[IchabodCrane]

That's not about making one very good camera; actually a flagship which doesn't sell might kill or otherwise put in trouble a camera company. Minolta's 7D, AFAIK, was one such example. The reverse is true: a successful flagship is far from solving a camera division's problems.
The thing is, that Samsung's camera division on the whole is in trouble. Whatever problems they might have, Ricoh Imaging would have to solve them.

To be fair, Ricoh wouldn't have to buy Samsung's camera business to get one or two cameras. The bigger dilemma is how to make Samsung's camera(s) fully compatible with K-mount. If that can't be reasonably done then would Ricoh really want to take on a 4th mount system and one that has a very limited lens lineup? That wouldn't make much sense to me.

[Dan Rentea]

Canon, with all their money and research power, produce their own sensors and they are crap and leave the photographic community wondering when they will ever come to their senses and start using Toshiba or Sony sensors (I can only assume Canon is saving money that way). Meanwhile Nikon uses Toshiba and Sony sensors and is getting better results.

So why all professional photographers are not selling all their Canon cameras and lenses and after that go to Nikon or Sony? What is wrong with Sue Bryce, Lindsay Adler, Karl Taylor, Jeff Ascough, Andy Rouse, etc.?

You'll probably say that they already have big investments in lenses, but all of them changed lenses in the last few years (selling the old ones) so why do they stick with Canon? They make money from their photos so gear must be important to them...

My guess is that all professionals photographer are too busy being creative in their work and they let this endless debate (which sensor or which camera is better) to us.

[FantasticMrFox]

So why all professional photographers are not selling all their Canon cameras and lenses and after that go to Nikon or Sony? What is wrong with Sue Bryce, Lindsay Adler, Karl Taylor, Jeff Ascough, Andy Rouse, etc.?

You'll probably say that they already have big investments in lenses, but all of them changed lenses in the last few years (selling the old ones) so why do they stick with Canon? They make money from their photos so gear must be important to them ...

L lenses And a very capable AF system, and the fact that I might have exaggerated when I called Canon sensors 'crap' - but they do trail behind the competition, slightly so in high ISO performance, significantly so in low ISO dynamic range. Obviously they are good enough to be used to create stunning images.

[Kunzite]

@JanG:
Indeed, I'm still trying to figure out what exactly you're saying they should buy, and if that's actually enough.
Buying sensor technology IMO means buying the part of Samsung responsible for the sensor's design (likely, not part of the camera division).
Buying "mirrorless technology"... what kind of technology is that? Can they simply license it, buy patents, or is it required to buy part of Samsung responsible for the respective technologies? IMO, except for some specific technologies which could be licensed to them, Ricoh would have to buy (part of) whatever Samsung division was responsible for it.

[WPRESTO]

Katzeye is defunct. Wish they had made a full microprism screen for Pentax before they went belly-up.

Perhaps someone else has observed this (I have not been reading posts on this thread regularly) but the dial immediately right of the pentaprism housing of the K1 has a crop position. It probably brings up choices that can be selected via the plain dial at the extreme right.
If the sensor is 36mp, I think that means cropping to APS-C will provide a 24mp image, same as the K3. Check me on that but I think the 1.5X crop factor is based on area rather than linear measurement.

[Dan Rentea]

L lenses And a very capable AF system, and the fact that I might have exaggerated when I called Canon sensors 'crap' - but they do trail behind the competition, slightly so in high ISO performance, significantly so in low ISO dynamic range. Obviously they are good enough to be used to create stunning images.

So, if more than a duzin of the best photographers in the world are using Canon gear: some of them are using 1Dx for wildlife & sports, others are using 5Ds for studio work or landscape, and others are using 5D Mark III for weddings (Jeff Ascough wife actually uses 6D for weddings), then I guess this debate is useless.

Both Nikon and Canon have something that Sony or Pentax doesn't have. A mature sistem with lots of accessories (lenses, flashes, etc.) and support from third party companies. Those things combined with what you just said (very capable Af system on Canon/Nikon cameras) makes PRO photographers staying (still) on Canon/Nikon boat.

So, I'm thinking that the number of megapixels from a full frame camera is not the most important thing when you choose a system.

[Kunzite]

@WPRESTO:
The crop factor is based on linear measurement, so you'll get around 16MP.

[pathdoc]

Buying sensor technology IMO means buying the part of Samsung responsible for the sensor's design

You can license the technology or you can buy the division that developed it. If you want to integrate that with what you yourself are doing, it can be argued that it makes more sense to buy the division because then you get the scientists who built the tech and understand its peculiarities. Of course a lot still depends on how you manage what you've got - note that the West got the most German rocket scientists while the Soviets got mostly the prototype rockets/blueprints, and yet it was the USSR which was first to put a satellite and then a man into orbit.

[WPRESTO]

@WPRESTO:
The crop factor is based on linear measurement, so you'll get around 16MP.

OK. So basically you get something closer to a K5 when the FF is cropped.

[Winder]

To be fair, Ricoh wouldn't have to buy Samsung's camera business to get one or two cameras. The bigger dilemma is how to make Samsung's camera(s) fully compatible with K-mount. If that can't be reasonably done then would Ricoh really want to take on a 4th mount system and one that has a very limited lens lineup? That wouldn't make much sense to me.

I would be fine with Ricoh using Samsung sensors and image processors. The difference between the Samsung BSI and the Sony BSI is basically nothing and the Samsung image processor is very, very powerful. I don't see it happening, but I would like to see more competition for Sony.

