[RonHendriks1966]

Look at cipa figures for januari.

http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-201601_e.pdf

Dslr production is -20% and mirrorless production is +20%.

[shakereduced]

Why would a company want to produce a camera so other companies can sell you a lens?.

I can see why a matching of these two companies would work. Think of it in terms of the days of m42. It would give customers a lot more choice, which would probably go a long way to attract more customers overall to the system by filling in weaknesses that might normally keep customers away. Fuji goes retro with their body, Ricoh goes modern with their body. Fuji develops more wide primes, particularly on the fast side of things compared to Pentax, while Ricoh/Pentax does more telephoto and zoom. You can choose whether you want the color of X-Trans versus the more common Bayer array. Stabilized lenses from Fuji versus stabilized sensor from Ricoh. This could be a great system for a lot of people. It would also create an ecosystem that might be more attractive to third parties. The more people using the ecosystem, the more chances you have to sell bodies and/or lenses to customers than if they were using another mount. The biggest downside to a system from these two companies right now would probably be that neither company is known for video, which would be something at least one of the companies would have to improve if they wanted to make a catch-all system that could attract the masses.

[JPT]

The Pentax Rumors article is interesting but frustrating in the way it is written. Apparently, "Fuji was one of the names that was mentioned", so what were the others? It sounds like the writer is being selective in what they choose to pass along, and trying to shape the story to their own interest. There are many kinds of collaborations. It could be nothing more than a lens manufacturing relationship where a manufacturer designs and makes the lens for the camera maker, like what Tamron does for Ricoh, or what Konica-Minolta does for Olympus and Leica. The assumption made is that it is to share new, large sensor, professionally oriented mount system with Fuji, which seems a bit odd when you think that Ricoh has just made a big gamble on a professional DSLR market. My guess is that the most likely move into mirrorless would be something similar in focus to the GXR system under the Ricoh brand. If they work with a partner, the most likely way would be for sourcing sensors, lens or some other component.

I'm still surprised that Ricoh lists GXR in it's current product line-up on the Ricoh Japan website.
Products | RICOH IMAGING
That list is otherwise quite up to date, so it's hard to believe it's just a mistake. The 645D, K-3, GR and other older models have been removed, but the GXR is still there. You haven't been able to actually buy them anywhere for years, so I'm really not sure what they are trying to say by keeping it there. Are they trying to leave the option open to make a successor one day?

I still think the GXR was a fundamentally good concept that suffered because it was a bit ahead of its time. It would be more feasible now that we have one inch sensors (ideal size for compact zoom modules), and now that APS-C sensors seem to be very cheap to source. When you look at fixed-lens cameras, They are a lot more popular now than five years ago. Sigma now makes its DP cameras in four focal lengths, and Nikon has just come out with three expensive zoom models based on one inch sensors. Canon has an even bigger line-up. A fully developed GXR system could be all of that, plus having K and Q mount modules to integrate with their other systems.

I know this is highly unlikely to come to pass at this stage, but I like the idea and I think the Fuji collaboration is no more probable.

[D1N0]

I didn't like the fact that lens and sensor were combined in the GXR The body was actually just a glorified grip. When the sensor is outdated or the module breaks down so is/does your lens. (save for the Leica m-mount module). They should have made it more modular with interchangeable lens, mount, sensor and processing unit. So you could use lenses from all brands, skip between sensors size and characteristics and upgrade the soc every few years.

[Biro]

Also, they "entered" the MILC market in 2012 with a certain rubber-clad brick-shaped camera. How many "entrances" can they make? "Wants to compete in" would have been a better choice of words.

I saw a K-01 in the wild only yesterday. I did a real double take. I was at a Monster-Mania convention in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, outside Philadelphia. I think about the K-01 I had and sometimes regret letting it go. I loved its simple operation compared with many modern cameras. It felt great in hand and was as solid as a rock. However, autofocus was still a tick too slow even with the firmware update and that rear LCD was simply too difficult to use in bright sunlight - at least for me. But a K-01 with a small Pentax prime on it was a lot of fun.

[jatrax]

autofocus was still a tick too slow even with the firmware update and that rear LCD was simply too difficult to use in bright sunlight

I think both of those could be overcome with the technology available today. Screen from the k-1, new sensor with better AF. I hope Ricoh tries this format again, I do think the concept was workable, but the implementation suffered, and the release price killed it. I owned three of them at one time or another. I think Ricoh could do a much better job now.

[Biro]

I think both of those could be overcome with the technology available today. Screen from the k-1, new sensor with better AF. I hope Ricoh tries this format again, I do think the concept was workable, but the implementation suffered, and the release price killed it. I owned three of them at one time or another. I think Ricoh could do a much better job now.

I agree completely.

[monochrome]

I think both of those could be overcome with the technology available today. Screen from the k-1, new sensor with better AF. I hope Ricoh tries this format again, I do think the concept was workable, but the implementation suffered, and the release price killed it. I owned three of them at one time or another. I think Ricoh could do a much better job now.

Most importantly, let their body designers design the body.

I agree completely.

They'd need to seriously commit to Video to make a success of a MILC.

[MJSfoto1956]

I'd like to see a consortium of camera companies come up with a FF mirrorless standard, á la M43. Clearly CaNikon won't be interested. But perhaps Olympus, Panasonic, Pentax, and others might. Pentax could opt for in body stabilization (like Olympus did with M43). Each would have their own niche.

Michael

[Winder]

Fuji builds all of the medium format lenses for Hassy and Ricoh would need someone who has the capacity to design and build medium format glass faster enough to develop a new system. There are a lot of rumors of Fuji getting into the MF mirrorless and skipping a FF option. Fuji has 25 lenses for the currently X-mount with a couple of more coming. The X-mount system is very close to being filled out. They make great glass.

[totsmuyco]

I think both of those could be overcome with the technology available today. Screen from the k-1, new sensor with better AF. I hope Ricoh tries this format again, I do think the concept was workable, but the implementation suffered, and the release price killed it. I owned three of them at one time or another. I think Ricoh could do a much better job now.

I totally agree. I'm not in for MILC but, I know a lot of people want it. It would be a blast if Ricoh does this right, making an APS-C MILC using the current k-mount lenses.

[IchabodCrane]

I totally agree. I'm not in for MILC but, I know a lot of people want it. It would be a blast if Ricoh does this right, making an APS-C MILC using the current k-mount lenses.

Ricoh can make a K-mount MILC but it will always be a round peg / square hole type of product. If they're serious about larger format MILCs, they will need a new mount.

[luftfluss]

Ricoh can make a K-mount MILC but it will always be a round peg / square hole type of product. If they're serious about larger format MILCs, they will need a new mount.

Welp, here's the thing: I know there is a large group of people who believe that "thin" is an essential element of MILC, but I'm not one of 'em, and I'm not alone. I would welcome a clone of the K-3 that simply eschews the mirror and OVF and substitutes in an EVF. There are handling advantages to large cameras, especially with large lenses.

[Kunzite]

But if it's not smaller, what would be the point? Except video, perhaps?

[monochrome]

Ricoh can make a K-mount MILC but it will always be a round peg / square hole type of product. If they're serious about larger format MILCs, they will need a new mount.

Except video, perhaps?

That's where Ricoh will enter video, I suspect - it can be K-mount, and they can offer a FF, feature-rich, ergonomically superior product at a compelling price versus the then-current standard MILC body. Wait until the 42Mp BSI video sensor matures (isn't that the one?). The ergonomics and the Limited lenses will be the sell - the anti- 'skinny, shiny, hipster plate' camera - but it will need to be a GREAT vidcam to overcome the embedded form factor preference.

Ricoh is developing a reputation as a market disruptor. It's kind of fun to be an insurgent - with a 45 year CV of experience with the brand.