of potential with current and old lenses.

But for Pentax, the most problematic issue is to get a competitive sensor. Everything else from the K-5 is good enough for a FF. But what sensor with good performance is readily available to Pentax?

--



http://www.flickr.com/photos/ensh/

 

[PentaxNever]

With minimal requirements only, Pentax will only sell to hard core Pentaxians who can live without fast AF, fast fps and all the other things that would make a Pentax FF competitive.

I believe this would result in a niche product (like the Pentax 645D or the Pentax Q), not a bad thing if you like paying the premium that comes with being in a niche (think of the Fujifilm X100, for instance). That means a Pentax FF could sell at around $3000, as much as the Sony A850/A900, Nikon D700 and Canon EOS 5DII, which would all offer something more than a Pentax FF.

However, to have a lower than $2000 selling price, you need to step out of the niche market and into the mass market. For this the camera needs to be competitive in order to make sales. Back to square one.

IMHO, a Pentax FF DSLR with only the minimum requirements would remain a niche product with a hefty price tag.

But I'm no market and economics specialist either. Maybe a Pentax FF could be cheap and could sell well. I don't know... I'm only a little photo business "know-it-all"!

--

If photography can be considered like painting, then I'm still at the preschool "paint with your fingers" level.

Oh, no more niche products.

In the film days, Pentax was (sort of) competitive with CaNikon, but at lower price. Pentax sold alot around the world. Pentax was doing relatively well.

Pentax now also must be cheaper, but Pentax is selling at very high prices, Pentax have raised prices of cameras and lenses in the close past! Pentax is not as strong system as a CaNikon or even Sony/Minolta/Zeiss. This is no way to go because more and more Pentax users will jump abroad. The smaller the number of users, the worse for the life of Pentax. And the end is visible. So, no more niche products, but more cheap products for mass market. That is what FF needs to be (and actually any Pentax camera), IMHO.

Or what one friend said: lower the price of the 645D to 2500$ and it would sell like mad. That is the truth.

 

[Wheatfield]

Or what one friend said: lower the price of the 645D to 2500$ and it would sell like mad. That is the truth.

This is the attitude that led Pentax to bankruptcy and it's being bought by Hoya in the first place.

Being the cheap guy selling the same crap as the big guys in the marketplace is not going to make them successful, what will make them successful is selling products that differ from Canon, Nikon or Sony products.
Pentax cannot make it as a "me too" camera maker.

 

[loock]

If eos5D old and MK II, with that crappy poor AF, and suport for those flare bomb lenses, sell good, then a Pentax FF35 DSLR with suport for AF smc lenses, would sell like hotcakes.

If eos5D old and MK II, with that crappy poor AF, and suport for those flare bomb lenses, sell good, then a Pentax FF35 DSLR with suport for AF smc lenses, would sell like hotcakes.

 

[Manchu]

Or what one friend said: lower the price of the 645D to 2500$ and it would sell like mad. That is the truth.

I love your truth

Pentax and Ricoh might probably make a profit on that camera after every other person in this world buys a 645D, but would certainly bleed to death first long before.

I also love the quote you found

"The millions who make up the vast majority of DSLR users including many top photogs must be all dumb not to use Pentax."

The dumb millions don't know what they are missing, like the fun of scrounging around for lenses, camera features or services that the tiny user base can never afford and therefore get, or the thrill of having a new owner of their brand now and then, so as to be able to dream of miracles happening.

Without market share and buyer confidence, even a minimalist FF camera will be unaffordable. Market share and buiyer confidence do not come overnight, just because a FF is released.

How cheap will it be? Say, a FF camera with just a K mount, a slow 1/1000 sec FF shutter, mostly plastic box, manual focusing only, 1 fps, basic exposure metering modes with just a few zone or centre only, plus compensation button, ISO 800 max, ... ... It won't be cheap unless it can sell a whole lot. All the keen enthusiasts here added together is not a whole lot. You are all unimportant if business is to survive, if not to make money. Whinging is useless. A minimalist FF would be just a gift to you here, but it ain't gonna happen.

 

[moving_comfort]

If eos5D old and MK II, with that crappy poor AF, and suport for those flare bomb lenses, sell good, then a Pentax FF35 DSLR with suport for AF smc lenses, would sell like hotcakes.

