Imaging Resource's interview with Ricoh

**monochrome** · 03-17-2014, 11:55 AM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

D600 + 24-85 F/3.5-4.5 is cheaper, lighter, faster, sharper, etc., etc. than K-3+16-50 F/2.8.

Depends on lens of course...

But . . . . . it's a D600 and f/3.5~4.5. Do you really claim that is the equal of K3 and 16~50?

ElJamoquio · 03-17-2014, 12:09 PM

Originally posted by monochrome

But . . . . . it's a D600 and f/3.5~4.5. Do you really claim that is the equal of K3 and 16~50?

Having had both (K-5+16-50 + D600 + 24-85), It's certainly better than the K-5 + 16-50.

I think it's better than the K3 + 16-50 but of course I only base this on 'projections' about the 16-50's sharpness based on data with the K-5. If there's anybody in the sf bay area with that combo, we can meet for a shoot-off. Perhaps the 16-50 is better than I give it credit for.

thibs · 03-17-2014, 12:09 PM

Originally posted by kadajawi

@Kunzite: Try bringing the SR system to FF. The sensor is bigger, it has a higher mass. Good luck moving it fast enough, precise enough, far enough. Are there any FF cameras with optical stabilization? If Pentax can't offer USABLE SR in camera, they will have to have it in the lenses. Which again means new lenses, investments, ... otherwise why would I go for a camera system that does not offer any form of stabilization? And what else could Pentax bring to the market? I like Pentax for having SR, and for being reasonably small and light yet weather proof, and for having a good UI. How small and light can they make a FF camera? Weather sealing exists on FF cameras. FF cameras are generally reasonably well thought out too, because of their target audience.

Mmmm? What do you think a850/a900 are but a stabilized Full Frame in body ?

kadajawi · 03-17-2014, 12:28 PM

Originally posted by thibs

Mmmm? What do you think a850/a900 are but a stabilized Full Frame in body ?

Oh, I didn't know about that camera. So it can be done. Did it work well? Also, the "successor", the a99 does not have stabilization...? Why?

Uluru · 03-17-2014, 01:59 PM

Originally posted by RobA_Oz

..I really doubt IBIS is a show-stopper for a 35FF Pentax DSLR, but designing an economical, efficient and effective system may require some extra effort. On the other hand, the benefits of such a design would likely flow down to the APS-C bodies as well, maybe even the GR.

?!?
Why not then start from the 645D, implement IBIS and scale it all down to GR?
Nah, but it must be FF, right, or otherwise it's not worthwhile?

At this stage, any our idea about IBIS implemented in larger than crop sensor bodies is a shot in the dark.

I am not at all certain Ricoh Imaging wants to bother with the FF in the first place. All we can see are splendid improvements in the Crop sensor IBIS, so it seems their efforts are focused there.

They have completely ruled it out for the 645D, so it seems that what they want to do with IBIS, is not worthwhile doing in 645D. I would not be surprised if it's not worth doing even in a theoretical FF. Pentax surely does not want another A850 on the market.

So far we see that Pentax focuses on IBIS in their mainstream range of cameras, the Q system and the Crop sized K-mount cameras. IBIS is one of their core technologies and trademarks, and may be the one of reasons Pentax does not want to bother with FF at all; not because it is hard to do, but because efforts exceed the benefits.

It is simple: if Nikon can achieve 3-4 stops of IS using in lens IS, and Pentax can achieve 3.5 stops of IS using IBIS, it makes sense to invest in it. But if IBIS in FF can only yield in some 1.5-2.5 stops gain, what's the point? It starts lower than Nikon's system in the first place. On the other hand, if Sony implemented it and they were able to squeeze something out if it, it doesn't mean much and proves nothing as Sony's strategy and RI's strategy in the FF will most likely be totally opposite.

Mistral75 · 03-17-2014, 02:23 PM

Originally posted by kadajawi

(...)
Try bringing the SR system to FF. The sensor is bigger, it has a higher mass. Good luck moving it fast enough, precise enough, far enough. Are there any FF cameras with optical stabilization?
(...)

Any and all Sony A-mount cameras: Alpha 850, Alpha 900 and Alpha 99.

