Ricoh Imaging Europe S.A.S. - Report of a meeting!

Kunzite · 01-21-2014, 09:26 AM

mikemike:
Eventually - but it's more difficult than it seems; there are limits that works one against another. Higher resolution requires faster data transfer&processing; higher refresh rate - the same plus higher sensor sensitivity, etc.
Don't single out characteristics (e.g. battery consumption, need for calibration) and think about the whole package: the good old SLR design is still viable.

normhead:
Don't laugh. What we like, and what are commercially successful products are two different things.

mrNewt · 01-21-2014, 09:30 AM

K-01 is still available in Japan as far as I know... the blue smurf came there after it was announced as canceled here right!?
I kind of I doubt there were technical problems... more like failure to price it right from the beginning...

Anyway, these are good news for me... I can I can hold a little bit longer and hope for that K-HG hopefully in a year or so...

mrNewt · 01-21-2014, 09:33 AM

Originally posted by mikemike

Correct. Eventually EVFs will be able to match the OVF in quality...

Never gonna happen... get close, maybe, but that's a whole other debate. No point to go into it.

mikemike · 01-21-2014, 09:53 AM

Originally posted by mrNewt

Never gonna happen... get close, maybe, but that's a whole other debate. No point to go into it.

If it gets close, it becomes a matter of cost and perceived value to the consumer. If you were comparing two cameras for the same price would you rather have a low latency high resolution 100% coverage EVF with focus peeking that telescoped and tilted for waste level usage or a 95% coverage pentaprism OVF? That is the choice that you will probably be facing in 3-5 years time.

ElJamoquio · 01-21-2014, 09:58 AM

Originally posted by mikemike

I think the K-01 was not successful because on the aesthetic side, it had a very radical design the people either loved or hated, and in the technical side, Pentax's CDAF system was still not up to snuff against other mirrorless systems. On chip PDAF is available now with the sensors that would likely make it into a pentax FF and should be utilized whether that camera is a mirrorless or with an OVF. This technological advancement means that the only sustainable technical advantage a DSLR has over a mirrorless is energy efficiency (battery life if they used the same size batteries but that could be closed with a bigger battery) because it has a passive view finder technology.

You didn't mention IMO the worst 'feature' - the ergonomics were terrible, in a package that's basically as big as a DSLR.

The required price cuts of 60+% that were only ~6 months after launch - an unprecedented albeit tacit admission of failure - must've burned some Pentax executives hard, though. Like after the FF failure in ~2001, Pentax's 'MILC Failure' might mean we don't have a 'real' MILC for at least a few years while they regroup psychologically.

normhead · 01-21-2014, 10:03 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

mikemike

normhead:
Don't laugh. What we like, and what are commercially successful products are two different things.

Laughing is good for your health. That's really bad advice.

**monochrome** · 01-21-2014, 10:05 AM

Originally posted by monochrome

Perhaps I don't understand what you mean by passive viewfinder technology.

Originally posted by Rondec

He means that you can look through an optical viewfinder with your camera off and still see something (as long as your lens cap is off too).

Oh. That's embarassingly obvious.

I will say however that what I would see is actually there, not what would be electronically interpreted as being there if I could actually see it. I suppose that matters.

normhead · 01-21-2014, 10:09 AM

Originally posted by monochrome

Oh. That's embarassingly obvious.

I will say however that what I would see is actually there, not what would be electronically interpreted as being there if I could actually see it. I suppose that matters.

It almost like asking, would you like to see the world, or would you like to watch it on TV? After all, on TV you see the updates to scores from other games, breaking news, going by on the bottom of the screen and all those great commercials. It really doesn't seem like much of a question, well at least to some of us.

**Rondec** · 01-21-2014, 10:13 AM

Originally posted by monochrome

Oh. That's embarassingly obvious.

I will say however that what I would see is actually there, not what would be electronically interpreted as being there if I could actually see it. I suppose that matters.

Problem (in my opinion) is that an EVF isn't as good right now and it definitely decreases battery life. I do think at some point EVFs will be as good as OVFs -- lag will be minimal, resolution adequate and in lower light, they could be better. But battery technology doesn't seem to advance nearly as rapidly as other things. My i phone's charge lasts days shorter than my wife's three year old flip phone -- and I really don't use it that much more than to make phone calls.

Kunzite · 01-21-2014, 10:15 AM

Originally posted by normhead

Laughing is good for your health. That's really bad advice.

My apologies; please laugh to your hearth's content - and may you live a long, healthy and happy life. But... could you find other subjects to laugh at?

Originally posted by mikemike

If it gets close, it becomes a matter of cost and perceived value to the consumer. If you were comparing two cameras for the same price would you rather have a low latency high resolution 100% coverage EVF with focus peeking that telescoped and tilted for waste level usage or a 95% coverage pentaprism OVF? That is the choice that you will probably be facing in 3-5 years time.