If eos5D old and MK II, with that crappy poor AF, and suport for those flare bomb lenses, sell good, then a Pentax FF35 DSLR with suport for AF smc lenses, would sell like hotcakes.

.

Your chorus needs work, I don't hear a hook.

--
Here are a few of my favorite things...
---> http://www.flickr.com/photos/95095968@N00/sets/72157626171532197/

 

[Yanko Kitanov]

To have a FF body a company needs to have the appropriate AF system - speed, accuracy, consistency, CAF.

Wrong. The Canon 5D sold very well with just one center cross AF point. Pentax doesn't need to be on top of the game, the SAFOX XI+ (K-5, 645D) is good enough. Pentax will never appeal to sport shooters anyway, that's the realm of Nikon.

Have you shot the 5D - I have, it's much more accurate and faster than what Pentax offers, no matter what you read on paper. Focus accuracy and consistency is needed only in sports? Well I don't think so

To have a FF body a company needs to have the appropriate lens line up - this means fast, high resolution lenses with good contrast and colour rendition lacking any AF issues. All the way from fish-eye to super telephoto.

Yes, this is more a concern, but there is already a lot of usable lenses. Even this at this point, a Pentax FF has more lenses than any of the mirrorless systems!

You just forgot one point - manual lenses, all of them available USED by different auctions, all of them not engineered with sensor shift in mind - read about this in other recent post.

To have a FF body a company needs tethering support and third party producers support(the last one is not so important, but still many have their preferred third party gear)

Tethering is a minor point, not difficult at all. 3rd party is already there: there's many FF lenses from Sigma/Tamron that would fit.

Pentax has no 3d party sensor support, neither LR, nor C1, nor any dedicated program the small privately developed tethering experiment is way behind what is needed, although I admire the effort of the developer. 3rd party support has been discontinued and many of the 3rd party lenses available now are APS-C lenses. Also for a system to support its product it must have its own line and not count on independent users.

What does Pentax do in this terms? The AF system is behind the competitors, noticeably and visibly.

I'm a bit fed up of hearing this. AF speed is not always relevant. For 99% of my photography the Pentax AF system is more than adequate. A lot of people even use MF, so...

Weather YOU are fed up or not is totally uninteresting to me, it's your own business what we are discussing here is market strategy and not your private issues. I don't use AF at all, but that doesn't make any difference too. So for your or mine photography it is irrelevant, but for the major target group it is.

The lens line-up is dated and no matter that some of these are really good lenses they are not on pair with the Canon's L glass or Sony's Zeiss glass both in terms of resolution and in terms of corrections.

Sure but not everyone needs this kind of lens.

To put the long story short - a FF higher resolution sensor always needs HQ high resolution lenses as otherwise the lenses are limiting the sensor. Rent the Sony a900 or a800 and shoot it with the SIgma 70-300 at 135mm and then try it with the Zeiss 135mm - two different cameras. The weakest link in the sensor-lens bundle is the one which determines the output. Investing in FF body and making this investment useless by a low res lens is something that not everyone needs.

Pentax does not develop its software anywhere near Nikon's or Canon's proprietary solutions.

I'm very glad for that! Canikon software is not that good, their usability is not good and many people prefer to use more mainstream developers such as Lightroom, DXO, etc. At least Pentax doesn't push anything I don't want.

Hmm, do you have any actual experience comparing these? My experience is the opposite. And if Canon or Nikon "push" you something you don't personally want - go and check their forums for user feedback on these software solutions - you will be surprised how off the mainstream you are.

But for Pentax, the most problematic issue is to get a competitive sensor. Everything else from the K-5 is good enough for a FF. But what sensor with good performance is readily available to Pentax?

This shows clear ignorance - Pentax doesn't develop their own sensors and counts on Sony products - currently the best FF on the market is developed by Sony (Nikon D3x). Sony are ready with their new FF sensor - the Nikon D4 will use it and it is just around the corner, wait and see the result. So Pentax have no problem at all in terms of the sensor.

Now we all have our opinions - I expressed mine and the reason I had to correct your wrong statements is just because you didn't answer to the OP stating your opinion, but tried to comment and correct mine. Nothing personal in pointing out all the mistakes, lack of info and inconsistencies in you post, I just defended my point of view. Now I propose we all keep our opinions and not flood the thread with further persuading each other what is and is not. At least this is what I will have to do due to the lack of time to answer every time.

