Jorgen Udvang wrote:
We don't know what kind of deal Pentax have gotten on the sensor, but it should be rather obvious than any manufacturer of MF sensors would be extremely happy if a new customer came in the door, willing to buy a few thousand units.
I started out with Pentax 35mm kit, owned and loved alot of their M series kit, and still hanker after the LX a little. I would love Pentax to came back with a medium format digital outfit, I wish them luck with this. Pentax is a brand that has alot of meaning for alot of us, it would be nice to see them released from the crop sensor limitation.
"Pentax
Expect some point an shoot cameras like everyone else. What I’m really curious about though is whether they’ll release the much-rumored and poorly kept secret 645D medium format camera."
Well, they're paying for the AF system somehow, and they're amortizing the costs over a small number of bodies. Whether or not it's developed in-house or not, they still need to pay for the AF system and pay for its integration and do so based on a couple thousand units max.
I doubt Pentax developed all of its AF system in-house either (For starters, the basic sensor is just too similar to Nikon's Multi-CAM2000 in layout and spec) and I'm positive Pentax's flash system is licensed (it's a direct clone of Minolta's ADI system, right down to the silly channel/group setting method).
None of this changes the fact that Pentax can spread many costs over far more sales than Hasselblad or Phamiya, which gives them a cost advantage. There's a lot more than just the sensor involved in the cost of a MF system, even if the sensor is the largest cost by a fair margin, to say that the Sensor is the only significant factor in the price is downright silly. There's a huge difference between 'largest single factor' and 'only significant factor'
HerbChong wrote:
do you really believe that the other MF manufacturers are really designing their own AF? and how much can it really save given that the lowest end SLR bodies out there now have AF equal to or better than most MF bodies with AF. the savings in the AF system are completely negligible compared to the cost of the sensor. that is what determines the cost of the camera along with the support network. everything else in a digital body is tiny by comparison.
the cost of a sensor dominates the cost of a digital camera. since Pentax will be buying ballpark the same number as Hasselblad of the identical sensor model from Kodak, Pentax's costs ought to be about the same. saving money on the AF module that costs 1/10 of the sensor isn't going to make any difference in price. Hasselblad's profit margins are high but not so high that you can cut 50% off list price and make money. at $10K, they will be barely breaking even, assuming they sell a couple of thousand units.
Herb...
mawz wrote:
Well, they're paying for the AF system somehow, and they're amortizing the costs over a small number of bodies. Whether or not it's developed in-house or not, they still need to pay for the AF system and pay for its integration and do so based on a couple thousand units max.
they learned about camera systems and lens systems. systems integration and not just components. you have never built a DSLR before and learning from engineers who have already done it is very valuable.
Herb...
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I guess I'm slow. Exactly which technology from Pentax did Samsung use in the NX? The EVF? The Mount? The AF? The non SLR body design? hmm.
Mr.Lindy wrote:
"Pentax
Expect some point an shoot cameras like everyone else. What I’m really curious about though is whether they’ll release the much-rumored and poorly kept secret 645D medium format camera."
HerbChong wrote:
the cost of a sensor dominates the cost of a digital camera. since Pentax will be buying ballpark the same number as Hasselblad of the identical sensor model from Kodak, Pentax's costs ought to be about the same. saving money on the AF module that costs 1/10 of the sensor isn't going to make any difference in price. Hasselblad's profit margins are high but not so high that you can cut 50% off list price and make money. at $10K, they will be barely breaking even, assuming they sell a couple of thousand units.
Herb...
For MF digital, the traditional method (and I have previously argued outdated and mostly unnecessary in this day and age) the major players have employed to sell and support their cameras has been extremely costly. This cost must be factored into the price. If Pentax were to sell using the model that the smaller format digital cameras use, their costs could be significantly reduced compared to what PhaseOne and Hasselblad have to cover. Particularly with the low number of units sold in this market, a major reduction in overhead such as personnel represents major cost savings. It would not surprise me if the additional costs associated with customer support/training staff/etc. represents something close to the cost of the sensor itself for the current MF players. I believe this is where the majority of the cost savings Pentax might enjoy could come from.
The thing is that AF unit likely costs Hasselblad 1/10 of the price of the sensor, but Pentax will be paying closer to 1/100 or less, because of differing amortization costs due to Pentax's ability to share the non-physical costs of the AF unit across orders of magnitude more production. Differences like that add up quite quickly. It's not going to make Pentax come in at half the price of the Hassy, but even a 10% cost advantage can be a huge deal with $10k cameras
-Adam
HerbChong wrote:
the cost of a sensor dominates the cost of a digital camera. since Pentax will be buying ballpark the same number as Hasselblad of the identical sensor model from Kodak, Pentax's costs ought to be about the same. saving money on the AF module that costs 1/10 of the sensor isn't going to make any difference in price. Hasselblad's profit margins are high but not so high that you can cut 50% off list price and make money. at $10K, they will be barely breaking even, assuming they sell a couple of thousand units.