---------- Post added 03-17-2014 at 10:26 PM ----------

Originally posted by kadajawi

Oh, I didn't know about that camera. So it can be done. Did it work well? Also, the "successor", the a99 does not have stabilization...? Why?

Alpha 99 enjoys sensor stabilization too and yes, it works well.

**RobA_Oz** · 03-17-2014, 09:50 PM

Originally posted by Uluru

Why not then start from the 645D, implement IBIS and scale it all down to GR?

I think you know the answer to that question, but for those who haven't been following the previous discussions, a 24x36 sensor will fit within the envelope of the present APS-C IBIS platform, including the actuators. The 33x44 sensor from the 645D would require up-scaling of the platform to accommodate it. Of course, they may already have done that.

kadajawi · 03-17-2014, 10:31 PM

Does SR make sense in a 645D? Do owners shoot with it handheld?

Personally I'd be much more excited if the SR system from the K-3 has enough range to cover FF. So there is a bracketing mode that takes photos from different sensor positions so when stitched together I get a FF image.

ElJamoquio · 03-17-2014, 10:54 PM

Originally posted by kadajawi

Does SR make sense in a 645D? Do owners shoot with it handheld?

Personally I'd be much more excited if the SR system from the K-3 has enough range to cover FF. So there is a bracketing mode that takes photos from different sensor positions so when stitched together I get a FF image.

Let's say the movement peak-peak is 2 millimeters now.
For a FF the IBIS would 'need', say, 3 mm (debatable, but let's go with it for now).
For FF emulation through sensor shift, it would need to be ~12.5mm.

Quite a bit more... and not going to happen in my view.

kadajawi · 03-18-2014, 12:05 AM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

Let's say the movement peak-peak is 2 millimeters now.
For a FF the IBIS would 'need', say, 3 mm (debatable, but let's go with it for now).
For FF emulation through sensor shift, it would need to be ~12.5mm.

Quite a bit more... and not going to happen in my view.

The possible movement is quite a lot more than that though. If you use the sensor shift function you can move the sensor quite a bit. In any case, they should have that function, even if it doesn't have the reach of a full frame sensor.

Clavius · 03-18-2014, 01:10 AM

So... Maybe that's why the FA ltd update is scratched? Because the new FF compatible lenses are going to have the stabilisation in the lens instead? (Sorry, just trying to revive the hope for FF. LOL!)

ewig · 03-18-2014, 02:17 AM

i think pentax have already fullframe on prototype,
they just have a lot of problem with it, seems they work hard to invent "more" than a full frame DSLR....

waiting is not necessary ..theres a bunch of a Full frame camera out there

just keep an old FF lens... K mount its still the legend to continues , im pretty sure they still use K-mount for this full frame.

**Belnan** · 03-18-2014, 03:59 AM

Originally posted by ewig

i think pentax have already fullframe on prototype,
they just have a lot of problem with it, seems they work hard to invent "more" than a full frame DSLR....

waiting is not necessary ..theres a bunch of a Full frame camera out there

just keep an old FF lens... K mount its still the legend to continues , im pretty sure they still use K-mount for this full frame.

The only reason that pentax hasnt released a full frame camera is because they dont want to at this point. I am certain they could have released a full frame camera pretty much any time they had wanted to in the last couple of years however they dont want to release a camera without lenses to go with it. The new 70-200 lens on the map is basically the most obvious way they can tell us full frame is coming soon without actuallly saying it. 645D II will be in May/June. FF will likely be shown at photokina with a release in late 2014 early 2015. Ricoh is definately not like Fuji or Sony in the sense that they will aggresively go for market share, ricoh's approach will much more methodical. More good things will come in time.

Uluru · 03-18-2014, 04:09 AM

Originally posted by kadajawi

Does SR make sense in a 645D? Do owners shoot with it handheld?

Personally I'd be much more excited if the SR system from the K-3 has enough range to cover FF. So there is a bracketing mode that takes photos from different sensor positions so when stitched together I get a FF image.