--
Kind Regards,
Yanko Kitanov

I am dreaming to enhance the sensitivity of my own perception and not the sensitivity of my camera's sensor...

 

[Alex Sarbu]

With minimal requirements only, Pentax will only sell to hard core Pentaxians who can live without fast AF, fast fps and all the other things that would make a Pentax FF competitive.

I believe this would result in a niche product (like the Pentax 645D or the Pentax Q), not a bad thing if you like paying the premium that comes with being in a niche (think of the Fujifilm X100, for instance). That means a Pentax FF could sell at around $3000, as much as the Sony A850/A900, Nikon D700 and Canon EOS 5DII, which would all offer something more than a Pentax FF.

However, to have a lower than $2000 selling price, you need to step out of the niche market and into the mass market. For this the camera needs to be competitive in order to make sales. Back to square one.

IMHO, a Pentax FF DSLR with only the minimum requirements would remain a niche product with a hefty price tag.

But I'm no market and economics specialist either. Maybe a Pentax FF could be cheap and could sell well. I don't know... I'm only a little photo business "know-it-all"!

--

If photography can be considered like painting, then I'm still at the preschool "paint with your fingers" level.

Oh, no more niche products.

In the film days, Pentax was (sort of) competitive with CaNikon, but at lower price. Pentax sold alot around the world. Pentax was doing relatively well.

When was that? Pentax was really successful before AF - after that they lost ground.

Pentax now also must be cheaper, but Pentax is selling at very high prices, Pentax have raised prices of cameras and lenses in the close past! Pentax is not as strong system as a CaNikon or even Sony/Minolta/Zeiss. This is no way to go because more and more Pentax users will jump abroad. The smaller the number of users, the worse for the life of Pentax. And the end is visible. So, no more niche products, but more cheap products for mass market. That is what FF needs to be (and actually any Pentax camera), IMHO.

OK, I get it... you hate Pentax so much (Pentax Never , eh?) you want them to be bottom feeders forever: making cheap, selling cheap. Then you'd happily troll around: "Hey, I have this nice Canikon, not some cheap Pentax!".

Or what one friend said: lower the price of the 645D to 2500$ and it would sell like mad. That is the truth.

"Truth"? Are you Gazooma? That's no "truth", that's BS - there's no way a company would lower the price of a product made to sell for $10.000 to 1/4 of that. The purpose of any company is to make money, not gifts.
There's no merit in asking ridiculous things.

Alex S.

 

[Yamin Tedja]

With minimal requirements only, Pentax will only sell to hard core Pentaxians who can live without fast AF, fast fps and all the other things that would make a Pentax FF competitive.

I believe this would result in a niche product (like the Pentax 645D or the Pentax Q), not a bad thing if you like paying the premium that comes with being in a niche (think of the Fujifilm X100, for instance). That means a Pentax FF could sell at around $3000, as much as the Sony A850/A900, Nikon D700 and Canon EOS 5DII, which would all offer something more than a Pentax FF.

However, to have a lower than $2000 selling price, you need to step out of the niche market and into the mass market. For this the camera needs to be competitive in order to make sales. Back to square one.

IMHO, a Pentax FF DSLR with only the minimum requirements would remain a niche product with a hefty price tag.

But I'm no market and economics specialist either. Maybe a Pentax FF could be cheap and could sell well. I don't know... I'm only a little photo business "know-it-all"!

--

If photography can be considered like painting, then I'm still at the preschool "paint with your fingers" level.

Oh, no more niche products.

In the film days, Pentax was (sort of) competitive with CaNikon, but at lower price. Pentax sold alot around the world. Pentax was doing relatively well.

When was that? Pentax was really successful before AF - after that they lost ground.

Pentax now also must be cheaper, but Pentax is selling at very high prices, Pentax have raised prices of cameras and lenses in the close past! Pentax is not as strong system as a CaNikon or even Sony/Minolta/Zeiss. This is no way to go because more and more Pentax users will jump abroad. The smaller the number of users, the worse for the life of Pentax. And the end is visible. So, no more niche products, but more cheap products for mass market. That is what FF needs to be (and actually any Pentax camera), IMHO.