Yeah, I know, CES was likely not the venue to launch 645D, but I thought there must have been a good reason for both Pentax Europe and Pentax USA to attend CES in Vegas, yesterday and today. Maybe the Las Vegas visit is a corporate vacation perk for Pentax USA and Europe employees attending the 3 day event? I've seen no CES images of anything "Pentax" on the net or on CNBC business channel thats broadcasting from the event, so far...
Pentax has not offered anything new at CES during first two days. Pentax seems to like PIE show in Japan in prior years displaying their numerous 645D vaporeware cameras. I think thats in March?
Another observation, now with Hoya ownership there are two hands in the cash register. Pentax needs profits to look good as a division and Hoya looks for profits on their Pentax corporation investment. Today in Bloomberg it seems Hoya has now completed their manufacturing move out of Japan:
Making gear in Japan in 2010 is "stupid" according to Hoya's Ceo. I guess both Canon and Nikon are stupid to continue operating manufacturing plants in Japan?
I've seen people speculate the 2010 edition 645D will launch for $5,000 to $6,500. If that happened in next few months then I'm guessing alot people would buy one without hessitation. At $10,000 plus for right person its a decent deal for a kit lens and 645D camera combo. Either way I don't see photographers abandoning and selling off their high end pro spec Canikon or Hassy for 645D. Adding other brand gear seems more logical thesedays. Look at Panasonic G Series owners, they added m4/3 Panny to their existing other brand gear choices.
Officially in 2009 Pentax USA has said no 645D USA sales, I provided link earlier, so that means no USA support. Lately people buying grey market pentax have been told to ship back to Japan for warranty service. Pentax used to have a very liberal warranty, but since they closed down inhouse repair center in Colorado in 2009 things are much tighter with their new outsourced repair provider, CRIS in Arizona.
just who would buy one without extensive support? you paid that much for a camera and you expect full support from the manufacturer beyond just repairs. if the rumor of selling only in Japan is true then Pentax has decided that they have to support it like everyone else does and the only place the support is cheap to supply is in Japan to the Japanese market.
Herb...
Tariq Gibran wrote:
For MF digital, the traditional method (and I have previously argued outdated and mostly unnecessary in this day and age) the major players have employed to sell and support their cameras has been extremely costly. This cost must be factored into the price.
it hasn't played a role in Canon 1Ds Mk3 vs Nikon D3X sales. people are not buying the Canon just or even mostly because of cost where the price difference is more than 10%. brand power is more important and Pentax lost its a long time ago.
Herb....
mawz wrote:
The thing is that AF unit likely costs Hasselblad 1/10 of the price of the sensor, but Pentax will be paying closer to 1/100 or less, because of differing amortization costs due to Pentax's ability to share the non-physical costs of the AF unit across orders of magnitude more production. Differences like that add up quite quickly. It's not going to make Pentax come in at half the price of the Hassy, but even a 10% cost advantage can be a huge deal with $10k cameras
Pentax skipped Photo Plus in NYC last fall. at least they had the brains to sell off their scanner and printer division. i believe survey instruments and GIS are also gone.
Herb...
Mr.Lindy wrote:
Yeah, I know, CES was likely not the venue to launch 645D, but I thought there must have been a good reason for both Pentax Europe and Pentax USA to attend CES in Vegas, yesterday and today. Maybe the Las Vegas visit is a corporate vacation perk for Pentax USA and Europe employees attending the 3 day event? I've seen no CES images of anything "Pentax" on the net or on CNBC business channel thats broadcasting from the event, so far..
HerbChong wrote:
just who would buy one without extensive support? you paid that much for a camera and you expect full support from the manufacturer beyond just repairs. if the rumor of selling only in Japan is true then Pentax has decided that they have to support it like everyone else does and the only place the support is cheap to supply is in Japan to the Japanese market.
Herb...
That would be me...and probably many other knowledgeable digital photographers who would be more than happy to save many thousands off of the purchase price in lieu of un-needed, after-sale hand holding/training of stuff they already know. Like I said earlier, this is not 1997, a time when high end digital cameras required highly specialized software, and the training to use it. What do you need extensive support for today?
