[ogl]

Keeping the same equivalent lens focal length and bright aperture while putting in a 70% larger sensor means making a 70% longer and 70% larger diameter lens. It would not be compact anymore.

I doubt.

Have a look at RX100VI - 24–200/2.8–4.5 in 102 x 58 x 43 mm body
RX100 II - 28–100/1.8-4.9 in 102 x 58 x 38 mm body.


Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX10 24-72/1.4-2.8 in 106 x 60 x 42 mm body.
Pay attention! Wider and faster lens.

Smaller cameras than MX.

MX-1 was 122 x 61 x 51 mm with 28-112/1.8-2.5 lens.

Ricoh has long traditions of develop compact lenses. I don't think that they can't produce the same size lens for 1" sensor.
Let it be 24-100 for example. Or smth else.

[D1N0]

The lens in the MX-1 wasn't produced by Ricoh. The MX-1 was produced in Indonesia and used the same lens/sensor array as the Olympus XZ-1/2. These camera's are outsourced.

[6BQ5]

A new MX-2 would be cool from a brand loyalty perspective. Which one of us would not want to see more Pentax and Ricoh branded products? From a market perspective I think it would be a mistake. Look at what Ricoh would be up against? Canon, Sony, and LUMIX all have incredible 1" sensor based cameras. How would Ricoh position itself? By price? Features? Insane, and I mean insane, IQ?

Personally, I think Ricoh should make continue with 3 active APS offerings, 1 active FF, and their 645. In fact, I would even reduce the 3 APS offerings to 2 one day : a high end model and a mid-level model. Give the low end model away at trade shows as freebies or to schools as educational aids. Let the other companies fight their way to the bottom.

And let the others fight for the 1" market. Eventually it will disappear when everyone figures out how to make super compact APS bodies ... or cell phone cameras just keep getting better and better.

[enoeske]

I really wanted the MX-1 because of the metal body and brassing that would occur, but it had too small a sensor for acceptable IQ and no hotshoe. I can deal with no viewfinder, though, I'd prefer one for sure. So an MX-2 that had a similar body, fast zoom lens, larger sensor and hotshoe would be a buy from me.

[johnmflores]

Lots of still competition in the 1" compact market with products from Sony, Canon, and Panasonic. An MX-2 with a 1" sensor would be me-too and only appeal to current Pentax owners. Don't know if that's a big enough market to warrant the investment. It may very well be.

Me, I'd prefer a Q with a 1" sensor...

[ogl]

Lots of still competition in the 1" compact market with products from Sony, Canon, and Panasonic. An MX-2 with a 1" sensor would be me-too and only appeal to current Pentax owners. Don't know if that's a big enough market to warrant the investment. It may very well be.

Me, I'd prefer a Q with a 1" sensor...

It will be necessary to develop new lenses. Q lenses can't cover 1" sensor.

[johnmflores]

It will be necessary to develop new lenses. Q lenses can't cover 1" sensor.

I'm ok with that and it would be the only 1" interchangeable lens system.

[UncleVanya]

I own the Panasonic LX-7 and have owned some other mirrorless tech (Samsung, Panasonic GX7, GX1, etc.) I have watched the small sensor market quite a bit. The Sony RX100 is the reigning king there and shows that you can make a 1" sensor camera with a physically small lens. But there is a lot of competition - Panasonic, Sony, Nikon and Canon all have cameras in this space. How would the Pentax differentiate itself from these? Sony makes multiple versions of the RX100 still today! They span multiple generations of tech and pretty much span the gamut - offering cheap - no viewfinder - slower lens to fast lens with viewfinder to moderate lens with viewfinder.

Don't misunderstand - I'd love for Pentax to be competitive in that market but I don't see it likely.

[6BQ5]

I'm ok with that and it would be the only 1" interchangeable lens system.

Nikon tried with their Nikon 1 system. It had many, many advanced features and was a power house of a little camera. Some people complained the lens selection was meager and didn't offer enough constant aperture designs. Still, there were more lenses available than what we have in our Q ecosystem. The result? Nikon discontinued the entire line earlier this month. I think they had a hard time breaking in with a mirrorless system that ended up being very close to u4/3 ... and Nikon is huge force in the industry. How would Ricoh manage it? They would have to do something spectacular to win people over and carve out space. They would better off updating the Q with a new sensor that has some new tech from today's modern sensors and maybe release the 09 macro lens.

