[i83N]

Ricoh filed a patent application (2013-61573) for a 4.6-18mm f/1.8-2.8 lens (21-84mm equivalent) designed for a 1/1.7" size sensor.

The latest patents from Ricoh, Canon and Sony | Photo Rumors

[Adam]

Looks more like something for a prosumer compact (the Q has a 1/2.3" sensor).

[i83N]

Looks more like something for a prosumer compact (the Q has a 1/2.3" sensor).

You're wright.

[drougge]

It was my understanding that the Q system was made to accomodate slightly larger sensors, and that the lenses therefore cover more than is currently used.

And even if that's wrong, the vast number of people shooting FF lenses on APS-C suggests that there would be nothing wrong with using this lens on a Q anyway. It certainly sounds more exciting than the current standard zoom.

[thibs]

It was my understanding that the Q system was made to accomodate slightly larger sensors, and that the lenses therefore cover more than is currently used.

And even if that's wrong, the vast number of people shooting FF lenses on APS-C suggests that there would be nothing wrong with using this lens on a Q anyway. It certainly sounds more exciting than the current standard zoom.

Question: are current Q optics OK for 1/1.7" sensor ?

[starbase218]

It was my understanding that the Q system was made to accomodate slightly larger sensors, and that the lenses therefore cover more than is currently used.

This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. It would seem to imply that the current sensor is just a placeholder, to be replaced when a new sensor becomes available. But then the FOV would change too, so the current lenses would behave differently (e.g. an 8.5mm is no longer an 8.5mm). Where did you get this from, if I may ask?

Also, maybe the "designed for 1/1.7 inch" thing is needed to accommodate sensor movement due to SR?

[drougge]

This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. It would seem to imply that the current sensor is just a placeholder, to be replaced when a new sensor becomes available. But then the FOV would change too, so the current lenses would behave differently (e.g. an 8.5mm is no longer an 8.5mm). Where did you get this from, if I may ask?

It's a bit fuzzy in my memory I'm afraid. It's from when the Q was new, I remember reading somewhere that they didn't put equivalence information on the lenses because they wanted the option of going to a larger sensor. Or at least that they had considered this. As I said, a bit fuzzy.

[anthony mazzeri]

Question: are current Q optics OK for 1/1.7" sensor ?

YES!

But no, because it can only be done without image stabilization. The image circle is made larger than required for a 1/2.3" sensor to accomodate the sensor movement so the corners stay safely within the circle as it moves. So the image circle is large enough to accomodate a larger 1/1.7" sensor, but only if it stays still without that movement. But would they actually do that? A 'Pro-Q' with a 1/1.7" sensor but no IS might find a market.

This lens is probably an update for the GXR S10 with 1/1.7" sensor, extending its range from 24-72mm to an even wider 21-84mm and faster too at f/1.8 from f/2.5. Or for a GX300 if they plan to reintroduce that line of compacts and/or kill the GXR off.

[Uluru]

YES!A 'Pro-Q' with a 1/1.7" sensor but no IS might find a market....

A Pro-Q? Pro ... ?
With a 1mm larger sensor? Oh my goodness ...

[Uluru]

The latest patents from Ricoh, Canon and Sony | Photo Rumors

To me, this sounds as a lens for MX-1 type of camera, but with a MUCH wider lens than current prosumers have.
LX-7, DLUX-6 go to 24mm.

21mm equivalent is seriously wide and probably, the widest focal length any prosumer camera has ever seen.
It seems Pentax is now wearing a big thinking hat, and I would be really, really interested in such an MX-like product.
Call it MX-1W ('w' for wide) and make the world happy!

[quant2325]

The crop fator changes from 5.62 to 4.55, and the sensor size change is minimal. Whatever camera the new lens is for, there will still be issues with bokeh. I have the Q and like it because it is fun, but you can't expect superior IQ out of it or a great blurred background, even with the in-camera electronics (Photoshop lens blur is better). The camera the new lens is for will produce similar results becasue of the small sensor size.

[frank]

It was my understanding that the Q system was made to accomodate slightly larger sensors, and that the lenses therefore cover more than is currently used.

And even if that's wrong, the vast number of people shooting FF lenses on APS-C suggests that there would be nothing wrong with using this lens on a Q anyway. It certainly sounds more exciting than the current standard zoom.

From what I've heard, this might be true We probably will see an updated Q camera w a slightly bigger sensor soon?

[monochrome]

From what I've heard, this might be true We probably will see an updated Q camera w a slightly bigger sensor soon?

All-metal body like the Q; colored Q's get the poly bodies like the Q10. When we say a pro version I want the full dSLR control set (TAv on Mode dial, real Manual Mode), fix the flash issues, extend the line of better lenses.

Certainly it isn't a dSLR replacement nor should we want that. But for a pocket/briefcase camera that's actually better than a super-premium compact - world's smallest capable ILC - world's most capable fun camera - it can be the enthusiast's/professional's "day-off" camera.

Emulate the first Oly XA.

[Uluru]

This design above shows a lens that is almost identical to the current MX-1 lens, including the placement and grouping of all elements, together with distance of the rear element from the sensor. It is a lens equivalent for 21-84mm focal length, with macro capabilities, and Pentax would design it .. for the Q? .. which has a different sensor size. Or no, even better, for the ... "Pro Q" which may host a 1mm larger sensor (!) to fit this lens?

(And in the same go endanger the sale of the 01 and 02 lenses for the Q mount, kill possible new macro lens for the Q too, and endanger the sale of the MX-1 camera too? .. but we won't talk about that now.)

That was the most improbable and incomprehensible set of conclusions you posted, and o boy, am I surprised to see it on Pentax Forums?

[anthony mazzeri]

From what I've heard, this might be true We probably will see an updated Q camera w a slightly bigger sensor soon?

Probably?

What else do you know about the near future, Frank?