Why would the OVFs make a step backwards?
And since we're talking about "the consumer", so far most MILCs sold are viewfinderless. Just sayin'.

mrNewt · 01-21-2014, 10:16 AM

Originally posted by mikemike

If it gets close, it becomes a matter of cost and perceived value to the consumer. If you were comparing two cameras for the same price would you rather have a low latency high resolution 100% coverage EVF with focus peeking that telescoped and tilted for waste level usage or a 95% coverage pentaprism OVF? That is the choice that you will probably be facing in 3-5 years time.

Like I have said, this debate was beaten to death with sticks and stones... a search will find you the threads.
Personally though, I would rather have an OVF over an EVF not matter how fancy the EVF is. Looking at a screen all day long trough a tube is never good. My eyes will eventually get tired.

Comparing the most advanced EVF that is on today's market, with a nice and bright OVF from a film camera... there is no contest... OVF wins by miles.
And considering FF market will eventually pick up, I expect the same OVF size and coverage as we had for the film cameras. So in that case... again, OVF any time of the day without any regrets.

And EVF will not bother me in the least on a smaller, street and use for fun cameras.

Anyway, sorry for the derail and to keep it on topic - thanks for this report.
It give me hope a little more - just enough to wait a year more.

**GlassJunkie** · 01-21-2014, 10:36 AM

Any insight as to when and the specs? THX for the Article Ron!

Uluru · 01-21-2014, 12:59 PM

Originally posted by mikemike

If it gets close, it becomes a matter of cost and perceived value to the consumer. If you were comparing two cameras for the same price would you rather have a low latency high resolution 100% coverage EVF with focus peeking that telescoped and tilted for waste level usage or a 95% coverage pentaprism OVF? That is the choice that you will probably be facing in 3-5 years time.

How fortunate! The same time when cold fusion portable reactors become available.
The concept of a decisive moment escapes you, it seems.

normhead · 01-21-2014, 01:05 PM

Quote:

But... could you find other subjects to laugh at?

You could send me a joke book for Christmas...

Daikokuya · 01-21-2014, 03:29 PM

Originally posted by mrNewt

K-01 is still available in Japan as far as I know... the blue smurf came there after it was announced as canceled here right!?

You're right. The white-blue version with a DA 40mmF2.8 XS is available.

01-21-2014, 10:36 AM	#147
GlassJunkie Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: St Petersburg Photos: Albums Posts: 402	Any news on lenses, Particularly the Long Tele Zoom? Any insight as to when and the specs? THX for the Article Ron!

01-21-2014, 12:59 PM	#148
Uluru Banned Join Date: May 2010 Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,535	Originally posted by mikemike If it gets close, it becomes a matter of cost and perceived value to the consumer. If you were comparing two cameras for the same price would you rather have a low latency high resolution 100% coverage EVF with focus peeking that telescoped and tilted for waste level usage or a 95% coverage pentaprism OVF? That is the choice that you will probably be facing in 3-5 years time. How fortunate! The same time when cold fusion portable reactors become available. The concept of a decisive moment escapes you, it seems. Last edited by Uluru; 01-21-2014 at 02:54 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ned's back! (but Retires from Pentax Ricoh Imaging Americas)	Ishpuini	Pentax News and Rumors	12	06-20-2014 03:05 PM
Ricoh Imaging expected to make a profit in this FY	Kunzite	Pentax News and Rumors	39	10-31-2013 12:46 AM
Ricoh announces company name change - no more Pentax Ricoh Imaging, just Ricoh.	rawr	Pentax News and Rumors	528	10-28-2013 04:39 PM
Plenty of FA lenses on new Ricoh Imaging Website	Uluru	Pentax News and Rumors	131	08-13-2013 01:45 PM
Nature My DA 55-300mm arrived today. Here's a few of it's first shots.	coachteeter	Post Your Photos!	6	05-02-2010 10:22 PM

01-21-2014, 09:26 AM	#136
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	mikemike: Eventually - but it's more difficult than it seems; there are limits that works one against another. Higher resolution requires faster data transfer&processing; higher refresh rate - the same plus higher sensor sensitivity, etc. Don't single out characteristics (e.g. battery consumption, need for calibration) and think about the whole package: the good old SLR design is still viable. normhead: Don't laugh. What we like, and what are commercially successful products are two different things.

01-21-2014, 09:30 AM	#137
mrNewt Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: ON, RH Posts: 2,181	K-01 is still available in Japan as far as I know... the blue smurf came there after it was announced as canceled here right!? I kind of I doubt there were technical problems... more like failure to price it right from the beginning... Anyway, these are good news for me... I can I can hold a little bit longer and hope for that K-HG hopefully in a year or so...

01-21-2014, 09:33 AM	#138
mrNewt Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: ON, RH Posts: 2,181	Originally posted by mikemike Correct. Eventually EVFs will be able to match the OVF in quality... Never gonna happen... get close, maybe, but that's a whole other debate. No point to go into it.

01-21-2014, 09:53 AM	#139
mikemike Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: New Orleans Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,053	Originally posted by mrNewt Never gonna happen... get close, maybe, but that's a whole other debate. No point to go into it. If it gets close, it becomes a matter of cost and perceived value to the consumer. If you were comparing two cameras for the same price would you rather have a low latency high resolution 100% coverage EVF with focus peeking that telescoped and tilted for waste level usage or a 95% coverage pentaprism OVF? That is the choice that you will probably be facing in 3-5 years time.

