Some ‘issues’ with the MX-1 concept

Started Jan 19, 2013 | Discussions thread
GXRuser
Contributing MemberPosts: 656
Like?
Re: Some ‘issues’ with the MX-1 concept
In reply to marike6, Jan 21, 2013

marike6 wrote:

GXRuser wrote:


Ricoh has two different EVFs in it's catalog. One for the GX100 and GX200 and one for the GXR. They use different accessory ports. The only cost is the inclusion of the interface port mechanically and electronically.

If Pentax didn't include a port to connect an EVF on the K-01 or Q, what makes people think they would have, or even should have included it for one of their compacts.

That is the error of the K-01 and Q/Q10 design. It was (and is) my hope that with Ricoh merging the imaging design teams of Ricoh and Pentax, that their premium compacts would incorporate an EVF interface port. The K-01 and Q were released under Hoya ownership. The Q10 is all about a redesign of the Q for lower manufacturing cost and a change from magnesium to polycarbonate frame. It is clearly a project that was started before Ricoh's acquisition. The MX-1 is the first totally new design since the acquisition and is probably also a product started under Hoya management.  The lack of EVF is consistent.

It remains my hope that with new management that there will be more attention to the needs of the Photographer. This is the essence of the GXR design. I personally think this includes an eye level viewfinder.

If the MX-1 is a licensed version of the XZ-2, then the EVF interface was deleted. This is the lost opportunity. It could have had the port and then the customer could have purchased an Olympus VF-2 or VF-3 if they chose to. I would have.

But the MX-1 is NOT a licensed version of the XZ-2. It has a similar, possibly the same lens but with Pentax SMC coatings on it, and it has an tilt-able LCD. They both use the 12 mp BSI 1/1.7" CMOS sensor from Sony, but that's where the similarities end.

And judging by the extremely small number of actual XZ-2 user images on Flickr, I get the impression that the XZ-2 is so far not anywhere near the big seller that the XZ-1 was. Why is that?

I think it is that the XZ-2 is essentially brand new. It is priced high and the XZ-1 is still available, and available at closeout prices. We will not know the acceptance of the XZ-2 until the end of 2013. Olympus is still selling brand new Pen EP-1 and EP-2 cameras and they have been discontinued for over 2 years.

I think it has to do with price. Nobody wants to spend $600 on a small sensor compact when the same $600 will get you one of Olympus's m43 cameras or even a DSLR from another vendor. So there is something to be said for keeping costs down in this segment of the market. Most photographers prefer cameras with VFs, but if including one would have made the MX-1 a $600 camera like the XZ-2, I for one am glad they didn't include such a EVF port. Few P&Ss, with the possible exception of the excellent Fuji X10/X20 which are all-metal cameras with optical VF, will sell in large numbers if they are priced over the $499 threshold. Above $500 you start getting into entry level DSLR, NEX and m43 territory in terms of pricing. Clearly Pentax understood this which is why they created a high end compact, but not with super high specifications where the cost of production would have made it impossible to sell for $499.

The Panasonic LX5 and LX7 (and their Leica branded cousins) all have the option of an optional EVF.

It is clear that I think that this is a Pentax miscalculation.

Cheers, Markus

Cheers!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow