[Robb Lincoln]

I would be hesitant to believe that Ricoh will introduce a fourth mounting system. They already have the Q, K, and 645 systems to sustain. A fourth could take away precious resources from existing systems. Ricoh has stated that their mirrorless solution is the Q system. So, unless they plan to abandon the Q in favor of something else I don't think we'll see a larger sensor system.

Then again, who knows? We're all just guessing here.

I think eventually thy'll have a system above the 645--like the old 67 system. Personally I'd suggest a mirrorless 67 with a registration distance of ~60mm. That way the 645 takes over the studio shooting, while the 67 can venture into the high end wedding & landscape shooting. They'd need a very wide diameter mount to ease the angle of incoming light at the edges of the sensor and I'd advocate for in-lens leaf shutters to minimize body depth and noise. I'd suggest a lense lineup of ultrawide, wide, short normal, and short tele with possible fisheye, macro, and shift specialty lenses. Of course I'd never be able to afford such a system, but it would be the holy grail of photo hounds!

[Adam]

Maybe some sort of ILC GR system?

[i83N]

Maybe some sort of ILC GR system?

aren’t we getting GR with fuji bayonet?
I think q with 1” sensor must focus on WR lens line...

[pinholecam]

With phones dominating the pns market, 1" is the logical way forward.

I'd love to see it so long as its still Q mount and I can use my current lenses in crop mode.

[Cynog Ap Brychan]

I'd love to see it so long as its still Q mount and I can use my current lenses in crop mode.

That would be great!

[Mistral75]

Maybe some sort of ILC GR system?

Adam, could you be aware of something?

[reh321]

With phones dominating the pns market, 1" is the logical way forward.

I'd love to see it so long as its still Q mount and I can use my current lenses in crop mode.

Not me.
I bought mine because the greater "magnification"/crop from its tiny sensor gives me a better look into the birding world, the sort of thing I would otherwise get from a Canon SX-50 or a Nikon P-900. I kept hoping for greater reach {than the 06} from native lenses, but if I have to do it with adapted lenses I'll do it that way as long as my Q-7 works. But, for me, a larger sensor is exactly the wrong way - backwards not forwards.

[lytrytyr]

It's the throat diameter that matters.

Sure, but the Q mount diameter is only typically proportioned to its registration distance.

[Spodeworld]

Moving to a 1" sensor would be result in a big IQ improvement over a 1/1.7" sensor....although not as good as m4/3

[johnmflores]

Moving to a 1" sensor would be result in a big IQ improvement over a 1/1.7" sensor....although not as good as m4/3

I have a Panasonic GM1 and a Pentax Q7. In good light you can't tell the photos from the two cameras apart. And DxO scores for the cameras corroborate my findings.

M43 is a bit of a puzzle - they don't benefit from Sony sensors as much as other sizes. The top M43 cameras are just now starting to catch up with the 12MP sensor in the Pentax K-x.

That said, Panasonic does great video and I've pre-ordered the new GX85 with 4k video and 5-axis image stabilization.

[Spodeworld]

My iPhone will also do well in good light.

But one of the key advantages of a larger sensor, when all else is equal, is superior low light performance. And, one can never get enough of that....

I have a Panasonic GM1 and a Pentax Q7. In good light you can't tell the photos from the two cameras apart. And DxO scores for the cameras corroborate my findings.

M43 is a bit of a puzzle - they don't benefit from Sony sensors as much as other sizes. The top M43 cameras are just now starting to catch up with the 12MP sensor in the Pentax K-x.

That said, Panasonic does great video and I've pre-ordered the new GX85 with 4k video and 5-axis image stabilization.

[johnmflores]

My iPhone will also do well in good light.

But one of the key advantages of a larger sensor, when all else is equal, is superior low light performance. And, one can never get enough of that....

I have one of the best smartphone cameras on the market right now - the Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge with a fast F1.7 lens and RAW capability. It's image quality is quite good but not a match for M43 under any lighting condition. The 1/1.7 Q is everywhere except low light.

So maybe your prior statement should be "big low light improvement over 1/1.7 sensor" not "big IQ improvement over 1/1.7 sensor".

[reh321]

My iPhone will also do well in good light.

But one of the key advantages of a larger sensor, when all else is equal, is superior low light performance. And, one can never get enough of that....

Every camera is a compromise of some kind. Pentax already has the entire K-mount family to provide good to wonderful low light performance {in larger packages}, so someone focusing on low light performance should go there. If Pentax follows your suggestion, ultimately they would be leaving the current "Q" niche, buying slightly better low light performance at the cost of larger lenses {later if not immediately}, leaving a niche they have to themselves to compete directly with Nikon. One could make the same argument, saying that the "Q" family should be replaced {or supplemented} by an MFT line, thereby competing with Olympus and Panasonic. Considering the success {of lack thereof} of the Nikon One family, I'm not convinced that Ricoh would get a good return from the required R&D expense for a 1" line - MFT makes very slightly more sense.

[Clarkey]

Not me.
I bought mine because the greater "magnification"/crop from its tiny sensor gives me a better look into the birding world, the sort of thing I would otherwise get from a Canon SX-50 or a Nikon P-900. I kept hoping for greater reach {than the 06} from native lenses, but if I have to do it with adapted lenses I'll do it that way as long as my Q-7 works. But, for me, a larger sensor is exactly the wrong way - backwards not forwards.

Absolutely right. Great for this, especially when you need more reach:

Tasty Treat by Aaron, on Flickr

I have a Panasonic GM1 and a Pentax Q7. In good light you can't tell the photos from the two cameras apart. And DxO scores for the cameras corroborate my findings.

M43 is a bit of a puzzle - they don't benefit from Sony sensors as much as other sizes. The top M43 cameras are just now starting to catch up with the 12MP sensor in the Pentax K-x.

That said, Panasonic does great video and I've pre-ordered the new GX85 with 4k video and 5-axis image stabilization.

I'm not sure I agree with daylight quality, having also returned to M43 with a GM1 (and a 20mm/45mm combination). I agree that the video from Panny is great, and am also thinking about the GX85.

[nightjockey]

On no .... not yet. My Q-S1 is hardly out of the box. I can't keep up with the constant change.....:-) :-)