Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-12-2016, 01:36 AM   #151
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,667
QuoteOriginally posted by JPT Quote
I think there main thing that stopped Ricoh from making an "MX-2" was that the company that made it for them didn't develop a platform for the successor. The lens-sensor unit was exactly the same as the Olympus XZ and the Casio EX-10, and neither of those has had a successor either.

Ricoh could start making this type camera on their own again, and I agree with you that they should, but it would mean doing the design in house. Perhaps if the Q is not to be continued, they will do that, but I personally hope it is more like the Ricoh GX-200 than the MX-1, which I always felt was a bit kitsch and lacking direct control for aperture, shutter and ISO.

The reason I'm so certain that Ricoh didn't make the MX-1 themselves is that it's made in Indonesia, where Ricoh doesn't have a camera factory. It's like the WG series, which seems to share a suspicious amount with the Olympus Tough cameras. It's a bit mysterious how much of those cameras is designed by the companies that brand them. I think it's quite possible that the maker approaches the camera companies with a base spec, and says something like, "Here's our spec for the next rugged camera. What do you think? Shall we make a WG-6 for you?", and the camera brand does little more than specify the styling and firmware.

I could be wrong, though.
That probably would make the project to expensive.

10-12-2016, 01:41 AM   #152
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 2,861
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
That probably would make the project to expensive.
Too expensive (no cost sharing) and too risky (fixed development costs instead of variable purchase costs).
10-12-2016, 01:55 AM   #153
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,975
Original Poster
Ricoh is making the GR line. Maybe they should make a zoom GR.(when they use the 24mp sensor you can also extend zoom a bit with digital zoom), as a competitor for the RX100 line but with superior IQ. Of course Video and AF performance is going to be the tough nut to crack for Ricoh. Just bringing out a 1" compact won't cut it. Not enough punch. Look at the trouble Nikon has with it's new DL line.
10-12-2016, 03:31 AM   #154
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,011
QuoteOriginally posted by JPT Quote
I think there main thing that stopped Ricoh from making an "MX-2" was that the company that made it for them didn't develop a platform for the successor. The lens-sensor unit was exactly the same as the Olympus XZ and the Casio EX-10, and neither of those has had a successor either.

Ricoh could start making this type camera on their own again, and I agree with you that they should, but it would mean doing the design in house. Perhaps if the Q is not to be continued, they will do that, but I personally hope it is more like the Ricoh GX-200 than the MX-1, which I always felt was a bit kitsch and lacking direct control for aperture, shutter and ISO.

The reason I'm so certain that Ricoh didn't make the MX-1 themselves is that it's made in Indonesia, where Ricoh doesn't have a camera factory. It's like the WG series, which seems to share a suspicious amount with the Olympus Tough cameras. It's a bit mysterious how much of those cameras is designed by the companies that brand them. I think it's quite possible that the maker approaches the camera companies with a base spec, and says something like, "Here's our spec for the next rugged camera. What do you think? Shall we make a WG-6 for you?", and the camera brand does little more than specify the styling and firmware.

I could be wrong, though.
In the industry I worked in it was called packaging and was a way of buying turnover, in essence, while devoting finite in-house resources to the most important or profitable projects, the things which would really boost the company and which the staff had the expertise to deliver. The rest was farmed out, "packaged", and the companies which did the packaging were a thriving sub-industry. If your staff are better employed doing something else, then don't try to reinvent the wheel - buy the stuff in. I am absolutely sure this is what Ricoh and Olympus did in this case. In fact, I suspect far more packaging, inter-company sharing and subcontracting goes on the camera world than people realize. It's easy to be taken in by "brand image" but much of that is a sales frontage - the industrial reality is quite another matter.

I bought an MX-1 and found that it took extremely good images considering how small the sensor was. However, I also found it useless for its intended purpose - street photography - because of chronic shutter lag. By the time the shutter actually fired, the person was out of the frame. This has put me off small-sensor cameras completely. The ones I tried - this is two or three years ago now - simply weren't equipped with the processing muscle to make them genuinely useful. If Ricoh decide to develop the G line, then that would be great. However, it's impossible to say what their plans are. We have no hints and the development of the G line seems in limbo. I wonder if they are even going to continue with the GR.


Last edited by mecrox; 10-12-2016 at 03:53 AM.
10-12-2016, 05:17 AM   #155
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,114
QuoteOriginally posted by D1N0 Quote
Ricoh is making the GR line. Maybe they should make a zoom GR..
It could be mistake IMO. Several GR with different primes are better.
10-12-2016, 05:31 AM   #156
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,975
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
It could be mistake IMO. Several GR with different primes are better.
Just don't call it a GR but use the technological basis.
10-12-2016, 06:32 AM   #157
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,674
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
History repeats. Learn from history
Indeed!

When it first came out, the Leica was dissed by the users of view and rollfilm cameras.
Poor IQ, no selective depth of field possibilities, no proper viewing screen, yadayadayada.
But it survived because it let photographers do new things that they couldn't do with the larger systems.

Sound familiar?
10-12-2016, 06:50 AM   #158
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,667
The problem is that currently no camera is in production that carry's a 1/1,7" sensor. So it looks like a dead end.

