[Clavius]

They patented a FF camera under $1000? Are you sure, I mean, really sure about that? As in: can you point it out?

If I point it out any more then this, then I'm going to have to come over to you and point at your screen. Obviously, I'm not going to do that. Secondly, as two other members already stated, FF Sony at around 1000 is already happening right now. And this technology is still quite new. When a technology reaches maturity the price is supposed to go down, even without this rumor it is to be expected. I think this is only the start.

The patent predates the first FF "NEX" cameras, so it might simply refer to that.

In that case, the rumor has already profen itself to be true then. Is that what you're saying? LOL!

I was talking about the 645Z, and in a completely different context.

Well, I wasn't. You're avoiding it now. You think three years is ok for a manufacturer to develop a new camera. Yet you mock Sony for not marketing an MF MILC six months after a rumor? That's some twisted logic you're applying there.

You mean, making it harder for Ricoh Imaging to make a profit on that market? Sure.

How do you mean: 'on THAT market'. If they are not on the mirrorless market, how on earth can they make a profit there? And making profit is supposed to be hard. Only the mafia and kartels are after easy profit.

[Kunzite]

If I point it out any more then this, then I'm going to have to come over to you and point at your screen.

A simple quote from the patent - the exact place where they talk about pricing - would suffice. But you can't do that, can you?
Yet you claimed that Sony has the rumor patented.

In that case, the rumor has already profen itself to be true then. Is that what you're saying? LOL!

What I'm saying is that patent appears to be about the generic idea of a FF mirrorless E-mount camera.

Well, I wasn't. You're avoiding it now. You think three years is ok for a manufacturer to develop a new camera. Yet you mock Sony for not marketing an MF MILC six months after a rumor? That's some twisted logic you're applying there.

You have a very wild imagination. I never mocked Sony for not marketing an MF MILC six months after the rumor. I would never mock a company for not making whatever anonymous individuals imagined. I'm merely proving with an example that rumors should not be believed so easily.

P.S. From now on, I will be unwilling unable to see your posts. Respond how you wish, if you wish; consider you "won" some dispute if that makes you happy; even brag about it... I don't care. Bye!
Boriscleto'd™

[kadajawi]

3 years, on a stable company, and maybe they had previous research leading onto that. Ricoh Imaging had to struggle with the merger of Pentax Imaging Systems and Ricoh's own camera division, and with fixing the sorry state they were left in by Hoya. Only 3 years and 3 months passed since Ricoh took control... we should keep that in mind. Yet we had the K-3 and the 645z.

"IMHO mirrorless is going to win over DSLRs" - perhaps, eventually. Perhaps photography and cameras will be banned altogether, before that.
Right now I'm glad I can still choose a superior solution

Ricoh is more of an off the shelf camera maker though. Samsung developed literally everything for the NX1 new, while Ricoh gets a couple of parts from Panasonic, Sony, ... Still, 3 years is about right. I think the really interesting one will be the next launch. That should show us the direction they are going in.


I also prefer DSLRs over mirrorless at this point (maybe the NX1 can win me over... I wonder why Samsung hasn't made big box retailers here stock the camera...). But the time will come when mirrorless is simply better in most if not all areas, and Pentax might want to get into a better position for when that switch happens. Will Canon users, and Nikon users, when they have to switch systems because mirrorless makes more sense, still be getting Canon and Nikon? Or will they look at those brands, and the small amount of lenses etc. that are being offered, and then look at Panasonic, Olympus, Fuji and perhaps Sony and see how well positioned THEY are and how experienced they are with mirrorless, and decide to switch? Who knows how far loyalty goes.


That being said I don't see Pentax doing APS-C or larger mirrorless any time soon. The new 18-50 kit lens is quite telling IMHO.

[Clavius]

A simple quote from the patent - the exact place where they talk about pricing - would suffice. But you can't do that, can you?
Yet you claimed that Sony has the rumor patented.

I didn't claim they patented a 1000 dollar FF MILC at all. That's what you made of it. You can't patent pricing, and you know that. I claimed they patented an extremely compact basic FF MILC. Furthermore, I claimed that the 1000 dollar FE mount Sony has already happened.

You have a very wild imagination. I never mocked Sony for not marketing an MF MILC six months after the rumor.

This is not a figment of my imagination:

Let's not forget, the 645z was also declared beaten by a rumored Sony medium format which is still MIA, and that was an "SR3".

That rumor is 6 months old. Five and half to be precise, I gave you that one.

P.S. From now on, I will be unwilling unable to see your posts. Respond how you wish, if you wish; consider you "won" some dispute if that makes you happy; even brag about it... I don't care. Bye!

LOL! So I can double up on correcting you mis-information without you trying to covering it up again?

[Kunzite]

Ricoh is more of an off the shelf camera maker though. Samsung developed literally everything for the NX1 new, while Ricoh gets a couple of parts from Panasonic, Sony, ... Still, 3 years is about right. I think the really interesting one will be the next launch. That should show us the direction they are going in.