OK, I get it... you hate Pentax so much (Pentax Never , eh?) you want them to be bottom feeders forever: making cheap, selling cheap. Then you'd happily troll around: "Hey, I have this nice Canikon, not some cheap Pentax!".

So what is your suggestion on how pentax priced their product? higher than canon or nikon? yeah right.

Or what one friend said: lower the price of the 645D to 2500$ and it would sell like mad. That is the truth.

"Truth"? Are you Gazooma? That's no "truth", that's BS - there's no way a company would lower the price of a product made to sell for $10.000 to 1/4 of that. The purpose of any company is to make money, not gifts.
There's no merit in asking ridiculous things.

Of course there is no way pentax will sell 645d for $2500, I just responding to what you said on the other thread about sale of 645d jump from 0 to 6000 units, and I said well, if 645d were priced at $2500 , pentax will sell 1000000 units, much more than 6000 units that you mentioned earlier. But that is just an imaginary situation, don't be mad. There are ways a company priced their product and make money, one company can charge higher price and get more profit per unit but they sell less, other company charge lower price and get less profit per unit but they sell more, and I think with the current situation with pentax right now, it is more logical for them to sell their product at lower price than the competition even though they get less profit per unit but in turn they will sell more. That is still making money, not charity.

Alex S.

 

[PentaxNever]

Or what one friend said: lower the price of the 645D to 2500$ and it would sell like mad. That is the truth.

I love your truth

Pentax and Ricoh might probably make a profit on that camera after every other person in this world buys a 645D, but would certainly bleed to death first long before.

I'm thinking, is it really like that. If the every other person buy 645D for 2500, than, the users will have a need for lenses, and lenses for 645D are soo expensive, that I really do not believe they would bleed to death..they could live very well just from lens sales..... And it would not be such a big problem if they loose a little from body sales.

I also love the quote you found

"The millions who make up the vast majority of DSLR users including many top photogs must be all dumb not to use Pentax."

The dumb millions don't know what they are missing, like the fun of scrounging around for lenses, camera features or services that the tiny user base can never afford and therefore get, or the thrill of having a new owner of their brand now and then, so as to be able to dream of miracles happening.

Dont you know that the dreams have a special position in our lives. By some scientists, function of dream is removing junk: removing impressions which were not fully worked up and removing ideas which were not completely developed during the day. Strange comparison with Pentax

Without market share and buyer confidence, even a minimalist FF camera will be unaffordable. Market share and buiyer confidence do not come overnight, just because a FF is released.

I really see no way of Pentax to return buyer confidence. Maybe lower the prices and make FF to gain new users?

How cheap will it be? Say, a FF camera with just a K mount, a slow 1/1000 sec FF shutter, mostly plastic box, manual focusing only, 1 fps, basic exposure metering modes with just a few zone or centre only, plus compensation button, ISO 800 max, ... ... It won't be cheap unless it can sell a whole lot. All the keen enthusiasts here added together is not a whole lot. You are all unimportant if business is to survive, if not to make money. Whinging is useless. A minimalist FF would be just a gift to you here, but it ain't gonna happen.

 

[Alex Sarbu]

With minimal requirements only, Pentax will only sell to hard core Pentaxians who can live without fast AF, fast fps and all the other things that would make a Pentax FF competitive.

I believe this would result in a niche product (like the Pentax 645D or the Pentax Q), not a bad thing if you like paying the premium that comes with being in a niche (think of the Fujifilm X100, for instance). That means a Pentax FF could sell at around $3000, as much as the Sony A850/A900, Nikon D700 and Canon EOS 5DII, which would all offer something more than a Pentax FF.

However, to have a lower than $2000 selling price, you need to step out of the niche market and into the mass market. For this the camera needs to be competitive in order to make sales. Back to square one.

IMHO, a Pentax FF DSLR with only the minimum requirements would remain a niche product with a hefty price tag.

But I'm no market and economics specialist either. Maybe a Pentax FF could be cheap and could sell well. I don't know... I'm only a little photo business "know-it-all"!

--

If photography can be considered like painting, then I'm still at the preschool "paint with your fingers" level.

Oh, no more niche products.

In the film days, Pentax was (sort of) competitive with CaNikon, but at lower price. Pentax sold alot around the world. Pentax was doing relatively well.

