[RioRico]

If it isn't broke - don't fix it, goes the cliche.

Hmmm, I thought the new MBA mantra was IF IT AIN'T BROKE, BREAK IT i.e. tear it down and build a better one. Which is maybe what the GXR model is.

[robbiec]

We definitely need the hole between 21 and 31 filled + something in the 100 to 200 would be nice, macro especially. I also voted for APS-H because I have a sneaking feeling that FF would be too much even for the FA Limiteds but a lot of the DAs would handle ok, especially the DA*s.

[RonHendriks1966]

We definitately need the hole between 21 and 31 filled + something in the 100 to 200 would be nice, macro especially. I also voted for APS-H because I have a sneaking feeling that FF would be too much even for the FA Limiteds but a lot of the DAs would handle ok, especially the DA*s.

well I only think that non of the lenses below 21mm can handle APS-H so there is still a need for some wide-angle. The DA*16-50mm certainly can't handle APS-H since it is already hefty vignetting at 16mm/f2.8 on APS-C.

Look at the lenssurvey for choices in lensdevelopment.

[robbiec]

I was thinking DA*55, 200, 300 and had excluded the zooms, should have been more explicit

[robgo2]

Personally, I have no interest in FF, unless the bodies and lenses can be made smaller, so I would like to see Pentax maintain its superiority in the APS-C dSLR realm. However, I am increasingly intrigued by the GXR, which I think may be an obscure little gem. I understand the concept, but I am perplexed by how Ricoh will deal with obsolescence. When technological advances come along, replacing a lens with each module seems both wasteful and expensive. Perhaps I am missing something here. As I understand it, the forthcoming M module will allow for changing lenses only and, presumably, will not be sealed like the other modules.

Rob

[Mike Cash]

A "How would you vote to spend somebody else's money?" poll.....Nice.

[Winder]

I would love to see a sensor with the surface area of an APS-H, but in a 4/3 or 5/4 format sensor. I don't find 3/2 to be very good for my personal style. I get tired of cropping the images down to a more square format like 5/4.

First I would like to see some high end glass, fast primes, and better AF system with smaller more accurate points. 21-point AF with a better spread. A larger OVF with a 1.15x magnification for easier MF. 2 SD card slots for automatically backing up critical work.

I think with the right lenses (fast & sharp..... expensive) Pentax can produce an APS-C system that is more than capable of competing with Canon/Nikon/Sony. Things like QC and AF have to be addressed. SR needs to be faster.

The size of the system is not a huge issue for me. I am use to my Contax 645 and Canon 5D. The K-7 is almost too small without a grip. I would like to see a line of glass where speed and sharpness were the priority over size and weight. 50mm f/1.2, 85mm f/1.4, 135mm f/1.8. The 50-135 should have been an f/2.0 zoom.

---

Last edited by Winder; 07-09-2011 at 04:56 PM.

[les3547]

I too like your APS-H idea, combined with Blue's suggestion to make it just a bit bigger to avoid the accusation of copying Canon. One thing I really like about FF lenses with APS sensors is that they utilize the best part of the lens. A really capable H+ sensor plus FF lenses might get very close to the resolution of a FF sensor yet stay relatively compact.

[jeffshaddix]

I too like your APS-H idea, combined with Blue's suggestion to make it just a bit bigger to avoid the accusation of copying Canon. One thing I really like about FF lenses with APS sensors is that they utilize the best part of the lens. A really capable H+ sensor plus FF lenses might get very close to the resolution of a FF sensor yet stay relatively compact.

Totally agree. I also like Winder's alternate aspect ratio suggestion; a closer to square sensor could take better advantage of the image circle, especially on DA lenses where APS-H support would be iffy.

In fact, while we're pontificating, I'd promote a square or even circular (or hexagonal for you wafer space-conserving junkies) sensor with in-camera rectangular cropping options (with raw retaining the full sensor image). I've often wished to rotate my 3:2 crop slightly in PP without reducing width/height dimensions, a circular sensor could potentially accommodate that. I guess I'm an advocate for not wasting the image circle, but that's just crazy talk.

[RioRico]

Yes, wouldn't a square or hex sensor be fun?!?!? Make it 25mm across (like APS-C width) or 30mm (like APS-H width) or even 36mm (135/FF width). Have in-camera crops for 1:1, 5:4, 4:3, 3:1, HD, 2:1 etc, and sliders for custom aspect ratios. Yah, a 36mm square sensor would kick FF's butt! Not realistic costwise though. Let's see, 26mm square is the same size as 126 film -- digital Instamatic! Oops, I'd better not mention that...

[RonHendriks1966]

A "How would you vote to spend somebody else's money?" poll.....Nice.

well in part you are right, but the meaning of consumer demand is to pay for that research and in the end when demand and offers come together, you as a consumer are the moneyspender.

[les3547]

I am increasingly intrigued by the GXR, which I think may be an obscure little gem. . . . but I am perplexed by how Ricoh will deal with obsolescence. . . . Perhaps I am missing something here.

I would go farther and admit I am definitely missing something because to me the GXR doesn't seem like a very good idea for anything but consumer snap-shot photography.

[Fl_Gulfer]

Only 11% of Camera sales are Interchangable lens cameras, so which way do you think they are going to go.

[Blue]

Only 11% of Camera sales are Interchangable lens cameras, so which way do you think they are going to go.

Given the cutthroat competition and the < $300 and ~ $400-500 Point & Shoot systems and the fact that I don't think Ricoh bought Pentax for the less than stellar Optio line, I would say the bought Pentax for the k-mount dSLR and 645D line and intend to make a move in that direction. I think they will also bolster the GXR in some way. The Q line I am not sure about because I think they should of gone with at least a 1/1.63" or really a 4/3 which would have put it in the Auto 110 range. It wouldn't have effected.

[les3547]

Only 11% of Camera sales are Interchangable lens cameras, so which way do you think they are going to go.

Possibly I misinterpreted some of the enthusiasm I thought I read here and elsewhere for the GXR? It seemed like some were suggesting it might be an alternative to high-end interchangeable lens systems.