[reh321]

Huh... a WG-7 with a, say, 1/1.3" modern smartphone module and shorter zoom might be much more desirable. Like Alex says that'd mean in-house development so I guess we'll see the same old same old...

If they were to use a larger sensor, I would expect it to be more desirable, but I don't understand what you mean by 'shorter zoom'.
A larger sensor will typically require larger focal length to get the same view - a you suggesting a shorter range??

[Serkevan]

If they were to use a larger sensor, I would expect it to be more desirable, but I don't understand what you mean by 'shorter zoom'.
A larger sensor will typically require larger focal length to get the same view - a you suggesting a shorter range??

Yes, exactly. The WG-6 has a x5 zoom lens (28-140 FF equivalent). I'd wager the long end is not particularly important for most uses of such a camera and it would add a good deal of complexity to the optics (since they have to be compact for weather sealing), so a 28-80mm equivalent zoom should do the trick nicely IMO.

[reh321]

Yes, exactly. The WG-6 has a x5 zoom lens (28-140 FF equivalent). I'd wager the long end is not particularly important for most uses of such a camera and it would add a good deal of complexity to the optics (since they have to be compact for weather sealing), so a 28-80mm equivalent zoom should do the trick nicely IMO.

I cannot speak for the market in general, but back in 2007 I had a Canon camera similar to the WG, except it was not "weather-proof".
It used it for only nine months - the shortest time I have used any camera.
My excuse for giving it to a daughter is that she had broken the LCD on her camera - but I was just looking for an excuse.
The real reason was that it lacked the flexibility I wanted, much of that 'flexibility' being in the range of focal lengths it could cover.

[Serkevan]

I cannot speak for the market in general, but back in 2007 I had a Canon camera similar to the WG, except it was not "weather-proof".
It used it for only nine months - the shortest time I have used any camera.
My excuse for giving it to a daughter is that she had broken the LCD on her camera - but I was just looking for an excuse.
The real reason was that it lacked the flexibility I wanted, much of that 'flexibility' being in the range of focal lengths it could cover.

But almost the entire point of the WG is the weatherproofing. The compromises it makes (the sensor is smaller than a smartphone's, for example) are due to the weatherproofing being the main reason for the camera's existence. It's not a "general purpose" camera that you want to be capable of everything. You'd get a bridge camera for that.

[blackcloudbrew]

Given that I have a Pentax Optio W80, voted the worst camera of 2009...which I used for many years sea kayaking. When I upgraded last year to the WG-6, I felt like I stepped in to a new generation of water proof cameras. Big technology jump for sure. Skimming the previous comments, I can't imagine adding much more to the WG-6 than, clearly shooting in RAW, and a few menu changes, but who knows what will be added or not? Considering that my old W80 had terrible low light performance as was noticed in reviews than and by me as well, jumping 10 years forward is naturally a great improvement. Watching the evolution of the Pentax/Ricoh water proof cameras over the past 11 years, they just seem to keep adding stuff as they go along.

I think Serkevan has it correct, the entire point is weatherproofing. I just returned from a 5 day camping / kayaking trip to a lake in the mountains. I took my K-1II+several lenses for hiking, and the WG-6 for paddling. Quite happy with that combo and if a WG-7 had been available last year, I'd be using it instead.

[TwoUptons]

I still have a W60, though it is starting to misbehave.
The point is, indeed, the waterproofing and such. I also got mine for Kayaking, though it’s been used in plenty of other places, too.
It’s been interesting (and at times painful) to see Ricoh and Olympus clearly choosing different bits from the bin from whoever OEMs their tough cameras, with neither really getting it completely right as far as I’m concerned ( though Olympus has come closest)

I ended up with a non-WR camera when my Panasonic compact died, but I really wanted a WR camera with 20Mp or so, optical stabilization, and 4K video that wasn’t awful. No such thing... even the short zoom range would have been OK as a compromise considered the intended use.

-Eric

[Ishpuini]

Given that I have a Pentax Optio W80, voted the worst camera of 2009...which I used for many years sea kayaking. When I upgraded last year to the WG-6, I felt like I stepped in to a new generation of water proof cameras. Big technology jump for sure. Skimming the previous comments, I can't imagine adding much more to the WG-6 than, clearly shooting in RAW, and a few menu changes, but who knows what will be added or not? Considering that my old W80 had terrible low light performance as was noticed in reviews than and by me as well, jumping 10 years forward is naturally a great improvement. Watching the evolution of the Pentax/Ricoh water proof cameras over the past 11 years, they just seem to keep adding stuff as they go along.

I think Serkevan has it correct, the entire point is weatherproofing. I just returned from a 5 day camping / kayaking trip to a lake in the mountains. I took my K-1II+several lenses for hiking, and the WG-6 for paddling. Quite happy with that combo and if a WG-7 had been available last year, I'd be using it instead.

I stand corrected. I now remember it was a W80 that I had and not an early WG, and indeed poor low light performance. Good to hear that the WG series is a great improvement. Perhaps I'll consider one should the need arise again...

[Mistral75]

The main features of the Ricoh WG-7 are said to be the following:

• Two hours of continuous shooting at a depth of 20m
• 4K video recording
• Webcam function for high quality and high definition video broadcast

Pre-orders start on 17 June and the expected release date is the 9th of July.

Source: Nokishita Camera

[Sandy Hancock]

Cool!
And I still haven't used my WG-6, which I bought for my planned trip to the Galapagos Islands last November. Obviously COVID scuppered all that

[Kunzite]

The main features of the Ricoh WG-7 are said to be the following:

• Two hours of continuous shooting at a depth of 20m
• 4K video recording
• Webcam function for high quality and high definition video broadcast

What's new, the webcam function?

[thibs]

Webcam mode. Why not, in fact.

[Mistral75]

What's new, the webcam function?

Exactly. This is probably a mere software addition since a firmware update was able to add this feature to other, non-Ricoh cameras.

[JPT]

Here is the product page.

WG-7 / ?? | RICOH IMAGING
English page is not up yet.

This in the main new feature. It's useful, but it does look like it's a firmware upgrade really.


They are promoting the ring light for better lighting and close focusing for product demonstrations.


The price from Ricoh is 49,800 yen.

[Serkevan]

Really sounds like a middling update to the WG6.
Disappointing, really. Same size sensor, probably same optics since it's the same zoom range.

[Ishpuini]

Well, these probably don't sell as much as other cameras and not at the same margins? So R&D investment budget would be comparatively small, and not allow a complete overhaul? I guess it's good that they are keeping the line up-to-date...