I also prefer DSLRs over mirrorless at this point (maybe the NX1 can win me over... I wonder why Samsung hasn't made big box retailers here stock the camera...). But the time will come when mirrorless is simply better in most if not all areas, and Pentax might want to get into a better position for when that switch happens. Will Canon users, and Nikon users, when they have to switch systems because mirrorless makes more sense, still be getting Canon and Nikon? Or will they look at those brands, and the small amount of lenses etc. that are being offered, and then look at Panasonic, Olympus, Fuji and perhaps Sony and see how well positioned THEY are and how experienced they are with mirrorless, and decide to switch? Who knows how far loyalty goes.


That being said I don't see Pentax doing APS-C or larger mirrorless any time soon. The new 18-50 kit lens is quite telling IMHO.

Perhaps not everything, but an electronic giant which among other thing is making sensors, memory modules etc. is naturally able to use more in-house components. In theory Ricoh could become a fabless sensor manufacturer, but I don't see it happening.

The NX1 didn't won me over, but it was by far the best Samsung I tried - the complete opposite from that Galaxy-Android-phone-is-disabled thing. I even almost sort of liked the EVF Well done, Samsung!
Perhaps not a coincidence, it feels almost like a SLR. But it's not cheap... it's a halo product.

Yep, I agree - not now (but perhaps later). I'd like to see more innovation in the DSLR arena, perhaps that translucent mirror...

[kadajawi]

I don't think Ricoh Pentax has the employees to turn them into a fabless sensor manufacturer... that's a different skill set that'd be needed. Hopefully Sony and Samsung will be selling their latest and greatest to Ricoh.


The processor is another problem... but I can see Ricoh developing their own processor based on ARM. That's at least more possible, everyone does it these days. Samsung, Hisense, Apple, then there's a couple of companies like Qualcomm, Rockchip, etc. Or perhaps Fujitsu can step up their game and use something genuinely fast for UI etc.?


I hated that Galaxy Android nonsense... I think running Android or Tizen on the camera is not a bad idea (IIRC the NX1 uses Tizen? Like Samsungs latest smart TVs and some of their smart watches and phones), but the interface needs to be that of the camera in the first place, not like some phone or tablet that happens to have a decent camera.


Yup, a bit of a halo product, but I mean, the price seems reasonable. Other APS-C flagship cameras are similarly priced.


The translucent mirror was a great idea, but it solves a problem that has been solved in other ways already. How clear is it, how good are the optical properties? I think the main reason to use it was because you could have AF while using live view, but that was solved by simply putting AF sensors onto the sensor.


One possibility I could see would be to put an OLED screen onto the mirror, and then put the switchable mirror on top of it. That way you'd have an OVF, and when you fold up the mirror for live view you'd have an essentially sensor sized EVF, which means it can have a really high resolution. Not sure about how the eye has to refocus... maybe some additional optics in the viewfinder? But I don't think an OVF is _that_ important.


Anyway, the NX1 feels almost like a SLR... one day mirrorless may out-SLR a real SLR.

[Kunzite]

They don't have the capacity to become a fabless sensor manufacturer now. They might build them, but I don't think it's worth the effort, nor that it could be beneficial (e.g. cost effective).
If not Sony and Samsung, Toshiba or Aptina would be happy to fill the gap.

About the translucent mirror, I wonder... perhaps just to replace the movable mirror, thus easily achieving faster frame rates (the high-end MILCs already started to push that as a feature). Perhaps to help the dedicated PDAF system. Hopefully they'll be able to make something nice out of it (I know, there's no guarantee they'll even use the patent)

[rawr]

About the translucent mirror

For anyone interested in translucent mirrors, LensTip.com a few days ago released a detailed technical article (complete with lasers!) on translucent mirror technology:

Everything you always wanted to know about the semi-transparent mirror technology (but were afraid to ask)

[kadajawi]

Isn't the PDAF sensor array behind the mirror? Turning it translucent wouldn't help... The mirror still needs to fold away.

You could get a pre AF like OVF that only dims down for when the camera focuses... Apart from that...

[Kunzite]

rawr, thanks, that looks like a very thorough investigation of a current translucent mirror design (SLT). And yes, it has lasers! (too late to read it now, though... it will have to wait).

kadajawi: with a dedicated PDAF system (located behind and below the main mirror), indeed, they will have to fold the mirrors away (because they're two, and the secondary is smaller and fully reflecting). With such an arrangement they could tune the transparency of the main mirror and that would be all. Perhaps increasing the amount of light sent to the PDAF system in low light? A brighter OVF for manual focusing?
If they get rid of the dedicated PDAF system, using an on-the-sensor one (assumed good enough) there would be no need for a secondary mirror. Thus, a simpler design with a translucent mirror splitting the light between an optical viewfinder and the sensor - similar to the Canon Pellix. The mirror could be fixed in this case.

[kadajawi]

Hm. Those are some good ideas.

If you want to do a mirrorless camera with K mount, you could have a mirror, but have it redirect the light to the sensor. That way you can push the LCD and other parts closer to the lens, and hide things behind the mirror. Depending on how good the translucent tech is you could also use it as a ND filter.

Using the PDAF on sensor is a bit of an issue, they aren't as light sensitive AFAIK.