AbrasiveReducer: Pentax' already excellent lenses have just gotten sharper with the AA filter removed. It's a shame they charge extra to leave something out but there's serious potential for good jokes. "How much would it cost if you don't practice AND you don't play?" "You couldn't afford it". -- Chico Marx.
Alizarine - you always quick to be "forced" into making such assumptions? It's only a few hours since the press release and you're already dismissing it.
El Profe: Somehow Pentax was able to improve the best 16MP's camera currently available in the market. The one I am planning to get is the K5-IIs due to not having an Anti-Alising filter since due to this it is supposed to have more resolution (sharper details) and less noise than a 24MP's APS-C sensor. Plus due to the improvements in auto focus in lower light conditions and the better focus tracking. The only thing that people having other brands of camera use to complain about the K5. The issue of not having an articulating LCD is not important to me since I don't need (or want) an articulating LCD anyway except for turning the LCD backwards when not using the camera to protect the LCD. But I am going to wait a few months to see if Pentax decides to make a full frame version of the K5-IIs before I actually buy it because I already have too many APS-C cameras and the camera I really want to buy is a FF camera.
"My camera's better than yours""You're wrong, my camera's better than yours"
There's no such thing as "the best camera", it all depends on the user's needs. Deal with it, buy a camera and take photos.
ogl: Is there focus-peaking?
What's to say it won't come in a firmware update? The camera isn't even available yet. They already have an implementation in the K-01 so it's entirely reasonable that they'll port it to the K-5II.
ogl: All announcements look like mockery - 90% of Pentaxian don't need such products.Rebadged Tamron 18-270 - with bad SDM and weak optically.High expensive 645 DFA90 for MF users and marginal DA560 for USD7000.Pentax Q with the same tiny sensor and new dark zoom + adapter.K-5II is old camera with old processor and sensor with minor tweaks.
You don't know whether to laugh or cry...
ogl - you seem to know a lot about the 560mm and the 645 macro. Care to share your data? Thought not.
iaredatsun: On the surface this sounds like the worst move possible and potentially the end of Ricoh.
Like other commenters I have no confidence in Pentax's ability to design good cameras. They certainly could have never built such unique, well-designed and well-built cameras as the GRD and GXR. I think a lot of Ricoh users will be very nervous about this.
I could only hope that the designers who come up with the GRD and GXR are allowed to keep working as a reasonably autonomous unit.
Isn't it ironic that Ricoh buy Pentax and now Pentax are taking over management of the Ricoh camera division?
Not ironic at all and an entirely pragmatic move. Ricoh is primarily an office equipment company with deep pockets, Pentax Imaging an imaging company with little cash. Both companies are idiosyncratic, but there's a shared design philosophy in the Ricoh GR and Pentax Limited products that you don't see elsewhere.
Anastigmat: let's hope the reorganization gets rid of whatever obstacles that have so far prevented the marketing of a full frame model. With Sony working on its second generation full frame model, and Nikon bringing out its 3rd generation full frame, Pentax needs to start working, or it may be condemned to doing what Olympus is doing: putting old wine (M43 sensor) in an older bottle (a camera body that apes the OM series inelegantly).
You say 'condemned' as if FF is all that's worth being in the camera business for. Get over the FF thing and take photos. I prefer the handling of APS-C and m4/3, the image quality is getting better all the time and you get enough DoF control if you buy the right lenses.
bradleyg5: These cameras are SO expensive, the high ISO is terrible and the lens are slow. I mean what are you going to do with it? it's purely an outdoor camera. Like a good tropical vacation camera I guess. I'm not debating the IQ will be amazing, but only at base ISO so you gotta use it in bright light.
I feel like indoors, a Panasonic GX1 with a 20mm F1.8 would be way more capable.
How do you know they're terrible? Is f/2.8 slow for a 28mm equivalent? These are completely different to the DP1/s/x. Those were slow and expensive and exceptionally good if you used them with thought.
kenw: 50*1.5 = 75. 50 *1.6 = 80. These are pretty useful portrait focal lengths, I don't understand the "no-mans land' comments about them. Sure, maybe 56 would hit the venerable "85" spot on...
There's already the exceptionally good 55/1.4.
jamesm007: I have written many times in the past the main point of a mirror-less from a manufactors point of view is less design cost, better reliability (less warranty cost) higher profits.
For the consumer the main point of mirrorless is to get rid of the number one problem of dSLRs AF problems FF/BF mirror box. This camera is the first to step in the right direction.
Think... no need for AF fine tuning, superior reliability, still has Shake Reduction! When this camera has a EVF it will be complete. That is the transformation of dSLRs into viable mirrorless dSLR replacment for your current system.
The small mirrorless cameras are just point and shoot cameras. This is the first serious mirrorless as it did not leave behind the lens and Shake Reduction.
Its all in my writings a few years ago. Many said its not possible. I said it is including having Shake Reduction and use of old lens.
Those are new kit lens.
