[philbaum]

The one on my heavily used Canon A640 gave out (went blank).
So, as much as I appreciate their functionality,
I wouldn't be rushing to be an early adopter if they appeared on APS-C Pentax cameras.

Was that an articulating (multi directional) or a tilting screen? I've always thought the articulating were a bit more vulnerable. And the screen going out may or may not be related. I've heard of way more mount release buttons falling out than screen tilting failures :-)

[D1N0]

Was that an articulating (multi directional) or a tilting screen? I've always thought the articulating were a bit more vulnerable. And the screen going out may or may not be related. I've heard of way more mount release buttons falling out than screen tilting failures :-)

He is talking about a product from 2006. Only 8 years ago.

[lytrytyr]

Was that an articulating (multi directional) or a tilting screen?

Articulating. Which is what made it so handy.

---------- Post added 09-28-14 at 04:08 PM ----------

He is talking about a product from 2006. Only 8 years ago.

It lasted three years. If the image had been stabilized, I might have sent the camera for repair.

[danielblues]

The one on my heavily used Canon A640 gave out (went blank).
So, as much as I appreciate their functionality,
I wouldn't be rushing to be an early adopter if they appeared on APS-C Pentax cameras.

The one on my 2001 Canon G2 is still fine.
It's the only thing I miss when using my K-30.

[kadajawi]

I've always had a suspicion this is why they haven't done in body Wi-Fi.

But clearly there are spots where the WiFi signal could go out, otherwise the Flu card wouldn't be able to function. Place the antenna around the SD card door if necessary, but there must be a place for the antenna. And if not, make a place. Then the camera is not 100% metal, so what.

[monochrome]

But clearly there are spots where the WiFi signal could go out, otherwise the Flu card wouldn't be able to function. Place the antenna around the SD card door if necessary, but there must be a place for the antenna. And if not, make a place. Then the camera is not 100% metal, so what.

Well of course then they'd need to move whatever else is wherever they would put the antenna, which causes some other problem, so they have to change something else and something else.

Then there's the matter of the cost of features. I don't care if in-body Wi-Fi costs a penny, if they put it in they have to leave something else off - and EVERY buyer of that camera body has to accept that compromise whether or not they want or need Wi-Fi.

I simply refuse to believe Ricoh is just benighted on this issue. I believe they don't believe there is enough benefit to make Wi-Fi worth whatever other sacrifices they would need to make.

I think it is Wi-Fi is Consumer Reports effect feature - in-body Wi-Fi is important because it checks a box on a comparison table and internet shoppers are feature-comparison shoppers. But as a real, useful, needed feature for many or even most dSLR users it is far down the list.

Same goes for a hinged LCD - useful when you use it but the rest of the time it just makes the camera thicker and costlier. I carry a Refconverter in my camera bag. I bet I use it more often than the average user uses a hinged LCD, but even then only on a tripod.

[RonHendriks1966]

Well of course then they'd need to move whatever else is wherever they would put the antenna, which causes some other problem, so they have to change something else and something else.

Then there's the matter of the cost of features. I don't care if in-body Wi-Fi costs a penny, if they put it in they have to leave something else off - and EVERY buyer of that camera body has to accept that compromise whether or not they want or need Wi-Fi.

I simply refuse to believe Ricoh is just benighted on this issue. I believe they don't believe there is enough benefit to make Wi-Fi worth whatever other sacrifices they would need to make.

I think it is Wi-Fi is Consumer Reports effect feature - in-body Wi-Fi is important because it checks a box on a comparison table and internet shoppers are feature-comparison shoppers. But as a real, useful, needed feature for many or even most dSLR users it is far down the list.

Same goes for a hinged LCD - useful when you use it but the rest of the time it just makes the camera thicker and costlier. I carry a Refconverter in my camera bag. I bet I use it more often than the average user uses a hinged LCD, but even then only on a tripod.

You need to pay for incorporating wifi in the camera. Probably not worth it.

[clackers]

Most more rugged cameras don't have them. A 645Z doesn't need to be particularly rugged, so it can have it,

The 645Z screen is even WR.