Nikon is about to release their own mirrorless FF system. I think could potentially turn into a "me too" response to Sony's A7/A9 bodies. We'll see. If this is a "me too" of Sony then we can use that as a gauge of what would happen to Ricoh if they had their own "me too" with a 1" sensor camera.

You have to hand it to Ricoh and the current line up of APS and FF bodies. They are definitely not "me too" designs. There is nothing else in the world like a Pentax body.

It will be necessary to develop new lenses. Q lenses can't cover 1" sensor.

I would love to see a Q laid out like a mini-Hasselblad 500c, shooting squares on a 1" sensor. With software cropping to fit you would be able to use existing lenses and C mount lenses would be a natural.

Probably not going to happen in my lifetime, although new sensor technology might make it doable at some point.


The Nikon 1's lack of IBIS and awkward adapting limited its appeal for experimenters using non-native lenses.

[johnmflores]

Nikon tried with their Nikon 1 system. It had many, many advanced features and was a power house of a little camera. Some people complained the lens selection was meager and didn't offer enough constant aperture designs. Still, there were more lenses available than what we have in our Q ecosystem. The result? Nikon discontinued the entire line earlier this month. I think they had a hard time breaking in with a mirrorless system that ended up being very close to u4/3 ... and Nikon is huge force in the industry. How would Ricoh manage it? They would have to do something spectacular to win people over and carve out space. They would better off updating the Q with a new sensor that has some new tech from today's modern sensors and maybe release the 09 macro lens.

The Nikon 1 system was a half-hearted effort that was priced much too high in order to not cannibalize D3xxx and D5xxx sales.

Would a 1" Q system sell? I don't know. As an owner of several Qs, the K-01, and a Nikon 1, I'm just fatally attracted to oddball cameras.

[sunny16]

Love (for what they are) both the MX-1 and Q system. And while I would love to see an update to the MX-1, I don't think that is where the industry is at this point. Even with it being (partly?) outsourced, Olympus never made a follow up to their model that the MX-1 shared so many specs with and really, nobody else is making them either. Seems like the Sony RX100 series is about the only thing really out there. Also add in the seemingly limited production capabilities of Ricoh and at this point I'm just hoping to see another Q camera some day...

Fortunately my existing kits of both are still working so I guess I will be content.

[BigMackCam]

It will be necessary to develop new lenses. Q lenses can't cover 1" sensor.

Would a 1" Q system sell? I don't know. As an owner of several Qs, the K-01, and a Nikon 1, I'm just fatally attracted to oddball cameras.

Love (for what they are) both the MX-1 and Q system
...
I'm just hoping to see another Q camera some day...

Fortunately my existing kits of both are still working so I guess I will be content.

I doubt there are all that many bigger fans of the Q system than me. I really like and value my Q, Q7 and the lenses I own - especially the 01, 02 and 06. But partly because of that, I'd have a tough time convincing myself to buy into a new Q camera unless it was compatible with the existing lenses. I already have some investment in those, plus many others for my Pentax DSLRs and non-Pentax gear. I don't think I'd have the appetite for another entirely new system. But if a new Q came along that could use my existing lenses, yet with improved IQ, I might well be tempted

[UncleVanya]

Love (for what they are) both the MX-1 and Q system. And while I would love to see an update to the MX-1, I don't think that is where the industry is at this point. Even with it being (partly?) outsourced, Olympus never made a follow up to their model that the MX-1 shared so many specs with and really, nobody else is making them either. Seems like the Sony RX100 series is about the only thing really out there. Also add in the seemingly limited production capabilities of Ricoh and at this point I'm just hoping to see another Q camera some day...

Fortunately my existing kits of both are still working so I guess I will be content.

Canon and Panasonic both make 1" sensor cameras - both of which are not ILC but fixed lens.

[ogl]

My opinion that to offer MX-2 1" sensor zoom camera and GRIII APS-C fixed lens camera is good marketing move. If I were Ricoh's top-manager.))

MX-2 must have any unique features to be interesting for users. Retro, metal body, any photo attractive functions, maybe fast lens and the best IQ in RAW, weather resistance, the best AF system between competitors and e.t.c.