Tariq Gibran wrote:
That would be me...and probably many other knowledgeable digital photographers who would be more than happy to save many thousands off of the purchase price in lieu of un-needed, after-sale hand holding/training of stuff they already know. Like I said earlier, this is not 1997, a time when high end digital cameras required highly specialized software, and the training to use it. What do you need extensive support for today?
and me too. ;-)
Seriously. How much support do I need? What are they going to do? Hold my hand?
Why would Photo District New run an article titled Pentax 645D Medium-Format Digital Camera On Track for 2010http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/content_display/esearch/e3i0d52172227325f289ca2b6506ecc9ee4 With this quote "We've started development and the plan right now is to have it released by Spring 2010," said Ned Bunnell, president of Pentax Imaging (USA) at a press event this week. if Pentax wasn't going to sell the camera in the US
Also what's all this talk about a kit lens, does anybody think that this camera will come with a $99.00 lens with a plastic mount ?
As far as auto focus goes, Pentax was the first to offer it in a medium format body.
My main concern with a 645D is will it have professional support (like CPS or NPS, 2/3 day repair with loaners available) and can I rent bodies and lenses from local pro rental shops.
Here's some thoughts on Pentax full frame K Mount Dslr, the current K mount lenses, and the restart of 645D concept, from Pentax USA President's Blog April 2009:
Square sensor and full frame Executives in Japan have said we'll release a model this summer that is more advanced than the K20D, and that we have re-started development of the 645D which is expected to be released in 2010. When asked about full frame (meaning 35mm camera body), we commented this would be very difficult in the near future. To those that continue to postulate or argue that the new camera better be full frame, ask yourself what lenses are you planning to use on this hypothetical new full frame body?
As I received a few comments on this, let me clarify my tongue-in-cheek comment. Anyone that is currently using a full frame sensor 35mm camera knows that they exact a high price in terms of the lenses that perform acceptably. Many lenses originally designed for film fall short in terms of distortion control and edge-to-edge sharpness when used with a full frame sensor. I have a good friend who currently shoots high-end weddings in Southern California with a 5D. While he loves the fact he can now use his wide angle lenses, he has quite a few lenses he's shot with for years that he can no longer use.
In our case, if we developed a full frame camera, it's likely that very few of our recent DA lenses (those designed for APS-C) would be able to properly fill the viewing area of this new sensor. And although we have some wonderful FA lenses, like my favorite FA 31mm Limited, I'm not sure even this lens would be up to the optical challenge.
I know that our engineers have studied these issues and would probably not agree totally with my simplistic explanation. However, I think it's important to understand that going to a full frame sensor means not only having to design a brand new camera from ground up, but likely a new line of lenses that meet the more demanding optical requirements.
It's clear that there is a place for full frame cameras, but it currently is a small part of the overall SLR market. Due to the total cost of ownership and increased demands shooting with full frame images, the majority of cameras sold will still use APS-C, 4/3rds type sensors.
Despite some of our desires to always want newer, faster, better technology, I'm not sure that many of us would see a dramatic improvement in our photography if we were given a full frame sensor camera. Personally, I think we've hit the sweet spot with APS-C sensor cameras today. 12-15 megapixels is more than adequate for even your most demanding assignments, we've got far better control of noise, frame rates and processing speeds are sufficient for the majority of work advanced or serious photographers need and all of this is available at very reasonable price points, regardless of your choice of brand.
In closing this train of thought, the whole full frame debate reminds me of the sometimes wine-induced arguments I have with a buddy of mine over the performance of our 5 series BMW's. I always end these discussions by saying if he really, really demands/needs/desires higher performance then shut up and buy an M5 or 7 series. As you'd expect, he's still shooting...uh I mean driving his beautiful 5 series bimmer.
The D3x's selling point is the 14-24 and 24-70G. If you're going to pay that much for the camera, you're going to want the camera with the best glass on the front. People are buying the D3x because of the perception that it both outperforms the 1DsmIII and that it allows use of best-in-class lenses. This is a different situation than in the MF market where the current options are not considered to have better lenses available than Pentax's FA645 lenses. Note that Pentax will need to deliver competitive IQ to take advantage of any cost advantages, people will pay extra for more IQ, that's a given.
The MF market is different than the 35mm market for branding. Pentax still has strong brand awareness there from the 67 and the P645, where it's not had a strong higher-end presence in the 35mm market since the mid-1980's.
HerbChong wrote:
it hasn't played a role in Canon 1Ds Mk3 vs Nikon D3X sales. people are not buying the Canon just or even mostly because of cost where the price difference is more than 10%. brand power is more important and Pentax lost its a long time ago.