[mamethot]

I hate the onboard flash. I never use it. I want it off of the next camera. I don't want to pay for this since I don't use it.

And it uses the space for the gps and wifi antennas.

[monochrome]

I hate the onboard flash. I never use it. I want it off of the next camera. I don't want to pay for this since I don't use it.

And it uses the space for the gps and wifi antennas.

You'd have blood in the streets.

[kadajawi]

Well of course then they'd need to move whatever else is wherever they would put the antenna, which causes some other problem, so they have to change something else and something else.

Then there's the matter of the cost of features. I don't care if in-body Wi-Fi costs a penny, if they put it in they have to leave something else off - and EVERY buyer of that camera body has to accept that compromise whether or not they want or need Wi-Fi.

I simply refuse to believe Ricoh is just benighted on this issue. I believe they don't believe there is enough benefit to make Wi-Fi worth whatever other sacrifices they would need to make.

I think it is Wi-Fi is Consumer Reports effect feature - in-body Wi-Fi is important because it checks a box on a comparison table and internet shoppers are feature-comparison shoppers. But as a real, useful, needed feature for many or even most dSLR users it is far down the list.

Same goes for a hinged LCD - useful when you use it but the rest of the time it just makes the camera thicker and costlier. I carry a Refconverter in my camera bag. I bet I use it more often than the average user uses a hinged LCD, but even then only on a tripod.

I'm sure Ricoh thinks people don't want these features. Basically Ricoh doesn't want me as a customer, and I guess that's fine. I know Samsung loves me, and so does Sony. Maybe it's really time to leave in the next year or two. We'll see if Ricoh's outdated thinking will get them far, but they shouldn't be too surprised if suddenly they are even behind Samsung in terms of camera sales.


Btw., the WiFi antenna should be a bit of bent metal AFAIK, something that could be surrounding the place where the battery or SD card door is.

[ElJamoquio]

I hate the onboard flash. I never use it. I want it off of the next camera. I don't want to pay for this since I don't use it.

And it uses the space for the gps and wifi antennas.

Concur. I don't need GPS or WiFi for 99% of my life, but I 100% don't need onboard flash.

And if the world doesn't revolve around me... well, it should.

---------- Post added 09-28-14 at 07:43 PM ----------

I'm sure Ricoh thinks people don't want these features. Basically Ricoh doesn't want me as a customer, and I guess that's fine. I know Samsung loves me, and so does Sony. Maybe it's really time to leave in the next year or two. We'll see if Ricoh's outdated thinking will get them far, but they shouldn't be too surprised if suddenly they are even behind Samsung in terms of camera sales.


Btw., the WiFi antenna should be a bit of bent metal AFAIK, something that could be surrounding the place where the battery or SD card door is.

I don't understand why the metal chassis of the body isn't the WiFi antenna. Might not be possible, dunno. That might be a 'ground' to eliminate noise.

[clackers]

I know Samsung loves me, and so does Sony.

(Laughs).

Go with your heart, Kadajawi, I'll take all that K-mount glass off your hands for very little charge (good luck starting again on Samsung!), and your K-3 if you've got one.

[D1N0]

The Nikon D5300 has all of the above and costs 750 dollars. The competing K-50 costs 450. Put in Wifi, GPS and an articulated screen, along with weathersealing and bright Pentaprism. It will totally own the Nikon and Ricoh will be able to sell it for hundreds more.

[clackers]

The Nikon D5300 has all of the above and costs 750 dollars. The competing K-50 costs 450. Put in Wifi, GPS and an articulated screen, along with weathersealing and bright Pentaprism. It will totally own the Nikon and Ricoh will be able to sell it for hundreds more.

Don't rule out a later 'real' version targeted at existing customers, D1N0.

These 'S' versions of the K and Q series are aimed at young buyers attempting more serious photography than the fixed lens phones or compacts they've used in the past.

The president of Ricoh Imaging said there's no point in the company merely mirroring Canon and Nikon, who face troubles of their own, BTW.