[amonsul]

That would be awesome!

I was just about to post that link too. Very interesting. I just wonder why don't Pentax or Samsung release such a thing.

[rawr]

That would be a real interesting development.

Add a Pentax pancake onto a compact (4/3?) body and that would be a really cool little bit of gear.

[KungPOW]

I think the rumor was posted here a while ago.

It looks like it is a 15mm ltd on the ricoh body, but the registration distance is too short.

The lens also reads "ricoh" on the side. It might be a fake, or Pentax's new partner is going to be anounced to be Ricoh.

If it is a K mount it needs to keep the same registration distance, or add a corecting lens in the optical pathway. So based on the photo, it either has an extra lens in the body, or it is not a k-mount.

[Angevinn]

This is not entirely correct. If the registration distance is the same or if it is stepped down; let's say when you mount a 44mm lens (Like a Nikon lens) on a 42mm camera body (Like a Pentax camera body) you will not need an optical adapter (Granted this is only a 2mm difference). Focusing the lens can be used to compensate for the slight difference in registration distance. The lens will focus but will focus a little differently than if it was on a camera with a matching registration distance. I've converted a number of Nikon lenses for use on my Pentax camera. No optical adapter needed.

Stepping up is where you run into trouble. If you were to mount a 42mm registry distance lens to a longer registration body you would then need an optical adapter. That is why M42 (42mm) lenses do not work on Nikon (44mm) camera bodies without losing infinity focus. There are optical adapters available but the image quality is very poor.

Pentax lenses (42mm registration distance) could easily work on a Ricoh APS-C type system. There would just need to be a spacing adapter to let the lens achieve proper distance from the digital sensor plane. No optical glass would be required.

While I would prefer a FF K-Mount DSLR from Pentax I find this Ricoh rumor to be pretty cool. The APS-C sensor is superior to the smaller Micro 4/3 sensor. The micro 4/3 sensor can produce some nice images but the larger APS-C sensor has better control of highlights and images just look better too. Don't take my word for it, check out image samples on Flickr for the Micro 4/3 system. I love my legacy glass but do I need all my 50mm lenses turned into 100mm lenses? (Micro 4/3 doubles the focal length of lenses, APS-C is only a 1.5x factor).

Check the construction of the different lens adapters for the Olympus/Panasonic Micro 4/3 system. They are simply spacing adapters (no optical glass) to keep the respective lenses at the proper registration distance from the sensor plane. My guess is that the Ricoh system would incorporate similar adapters.

Goodnight!

I think the rumor was posted here a while ago.

It looks like it is a 15mm ltd on the ricoh body, but the registration distance is too short.

The lens also reads "ricoh" on the side. It might be a fake, or Pentax's new partner is going to be anounced to be Ricoh.

If it is a K mount it needs to keep the same registration distance, or add a corecting lens in the optical pathway. So based on the photo, it either has an extra lens in the body, or it is not a k-mount.

[krypticide]

Would love to hear about this too. I've been sort of eyeing the EP-1 and the new Panasonic. While I still love my K20D, it's too big to keep in my bad. I'd love to have a compact camera with the same range of DOF and interchangeable lenses as a full size DSLR.

[Douglas_of_Sweden]

Pentax lenses (42mm registration distance) could easily work on a Ricoh APS-C type system. There would just need to be a spacing adapter to let the lens achieve proper distance from the digital sensor plane. No optical glass would be required.

Yes, you are right in principle...but to say that it could work "easily" depends on what you mean with "work"! Manual focusing and manual exposure? I would prefere to get focus confirmation on my manual lenses and AF on my ltd's and I would definitely like to have some sort of exposure program...and then the adapter will not be that simple anymore and depend on functions of the Ricoh body.

The other problem is of couse that with the "extension tube" aka adapter that you would need between K mount lenses and a mirror-less body, you lose the advantage of compact size in one dimension, the body+adapter+lens will be about as deep as an ordinary K-mount body.

I agree fully with you that an APS-C version of mirror-less system-camera will have great advantages to a 4/3rd system. This Ricoh or the Samsung NX could get me interrested. Let's see now who will bring it out first. This should put some pressure on Samsung who yet have only shown the NX behind glass with anonymous lenses.

Perhaps Pentax is not in on the NX because they already had a deal with Ricoh???

How hard would it be to modify existing lenses to a shorter registration distance??? I would have thought generally not so easy (you will change other lens properties at the same time)...but one of the limited lenses exist in the Leica rangefinder mount...which has a much shorter registation distance than the k-mount!