When was that? Pentax was really successful before AF - after that they lost ground.

Pentax now also must be cheaper, but Pentax is selling at very high prices, Pentax have raised prices of cameras and lenses in the close past! Pentax is not as strong system as a CaNikon or even Sony/Minolta/Zeiss. This is no way to go because more and more Pentax users will jump abroad. The smaller the number of users, the worse for the life of Pentax. And the end is visible. So, no more niche products, but more cheap products for mass market. That is what FF needs to be (and actually any Pentax camera), IMHO.

OK, I get it... you hate Pentax so much (Pentax Never , eh?) you want them to be bottom feeders forever: making cheap, selling cheap. Then you'd happily troll around: "Hey, I have this nice Canikon, not some cheap Pentax!".

So what is your suggestion on how pentax priced their product? higher than canon or nikon? yeah right.

Strawman. I never said Pentax products should be priced higher.
By the way, Pentax is not as expensive as you make them be.

Or what one friend said: lower the price of the 645D to 2500$ and it would sell like mad. That is the truth.

"Truth"? Are you Gazooma? That's no "truth", that's BS - there's no way a company would lower the price of a product made to sell for $10.000 to 1/4 of that. The purpose of any company is to make money, not gifts.
There's no merit in asking ridiculous things.

Of course there is no way pentax will sell 645d for $2500, I just responding to what you said on the other thread about sale of 645d jump from 0 to 6000 units, and I said well, if 645d were priced at $2500 , pentax will sell 1000000 units, much more than 6000 units that you mentioned earlier. But that is just an imaginary situation, don't be mad. There are ways a company priced their product and make money, one company can charge higher price and get more profit per unit but they sell less, other company charge lower price and get less profit per unit but they sell more, and I think with the current situation with pentax right now, it is more logical for them to sell their product at lower price than the competition even though they get less profit per unit but in turn they will sell more. That is still making money, not charity.

Are you PentaxNever, as it was his message I was responding to? Maybe both of you are Gazooma (that's kind of an ongoing joke - he did have some clones, and from time to time he would forget which one to use)

1 million units, stop making up such ridiculous numbers. You should also stop stating your ridiculous opinions as facts; "they will sell"? You're very much clueless, and very much wrong.

FYI, that's higher than the Canon or Nikon FF sales and certainly higher than Pentax production capacity.

Alex S.

 

[ManuH]

Now I propose we all keep our opinions and not flood the thread with further persuading each other what is and is not. At least this is what I will have to do due to the lack of time to answer every time.

OK but why did you spent a long post to reply to me in this case? This last sentence would have been enough but you still want the last word, don't you? Don't worry I'll leave it to you, I started replying to each of your points but realized the potential waste of time.

--



http://www.flickr.com/photos/ensh/

 

[ManuH]

Are you PentaxNever, as it was his message I was responding to? Maybe both of you are Gazooma

Alex I suggest you to not answer people that are anonymous like PentaxNever. Guys like this are most surely trolls (and probably already banned trolls under another nickname). Pentax is such a nice ride for these guys.

--



http://www.flickr.com/photos/ensh/

 

[Escaping]

I am enjoying reading these posts about Pentax releasing a FF camera... I just have a great time LOL.

I would bet real money that Pentax will NOT launch a FF camera anytime soon. They have their hands full with getting their current line up to be successful and at making money... instead of putting resources on a FF camera that has very small chances of financial success.

I am very sure Pentax can design, create, manufacture a very good FF camera, but the financial viability of such a system (with lenses and support, etc.) is low. For the high end, demanding photographers, they already have the 645D. And Pentax bread and butter volume bodies are the K-r and K-x
--
Escaping (CT, USA) http://www.pbase.com/cvanlang
D700 / D300 / D90 / K10D / K-m / G2 / GF1 / LX5

 

[PentaxNever]

I am very sure Pentax can design, create, manufacture a very good FF camera, but the financial viability of such a system (with lenses and support, etc.) is low. For the high end, demanding photographers, they already have the 645D. And Pentax bread and butter volume bodies are the K-r and K-x
--
Escaping (CT, USA) http://www.pbase.com/cvanlang
D700 / D300 / D90 / K10D / K-m / G2 / GF1 / LX5

Thats what we need, FF K-x or K-r...