10-12-2016, 07:01 AM   #159
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Manila, Philippines
Posts: 1,051
R.i.p. Q
10-12-2016, 09:59 AM   #160
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,114
QuoteOriginally posted by D1N0 Quote
Just don't call it a GR but use the technological basis.
The time will tell...Anyway, I'd like to have such camera for travel. But I'm afraid that lens could be compact and the camera not bigger than GR.
10-12-2016, 02:59 PM   #161
Pentaxian
Uluru's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,512
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
The time will tell...Anyway, I'd like to have such camera for travel. But I'm afraid that lens could be compact and the camera not bigger than GR.
Original Rx100 was 102mm W, 58mm h, 36mm, 240g
GR is 117mm W, 61mm H, 35mm D, 243g

If Ricoh made the MX-2 to the same specs as the RX100, today we would see people going crazy after a Pentax compact. But no. The MX-1 was clearly a Pentax product, in the pipeline before the takeover, and Ricoh killed it for the sake of their own new camera for which they needed Pentax team to finalise it. And then we got an excuse that the MX-1 type of camera was disappearing anyway, and that is why it was discontinued. When it was not the case: the whole new generation of compacts was behind the horizon, and Sony led the way.

So, yes, they lied because they made a mistake. Not the first time, though.

New generation of compacts came with new sensor sizes, new specs. Today's RX100 V is so powerful that is blows your socks off. GR is still a fine stills camera, but at least 7 out of 10 people will choose RX100 over the GR, because of the utility.

Those 7 of out 10 people Ricoh could have in their own pockets if they invested in the MX-1 further on, like they invested in the GR. But no. Ricoh is not smart enough to learn from mistakes of others; they can learn only from own mistakes.

Last edited by Uluru; 10-12-2016 at 03:04 PM.
10-12-2016, 03:00 PM   #162
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hamilton, Texas
Photos: Albums
Posts: 645
QuoteOriginally posted by wed7 Quote
R.i.p. Q
Uhhhh. . . Say what now?

Ricoh have already told us twice, in two different interviews, that the Q system is continuing. So why are people still chiming in with these "dead end" and "R.I.P. Q" comments? Do you have some evidence to show that Ricoh representatives are lying to us?
10-12-2016, 03:48 PM   #163
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,694
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
Q has nothing to offer.
OH dear, looks like i'll have to start shooting the offshore(1-2k) reefs and whales with my phn!
10-12-2016, 04:14 PM   #164
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,694
QuoteOriginally posted by Professor Batty Quote
it has a niche
It has a "brilliant" niche imo!....Brilliant being in the eye of the beholder(mine)!
10-12-2016, 04:35 PM   #165
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,011
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
Original Rx100 was 102mm W, 58mm h, 36mm, 240g
GR is 117mm W, 61mm H, 35mm D, 243g

If Ricoh made the MX-2 to the same specs as the RX100, today we would see people going crazy after a Pentax compact. But no. The MX-1 was clearly a Pentax product, in the pipeline before the takeover, and Ricoh killed it for the sake of their own new camera for which they needed Pentax team to finalise it. And then we got an excuse that the MX-1 type of camera was disappearing anyway, and that is why it was discontinued. When it was not the case: the whole new generation of compacts was behind the horizon, and Sony led the way.

So, yes, they lied because they made a mistake. Not the first time, though.

New generation of compacts came with new sensor sizes, new specs. Today's RX100 V is so powerful that is blows your socks off. GR is still a fine stills camera, but at least 7 out of 10 people will choose RX100 over the GR, because of the utility.

Those 7 of out 10 people Ricoh could have in their own pockets if they invested in the MX-1 further on, like they invested in the GR. But no. Ricoh is not smart enough to learn from mistakes of others; they can learn only from own mistakes.
You may be right, because no one outside Pentax knows what the situation actually was. However, my experience in another industry with bought-in products strongly suggests you are mistaken. The MX-1 looks very strongly as if it was bought-in under contract with a special Pentax sauce (or Olympus sauce) added to the basic chassis, lens and electronics. For whatever reason, Ricoh decided not to buy in a Mark II version or perhaps the supplier simply said they wren't going to be making one. And if the package was bought in, then Ricoh would not have had the rights to develop their own Mark II version. The supplier would have owned the rights. At any rate, there is a perfectly reasonable and likely explanation for the MX-1 story which does not involve operatic dramas about lies and mistakes, etc, etc. It was simply business.

I think Ricoh were right not to go up against the RX100. No one else has succeeded in toppling it and fat chance that the relatively small camera division of Ricoh would have done. Their resources were better invested elsewhere.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
build, camera, doubt, format, fun, gift, images, interviews, leica, lens, lenses, market, media, medium, money, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, phone, pm, post, q-s1, qs-1, ricoh, samsung, sensor, size, system
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Given up on old Q- is Q7/Q-S1 much improved? SteveNunez Pentax Q 39 11-06-2015 04:55 AM
Q-S1 compared to original Q wildman Pentax Q 26 05-20-2015 04:41 AM
Behaviour of the Q7 and Q-S1 with external flashes NeilGratton Pentax Q 16 12-31-2014 07:09 AM
Video review of Q-S1 Painter Pentax Q 15 12-02-2014 02:36 AM
A brief, unscientific comparison : Original Q vs Q-S1 6BQ5 Pentax Q 29 11-30-2014 07:21 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:33 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top