[KungPOW]

This is not entirely correct. If the registration distance is the same or if it is stepped down; let's say when you mount a 44mm lens (Like a Nikon lens) on a 42mm camera body (Like a Pentax camera body) you will not need an optical adapter (Granted this is only a 2mm difference). Focusing the lens can be used to compensate for the slight difference in registration distance. The lens will focus but will focus a little differently than if it was on a camera with a matching registration distance. I've converted a number of Nikon lenses for use on my Pentax camera. No optical adapter needed.

Stepping up is where you run into trouble. If you were to mount a 42mm registry distance lens to a longer registration body you would then need an optical adapter. That is why M42 (42mm) lenses do not work on Nikon (44mm) camera bodies without losing infinity focus. There are optical adapters available but the image quality is very poor.

Pentax lenses (42mm registration distance) could easily work on a Ricoh APS-C type system. There would just need to be a spacing adapter to let the lens achieve proper distance from the digital sensor plane. No optical glass would be required.

While I would prefer a FF K-Mount DSLR from Pentax I find this Ricoh rumor to be pretty cool. The APS-C sensor is superior to the smaller Micro 4/3 sensor. The micro 4/3 sensor can produce some nice images but the larger APS-C sensor has better control of highlights and images just look better too. Don't take my word for it, check out image samples on Flickr for the Micro 4/3 system. I love my legacy glass but do I need all my 50mm lenses turned into 100mm lenses? (Micro 4/3 doubles the focal length of lenses, APS-C is only a 1.5x factor).

Check the construction of the different lens adapters for the Olympus/Panasonic Micro 4/3 system. They are simply spacing adapters (no optical glass) to keep the respective lenses at the proper registration distance from the sensor plane. My guess is that the Ricoh system would incorporate similar adapters.

Goodnight!

If you look at the photo of the camera with the lens, the registration distance is easily 3/4" (19mm) shorter then a k mount.

So, either the lens has been redesigned to deal with the much shorter reg distance, in wich case it is no longer a K-mount, or there is additional optics, or as you point out the lens does not behave properly.

There is no adapter between the lens and the camera in the photo.

Do you think they would release a camera, call it a k-mount, and allow it to focus well past infinity?

[elkarrde]

let's say when you mount a 44mm lens (Like a Nikon lens) on a 42mm camera body (Like a Pentax camera body)

actually, it's 46.5mm for nikon F-mount, and 45.46mm for Pentax and M42. 42mm is just lens mount diameter (for M42).

[vinzer]

All I'll say is that Ricoh makes great advanced P&Ses and I'll welcome whatever micro-K model they'll come up with. Looks like this is Hoya's answer to Samsung leaving them out of their NX system.

[Ratmagiclady]

"I am stuck on Rikenon cause Rikenon's stuck on me.... "

[johnmflores]

One possible path to mirrorless EVIL cameras is to create a new standard based on the shorter registration distance of an EVIL camera. Panasonic and Olympus went this route when going from the Four-Thirds to Micro Four-Thirds. The Four-Thirds lenses work but require an adapter.

In a similar fashion, Pentax can establish the EVIL-K standard with the shorter registration. Standard K lenses can work with an adapter that provided additional length for proper registration, and Pentax can roll out a new series of lenses specifically for the EVIL-K.

The K to EVIL-K adaptor would be short - around 1cm - so it will still be a pretty compact package with existing pancakes.

I really believe that EVIL cameras will eventually replace entry and mid-level dSLRs. EVFs may be inferior to pentaprisms now, but they will evolve and eventually do things that you can't do with glass, i.e. show blown highlights and black areas before you take the shot, show which areas of the frame are in focus, etc...

The size advantages of EVIL for a casual travel and family snapshot photographer are hard to ignore, and the interest in the Micro Four Thirds cameras are proving this out. Pentax needs a roadmap there to remain viable.

[Ratmagiclady]

The size advantages of EVIL for a casual travel and family snapshot photographer are hard to ignore, and the interest in the Micro Four Thirds cameras are proving this out. Pentax needs a roadmap there to remain viable.

I'm still not convinced of this: may as well wait till the tech grows up before trying to join that 'race.' The thing about the EVIL cameras is they're drawing off a lot of the competition for the third-player-in DSLR field: soon Olympus/Panasonic won't be an issue there: that leaves Sony, and Sony's mostly trying to compete with the big boys atm. Pentax needs to be the best at something, not flail around in all directions.

[séamuis]

Pentax needs to be the best at something, not flail around in all directions.

I could not agree more with this. and its probably why they are at least for now sticking with APS-C for its main camera system.

[Ratmagiclady]

I could not agree more with this. and its probably why they are at least for now sticking with APS-C for its main camera system.

There's no real reason not to: 4/3 was a bad bet on how the tech would go, now looking for a job.