[bertwert]

If the sensor is 36mp, I think that means cropping to APS-C will provide a 24mp image, same as the K3. Check me on that but I think the 1.5X crop factor is based on area rather than linear measurement.

Nope 36MP FF will make 16MP APS-C.
To get the MP crop factor you have to square the image format crop factor 1.5 * 1.5 which is 2.25.
36 / 2.25 is 16.
To have a 24MP APS-C sensor from FF crop you need a 54MP FF sensor (24 * 2.25 = 54).

[Kunzite]

I would be fine with Ricoh using Samsung sensors and image processors. The difference between the Samsung BSI and the Sony BSI is basically nothing and the Samsung image processor is very, very powerful. I don't see it happening, but I would like to see more competition for Sony.

I would also like to see more competition for Sony; I just don't see Ricoh doing it (in the near future).
Unfortunately what we're seeing is less competition, as Sony is buying the Toshiba sensor division and Samsung might get out of the large sensor market. Fortunately, current sensors are already very good.

[JanG]

@JanG:
Indeed, I'm still trying to figure out what exactly you're saying they should buy, and if that's actually enough.
Buying sensor technology IMO means buying the part of Samsung responsible for the sensor's design (likely, not part of the camera division).
Buying "mirrorless technology"... what kind of technology is that? Can they simply license it, buy patents, or is it required to buy part of Samsung responsible for the respective technologies? IMO, except for some specific technologies which could be licensed to them, Ricoh would have to buy (part of) whatever Samsung division was responsible for it.

I will try to explain it more thoroughly.
Sensor technology:
I am pretty sure that Samsung has some future advancements of the NX1 sensor up their sleeves that now will never see the light of day if not by selling the technology to another camera manufacturer. That this technology exists can be concluded from normal development cycles of let's say 2 to 4 years for cameras. This technology could be anything from a FF BSI sensor to sensors with faster read-out, lower noise, deeper electron wells - nobody of us knows. Ricoh could buy this technology or pay Samsung to finish the development. Ricoh could than let Samsung or any other chip manufacturer do the production of the chip. No need to buy larger parts of Samsungs sensor development department.

With the term "mirrorless technology" I was trying to refer to things like EVF, focusing technology, fast read out for high frame rates for stills and video, wireless technology, energy saving options and so on and so on - all concerning soft- as well as hardware. Again there would be no need to buy e.g. the production line of Samsung cams, neither their sales channels or whatever else that does not belong to development.

It would then depend on Ricoh alone whether they just licensed technology for a camera or bought the whole development group(s) with the intention to strengthen their chip and electronics know-how (as we should not forget that Pentax was an optics company from the very start but chips and electronics will become even more important for future cameras than they already are today).

Again, please keep in mind, this is nothing but an idea of mine. I do not even have the faintest hint that Ricoh has any interest in Samsung or Samsung's technology. But I am sure Samsung would be happy to make some last money with there camera division. And, of course, others could be interested in Samsungs knowledge, too. E.g., Canon for better low ISO DR for their chips.

[normhead]

So why all professional photographers are not selling all their Canon cameras and lenses and after that go to Nikon or Sony? What is wrong with Sue Bryce, Lindsay Adler, Karl Taylor, Jeff Ascough, Andy Rouse, etc.?

You'll probably say that they already have big investments in lenses, but all of them changed lenses in the last few years (selling the old ones) so why do they stick with Canon? They make money from their photos so gear must be important to them...

My guess is that all professionals photographer are too busy being creative in their work and they let this endless debate (which sensor or which camera is better) to us.

And, what camera you use makes very little difference to the quality of the majority of pictures. technical quality has nothing to do with artistic merit. Many of the folks on this site are caught up in technical quality, and ignore artistic merit. To be a top level photographer, artistic merit is everything, technical quality is an afterthought. They are not the same thing.

What is important as a pro is familiarity with your gear, so that the camera doesn't distract from your process. It doesn't matter what gear. There are small differences. One camera may have the edge in one area, one may have the edge in another. it's certainly nice to have that edge. But once you have a camera you're comfortable with, that's what's important. Your comfort level. You give that up changing systems. It may be weeks before you are comfortable on your new system. That can be cause for concern.

For some reason, when people are going on and on about some perceived improvement, mirrorless whatever... " I really don't give a s&!t about that." Isn't seen as a valid response. But 90% of the time, it's the best response and the only response. It's amazing how much work people will put into trying to convince other people that useless notions mean something. People go on and on 36 MP or 42 MP... what's the most valid response? See above. People go on about 13 EV DR, or 14 EV, what is the response? You guessed it.

What is the response if your picture has no artistic merit? It shouldn't be , "you need a better camera", it should be, "you need to better understand how to use what you have."

[RonHendriks1966]

So Samsung is big. Wants to play as number 1 or 2 in a market. Being number 3 or 4 is good when growth is possible.

They just invested in their semiconductor plant. That's the sensor business and more.

http://www.androidheadlines.com/2015/04/samsung-invest-23-billion-semiconductor-facility-near-seoul-south-korea.html

So with Ricoh Imaging being a dwarf, the question is where Samsung could earn money. The number of sensor bought by Ricoh is to small to invest a lot in it. Unless there are more customers. With Samsung stopping their camera's that makes the investment not the biggest priority for sensors larger then smartphones or just for surveillance or industrial use.