 

[Yamin Tedja]

Are you PentaxNever, as it was his message I was responding to? Maybe both of you are Gazooma (that's kind of an ongoing joke - he did have some clones, and from time to time he would forget which one to use)

Hey read this post http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=38860435 , who wrote that? hmm? You don't remember? That is the post that I am responding too, you don't have a chance to respond because that thread is full. Just because that thread is closed it does not mean its over.

1 million units, stop making up such ridiculous numbers. You should also stop stating your ridiculous opinions as facts; "they will sell"? You're very much clueless, and very much wrong.

Why is 1 million units is a ridiculous number if in fact pentax 645d were priced at $2500, but the thing is its not, it is just an "if" scenario, its not a facts, if you want facts all the time then don't respond to this kind of opinon, people in this forum always make a guessing, estimation, what will happen and rumors and so on so if you don't like something like that, don't respond, otherwise you will be crazy. But then again, if pentax 645d is priced at $2500, you don't think there are 1 million people that has $2500 and want 645d? Maybe 1 million is low estimation, maybe 2 millions? who knows? or maybe it will sell 250000 units, so I am off by 750000 units, so what if I am wrong, its not like we are betting against each other.

FYI, that's higher than the Canon or Nikon FF sales and certainly higher than Pentax production capacity.

Yes its higher than Canon or Nikon FF sales based on their current ff priced but if the price of canon and nikon ff camera were slashed by 75% to about $500 then it will sell more than 1 million, again, that is just an "if" situation, of course its not a facts or possibility. You might give a different number, so what?, You and me are entitled to our own opinion, even if you think I that I am ridiculous.

Alex S.

 

[Yamin Tedja]

I am very sure Pentax can design, create, manufacture a very good FF camera, but the financial viability of such a system (with lenses and support, etc.) is low. For the high end, demanding photographers, they already have the 645D. And Pentax bread and butter volume bodies are the K-r and K-x
--
Escaping (CT, USA) http://www.pbase.com/cvanlang
D700 / D300 / D90 / K10D / K-m / G2 / GF1 / LX5

Thats what we need, FF K-x or K-r...

Wow, an FF K-x? good idea.

 

[Alex Sarbu]

Are you PentaxNever, as it was his message I was responding to? Maybe both of you are Gazooma (that's kind of an ongoing joke - he did have some clones, and from time to time he would forget which one to use)

Hey read this post http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=38860435 , who wrote that? hmm? You don't remember? That is the post that I am responding too, you don't have a chance to respond because that thread is full. Just because that thread is closed it does not mean its over.

What? That post was my reply to Yanko Kitanov .

1 million units, stop making up such ridiculous numbers. You should also stop stating your ridiculous opinions as facts; "they will sell"? You're very much clueless, and very much wrong.

Why is 1 million units is a ridiculous number if in fact pentax 645d were priced at $2500, but the thing is its not, it is just an "if" scenario, its not a facts, if you want facts all the time then don't respond to this kind of opinon, people in this forum always make a guessing, estimation, what will happen and rumors and so on so if you don't like something like that, don't respond, otherwise you will be crazy. But then again, if pentax 645d is priced at $2500, you don't think there are 1 million people that has $2500 and want 645d? Maybe 1 million is low estimation, maybe 2 millions? who knows? or maybe it will sell 250000 units, so I am off by 750000 units, so what if I am wrong, its not like we are betting against each other.

No, I don't think so. No chance in h*ll for such a camera to approach 10% market share, it just isn't a mass market product.

It's not about being right or wrong, it's about stating ridiculous opinions as facts.

FYI, that's higher than the Canon or Nikon FF sales and certainly higher than Pentax production capacity.

Yes its higher than Canon or Nikon FF sales based on their current ff priced but if the price of canon and nikon ff camera were slashed by 75% to about $500 then it will sell more than 1 million, again, that is just an "if" situation, of course its not a facts or possibility. You might give a different number, so what?, You and me are entitled to our own opinion, even if you think I that I am ridiculous.

It's not an "if" situation, it's another ridiculous things.Talking about things that won't happen, then presenting them as the miraculous solution? A 75% price cut, yeah, sure... I'm out of this, getting tired of such nonsense.

Alex S.