That would be too difficult.
However, the FF would need no classic IBIS from the crop Pentax bodies if it comes with something else which IBIS related technology would allow. What I mean is that instead of working hard to gain extra 2 stops of light/shutter speed by moving sensor and taking one shot (whilst already gaining one stop by its relative size compared to crop sensor), it could be better to implement IBIS technology not to shake sensor to gain f-stops or reduce Moire, but shift sensor just a pixel in each direction to boost on resolution and detail captured, and perhaps just enough to simulate 'film look' of the image and increasing colour and detail fidelity by nullifying the Bayer pattern with the sensor shift. A virtual Foveon, which gains an extra stop of light each time it moves sensor by a pixel.

With such an approach, the same IBIS technology is used to three diffrent ends:

1. sensor shift to gain extra f-stops (crop sensor)
2. AA simulator (crop sensor)
3. resolution and colour fidelity boost simulator (FF sensor)

While first two are difficult to do with a sensor of larger mass, the third is just perfect for the FF, and the features of the FF do not spoil the treats of the APS-C line. Feature no 3 also delivers the outcomes of the AA simulator, but in a different way. Such an FF would also require superb optics to deliver best possible results and there we have a good and plausible excuse not to use ancient lenses but instead invest in new.

The computational power, however, needs to be very robust but Prime 3 has enough stamina to do it.

kadajawi · 03-18-2014, 05:48 AM

Boosting resolution/color fidelity via sensor shift could and should be also done with crop sensor cameras. And I don't need in camera processing. I want them to have features (like sensor shift bracketing) that aren't calculated in camera. I can stitch the files myself, thank you. I think at this point it is fine to assume that a DSLR user will process the photos on a computer anyway.

03-17-2014, 01:59 PM	#95
Uluru Banned Join Date: May 2010 Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,535	Originally posted by RobA_Oz ..I really doubt IBIS is a show-stopper for a 35FF Pentax DSLR, but designing an economical, efficient and effective system may require some extra effort. On the other hand, the benefits of such a design would likely flow down to the APS-C bodies as well, maybe even the GR. ?!? Why not then start from the 645D, implement IBIS and scale it all down to GR? Nah, but it must be FF, right, or otherwise it's not worthwhile? At this stage, any our idea about IBIS implemented in larger than crop sensor bodies is a shot in the dark. I am not at all certain Ricoh Imaging wants to bother with the FF in the first place. All we can see are splendid improvements in the Crop sensor IBIS, so it seems their efforts are focused there. They have completely ruled it out for the 645D, so it seems that what they want to do with IBIS, is not worthwhile doing in 645D. I would not be surprised if it's not worth doing even in a theoretical FF. Pentax surely does not want another A850 on the market. So far we see that Pentax focuses on IBIS in their mainstream range of cameras, the Q system and the Crop sized K-mount cameras. IBIS is one of their core technologies and trademarks, and may be the one of reasons Pentax does not want to bother with FF at all; not because it is hard to do, but because efforts exceed the benefits. It is simple: if Nikon can achieve 3-4 stops of IS using in lens IS, and Pentax can achieve 3.5 stops of IS using IBIS, it makes sense to invest in it. But if IBIS in FF can only yield in some 1.5-2.5 stops gain, what's the point? It starts lower than Nikon's system in the first place. On the other hand, if Sony implemented it and they were able to squeeze something out if it, it doesn't mean much and proves nothing as Sony's strategy and RI's strategy in the FF will most likely be totally opposite. Last edited by Uluru; 03-17-2014 at 03:16 PM.

03-18-2014, 12:05 AM	#100
kadajawi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 2,799	Originally posted by ElJamoquio Let's say the movement peak-peak is 2 millimeters now. For a FF the IBIS would 'need', say, 3 mm (debatable, but let's go with it for now). For FF emulation through sensor shift, it would need to be ~12.5mm. Quite a bit more... and not going to happen in my view. The possible movement is quite a lot more than that though. If you use the sensor shift function you can move the sensor quite a bit. In any case, they should have that function, even if it doesn't have the reach of a full frame sensor. Last edited by kadajawi; 03-18-2014 at 12:12 AM.