Me I hate mirrorless, But I am not blinded by my own wants as many are.
"For the consumer the main point of mirrorless is to get rid of the number one problem of dSLRs AF problems FF/BF mirror box"Rubbish. For pixel peepers on forums maybe, but for real consumers, the number one benefit is size, which the K-mount will never give.
I think this'll go down in history as an interesting design novelty, like a Nissan Figaro. People want mirrorless cameras because they're small and they can add an EVF if they want to. This is big, has no EVF port and AF is likely to be slow with existing lenses. I just don't see what problem this solves?
WestSeattleDan: Olympus may be de-listed on the Tokyo stock exchange
Financial irregularities are now coming to light as multiple years of records are being revised.
Irrelevant to this topic and yesterday's news.
JonSr: oh come on.. one of the best lense maker keep making crappy lense what is with this? i swear that made a pact with Panny to never make a high end lense to lure them into m43. I just can't understand this spec. f2.8-4 of previous excellent 43 lenes than this lense would have been the best lense on the market.. They intentionally refused to make it that. Both Panny and Oly can go to hell. This is intentional sabotaging of their own platfrom from within.
is the 45mm crappy? If you want a fast zoom, you are going to compromise the portability of the PEN system. If you want quality, buy primes.
Too bad Panasonic either designed the GF1 accessory port badly or decided to change it in a cynical attempt to shift more high margin accessories and potentially lose customers. The whole point of a system camera is that I don't have to throw all my accessories in the bin when I buy a new body.
With some decent primes, this camera looks ideal, but I would need the finder, but not if it won't work on the GX2 etc.
munro harrap: Its just a digicam like a g Powershot Canon. Dont be deceived that it in any way resembles the x100 which is APS-C or recent Sony offerings. It'll be noisy, slow in operation and a waste of money. In 2003 they were OK. Now, forget it, grow up and buy a camera with a decent-sized sensor. Street photography requires lack of shutter lag. You have to be very quick. None of these cameras are. You need less than 0.050 millisecs delay.
Do you have any idea how far someone can move in that time at normal walking speed close to the camera? Well, even that is not fast enough
Why would it be a waste of money? Why does growing up mean buying a "decent-sized" sensor? Who says every wants to buy this for street photography?
grahamdyke: No Grip, No Buy...
Just get a Franiec grip - totally transforms the Sigma DP1.
Style over substance - and that applies to both the camera and the laughable press release. This is one of the most painful press releases I have ever read.
But it does illustrate who the target market is - certain not readers of photo forums. This system is design for people who think photography is fashionable. The tiresome iPhone/Instagram/Hipstamatic brigade.
"electronic lens system enables the camera to keep pace with an active lifestyle" -- I'm sorry, what? Still the fanboys will love it.
For anyone in the UK, this belongs in Pseud's Corner.
Maybe choice of sensor format is a good one? Is it a good balance of size (sorry, "lifestyle") vs quality? Speculate all you like, but no one will know until it's put up against a Q, a PEN and a NEX.
But the complete lack of physical controls means there's no chance I'll be getting one. Ever.
Poweruser: I get the feeling that Ricoh uses "firmware updates" to get at least some form of press coverage.
Who the f*** really needs all those custom options. Now we can program the ADJ button too. Wow! Gosh...
Ridiculous post! Ricoh have in the past significantly improved AF performance with firmware updates. And to some people (me), ergonomics counts for a lot in a camera, so if I can program the ADJ button, maybe I will.More companies should follow Ricoh's lead (no I don't own one!) and provide long term support for their models.
tapir: No PASM???? No even AF/AEL lock? Why they also miss these on super-zooms?
Because the target buyer for this sort of camera couldn't care less. Why do people always assume they are representative of the entire buying public?
Neoasphalt: Sad, that I never will consider this a great zoom in small cam - dividing megapixels with 2 would be another story...
Then perhaps you're not the target buyer.
David Fell: I have to disagree regarding the cost - when we were using 35mm film, the costs were much higher, the cameras today are very capable, memory is so cheap & to print is convenient, flexible and cheap at supermarkets. You can recover pictures that are sub-par with good results. Holidays used to be 2-3 rolls of film (24-26 exposure) now we take '00s of pictures. I can print A3+ to a better standard than 35mm enlargements I have had done for about £5 (paper, ink, stiffener & cello bag). The printer has printed 1000 images so costs about £0-50/print and ink I estimate at £0-75/picture (A3+).
Printing 6x4s costs peanuts; photo paper is just so cheap.
My Minolta SLR with the very spiffy 24-85mm len where I recently filtered out some old 6x4s - '00s were consigned to the bin, so the costs cannot have been good if I chuck 70% of my prints away.
If you consider the total cost of ownership of camera, memory &printing over say the life of a camera today, I belive we are quite fortunate.
Comparing against the cost of film is irrelevant, unless you run both film and digital cameras and choose one or the other based on cost. More useful is to ask whether I am better off buying a printer, or printing through one of the online services.