01-21-2014, 09:58 AM	#140
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by mikemike I think the K-01 was not successful because on the aesthetic side, it had a very radical design the people either loved or hated, and in the technical side, Pentax's CDAF system was still not up to snuff against other mirrorless systems. On chip PDAF is available now with the sensors that would likely make it into a pentax FF and should be utilized whether that camera is a mirrorless or with an OVF. This technological advancement means that the only sustainable technical advantage a DSLR has over a mirrorless is energy efficiency (battery life if they used the same size batteries but that could be closed with a bigger battery) because it has a passive view finder technology. You didn't mention IMO the worst 'feature' - the ergonomics were terrible, in a package that's basically as big as a DSLR. The required price cuts of 60+% that were only ~6 months after launch - an unprecedented albeit tacit admission of failure - must've burned some Pentax executives hard, though. Like after the FF failure in ~2001, Pentax's 'MILC Failure' might mean we don't have a 'real' MILC for at least a few years while they regroup psychologically.

01-21-2014, 10:03 AM	#141
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by Kunzite mikemike normhead: Don't laugh. What we like, and what are commercially successful products are two different things. Laughing is good for your health. That's really bad advice.

01-21-2014, 10:05 AM	#142
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by monochrome Perhaps I don't understand what you mean by passive viewfinder technology. Originally posted by Rondec He means that you can look through an optical viewfinder with your camera off and still see something (as long as your lens cap is off too). Oh. That's embarassingly obvious. I will say however that what I would see is actually there, not what would be electronically interpreted as being there if I could actually see it. I suppose that matters.

01-21-2014, 10:09 AM	#143
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by monochrome Oh. That's embarassingly obvious. I will say however that what I would see is actually there, not what would be electronically interpreted as being there if I could actually see it. I suppose that matters. It almost like asking, would you like to see the world, or would you like to watch it on TV? After all, on TV you see the updates to scores from other games, breaking news, going by on the bottom of the screen and all those great commercials. It really doesn't seem like much of a question, well at least to some of us.

01-21-2014, 10:13 AM	#144
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,663	Originally posted by monochrome Oh. That's embarassingly obvious. I will say however that what I would see is actually there, not what would be electronically interpreted as being there if I could actually see it. I suppose that matters. Problem (in my opinion) is that an EVF isn't as good right now and it definitely decreases battery life. I do think at some point EVFs will be as good as OVFs -- lag will be minimal, resolution adequate and in lower light, they could be better. But battery technology doesn't seem to advance nearly as rapidly as other things. My i phone's charge lasts days shorter than my wife's three year old flip phone -- and I really don't use it that much more than to make phone calls.

01-21-2014, 10:15 AM	#145
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by normhead Laughing is good for your health. That's really bad advice. My apologies; please laugh to your hearth's content - and may you live a long, healthy and happy life. But... could you find other subjects to laugh at? Originally posted by mikemike If it gets close, it becomes a matter of cost and perceived value to the consumer. If you were comparing two cameras for the same price would you rather have a low latency high resolution 100% coverage EVF with focus peeking that telescoped and tilted for waste level usage or a 95% coverage pentaprism OVF? That is the choice that you will probably be facing in 3-5 years time. Why would the OVFs make a step backwards? And since we're talking about "the consumer", so far most MILCs sold are viewfinderless. Just sayin'.

01-21-2014, 10:16 AM	#146
mrNewt Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: ON, RH Posts: 2,181	Originally posted by mikemike If it gets close, it becomes a matter of cost and perceived value to the consumer. If you were comparing two cameras for the same price would you rather have a low latency high resolution 100% coverage EVF with focus peeking that telescoped and tilted for waste level usage or a 95% coverage pentaprism OVF? That is the choice that you will probably be facing in 3-5 years time. Like I have said, this debate was beaten to death with sticks and stones... a search will find you the threads. Personally though, I would rather have an OVF over an EVF not matter how fancy the EVF is. Looking at a screen all day long trough a tube is never good. My eyes will eventually get tired. Comparing the most advanced EVF that is on today's market, with a nice and bright OVF from a film camera... there is no contest... OVF wins by miles. And considering FF market will eventually pick up, I expect the same OVF size and coverage as we had for the film cameras. So in that case... again, OVF any time of the day without any regrets. And EVF will not bother me in the least on a smaller, street and use for fun cameras. Anyway, sorry for the derail and to keep it on topic - thanks for this report. It give me hope a little more - just enough to wait a year more.

01-21-2014, 01:05 PM	#149
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Quote: But... could you find other subjects to laugh at? You could send me a joke book for Christmas...

01-21-2014, 03:29 PM	#150
Daikokuya Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 210	Originally posted by mrNewt K-01 is still available in Japan as far as I know... the blue smurf came there after it was announced as canceled here right!? You're right. The white-blue version with a DA 40mmF2.8 XS is available.