03-18-2014, 04:09 AM	#104
Uluru Banned Join Date: May 2010 Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,535	Originally posted by kadajawi Does SR make sense in a 645D? Do owners shoot with it handheld? Personally I'd be much more excited if the SR system from the K-3 has enough range to cover FF. So there is a bracketing mode that takes photos from different sensor positions so when stitched together I get a FF image. That would be too difficult. However, the FF would need no classic IBIS from the crop Pentax bodies if it comes with something else which IBIS related technology would allow. What I mean is that instead of working hard to gain extra 2 stops of light/shutter speed by moving sensor and taking one shot (whilst already gaining one stop by its relative size compared to crop sensor), it could be better to implement IBIS technology not to shake sensor to gain f-stops or reduce Moire, but shift sensor just a pixel in each direction to boost on resolution and detail captured, and perhaps just enough to simulate 'film look' of the image and increasing colour and detail fidelity by nullifying the Bayer pattern with the sensor shift. A virtual Foveon, which gains an extra stop of light each time it moves sensor by a pixel. With such an approach, the same IBIS technology is used to three diffrent ends: 1. sensor shift to gain extra f-stops (crop sensor) 2. AA simulator (crop sensor) 3. resolution and colour fidelity boost simulator (FF sensor) While first two are difficult to do with a sensor of larger mass, the third is just perfect for the FF, and the features of the FF do not spoil the treats of the APS-C line. Feature no 3 also delivers the outcomes of the AA simulator, but in a different way. Such an FF would also require superb optics to deliver best possible results and there we have a good and plausible excuse not to use ancient lenses but instead invest in new. The computational power, however, needs to be very robust but Prime 3 has enough stamina to do it. Last edited by Uluru; 03-18-2014 at 04:39 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Imaging Resource's light leak tests	odyseuss	Pentax DSLR Discussion	6	03-14-2014 10:54 AM
Interview with Chief Sales & Marketing Officer / Ricoh Imaging Japan	leonsroar	Pentax News and Rumors	464	01-13-2014 01:42 PM
Ricoh email on K-3 points to Imaging Resource review	bwDraco	Pentax K-3 & K-3 II	34	10-23-2013 11:01 AM
Imaging-Resource Pentax/Ricoh interview	ogl	Pentax News and Rumors	44	09-24-2012 08:32 AM
Imaging Resource Interview with PENTAX US VP Marketing	Gareth.Ig	Pentax News and Rumors	8	01-28-2012 10:42 AM

03-17-2014, 11:55 AM	#91
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by ElJamoquio D600 + 24-85 F/3.5-4.5 is cheaper, lighter, faster, sharper, etc., etc. than K-3+16-50 F/2.8. Depends on lens of course... But . . . . . it's a D600 and f/3.5~4.5. Do you really claim that is the equal of K3 and 16~50?

03-17-2014, 12:09 PM	#92
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by monochrome But . . . . . it's a D600 and f/3.5~4.5. Do you really claim that is the equal of K3 and 16~50? Having had both (K-5+16-50 + D600 + 24-85), It's certainly better than the K-5 + 16-50. I think it's better than the K3 + 16-50 but of course I only base this on 'projections' about the 16-50's sharpness based on data with the K-5. If there's anybody in the sf bay area with that combo, we can meet for a shoot-off. Perhaps the 16-50 is better than I give it credit for.

03-17-2014, 12:09 PM	#93
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by kadajawi @Kunzite: Try bringing the SR system to FF. The sensor is bigger, it has a higher mass. Good luck moving it fast enough, precise enough, far enough. Are there any FF cameras with optical stabilization? If Pentax can't offer USABLE SR in camera, they will have to have it in the lenses. Which again means new lenses, investments, ... otherwise why would I go for a camera system that does not offer any form of stabilization? And what else could Pentax bring to the market? I like Pentax for having SR, and for being reasonably small and light yet weather proof, and for having a good UI. How small and light can they make a FF camera? Weather sealing exists on FF cameras. FF cameras are generally reasonably well thought out too, because of their target audience. Mmmm? What do you think a850/a900 are but a stabilized Full Frame in body ?

03-17-2014, 12:28 PM	#94
kadajawi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 2,799	Originally posted by thibs Mmmm? What do you think a850/a900 are but a stabilized Full Frame in body ? Oh, I didn't know about that camera. So it can be done. Did it work well? Also, the "successor", the a99 does not have stabilization...? Why?

03-17-2014, 02:23 PM	#96
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,525	Originally posted by kadajawi (...) Try bringing the SR system to FF. The sensor is bigger, it has a higher mass. Good luck moving it fast enough, precise enough, far enough. Are there any FF cameras with optical stabilization? (...) Any and all Sony A-mount cameras: Alpha 850, Alpha 900 and Alpha 99. ---------- Post added 03-17-2014 at 10:26 PM ---------- Originally posted by kadajawi Oh, I didn't know about that camera. So it can be done. Did it work well? Also, the "successor", the a99 does not have stabilization...? Why? Alpha 99 enjoys sensor stabilization too and yes, it works well.

03-17-2014, 09:50 PM	#97
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,191	Originally posted by Uluru Why not then start from the 645D, implement IBIS and scale it all down to GR? I think you know the answer to that question, but for those who haven't been following the previous discussions, a 24x36 sensor will fit within the envelope of the present APS-C IBIS platform, including the actuators. The 33x44 sensor from the 645D would require up-scaling of the platform to accommodate it. Of course, they may already have done that.

03-17-2014, 10:31 PM	#98
kadajawi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 2,799	Does SR make sense in a 645D? Do owners shoot with it handheld? Personally I'd be much more excited if the SR system from the K-3 has enough range to cover FF. So there is a bracketing mode that takes photos from different sensor positions so when stitched together I get a FF image.

03-17-2014, 10:54 PM	#99
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by kadajawi Does SR make sense in a 645D? Do owners shoot with it handheld? Personally I'd be much more excited if the SR system from the K-3 has enough range to cover FF. So there is a bracketing mode that takes photos from different sensor positions so when stitched together I get a FF image. Let's say the movement peak-peak is 2 millimeters now. For a FF the IBIS would 'need', say, 3 mm (debatable, but let's go with it for now). For FF emulation through sensor shift, it would need to be ~12.5mm. Quite a bit more... and not going to happen in my view.

03-18-2014, 01:10 AM	#101
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	So... Maybe that's why the FA ltd update is scratched? Because the new FF compatible lenses are going to have the stabilisation in the lens instead? (Sorry, just trying to revive the hope for FF. LOL!)

03-18-2014, 02:17 AM	#102
ewig Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 312	i think pentax have already fullframe on prototype, they just have a lot of problem with it, seems they work hard to invent "more" than a full frame DSLR.... waiting is not necessary ..theres a bunch of a Full frame camera out there just keep an old FF lens... K mount its still the legend to continues , im pretty sure they still use K-mount for this full frame.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-18-2014, 03:59 AM	#103
Belnan Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Nova Scotia Photos: Albums Posts: 1,090	Originally posted by ewig i think pentax have already fullframe on prototype, they just have a lot of problem with it, seems they work hard to invent "more" than a full frame DSLR.... waiting is not necessary ..theres a bunch of a Full frame camera out there just keep an old FF lens... K mount its still the legend to continues , im pretty sure they still use K-mount for this full frame. The only reason that pentax hasnt released a full frame camera is because they dont want to at this point. I am certain they could have released a full frame camera pretty much any time they had wanted to in the last couple of years however they dont want to release a camera without lenses to go with it. The new 70-200 lens on the map is basically the most obvious way they can tell us full frame is coming soon without actuallly saying it. 645D II will be in May/June. FF will likely be shown at photokina with a release in late 2014 early 2015. Ricoh is definately not like Fuji or Sony in the sense that they will aggresively go for market share, ricoh's approach will much more methodical. More good things will come in time.

03-18-2014, 05:48 AM	#105
kadajawi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 2,799	Boosting resolution/color fidelity via sensor shift could and should be also done with crop sensor cameras. And I don't need in camera processing. I want them to have features (like sensor shift bracketing) that aren't calculated in camera. I can stitch the files myself, thank you. I think at this point it is fine to assume that a DSLR user will process the photos on a computer anyway.