If they're smart, Ricoh will retain the Pentax name on the camera products. It's known in the industry as a legacy brand naming. Ricoh makes some terrific products, especially their copiers - people really don't care what name is on the office copier, so long as it's reliable - which they are (more than Xerox, alas). Other smart corporations have bought up notable brands brands and have refrained from "peeing on all the bushes" as it were. As good as it is, would anyone want to buy Unilever Cherry Garcia ice cream?
Hmm. Opportunity missed, maybe. Perhaps a Tiffany version of this camera - blue is close and you could charge another $400~$500 more. Or, go towards the blue-green and put it behind the Clinique counter. Gotta work it.
vladimir vanek: "Lytro has released a firmware update that enables the Wi-Fi chips inside its 8GB and 16GB light field cameras." - this kind of statements sounds a bit strange to me. They always present it like an advantage for the user. But hey, why don't they just admit that they've been selling not fully functional products and say something like "we were so eager to release the cam to the market that we weren't able to enable all its functions at the time of the release"??? Is it some kind of fashion to release unfinished products, such as those M****$oft OS' that need a week of updating after installation? And they act as if it was absolutely OK. But, it's like selling a car with V4 engine for V6 money and then releasing an "update" that will unlock 2 more cylinders.... WTF??
Yes. And I hear that Chrysler is going to release a really good and competitive new small car in the form of a firmware release for the Dart will make it almost as good as your average Corolla. Stay tuned.
Tape5: Controlling focus after taking a picture is like eating everything on the table first and vomiting what you don't like later.
Yes. Photos from this unfortunate mutated monstrosity are rather bilious. This stuff should stay in the realm of surveillance equipment where it belongs.
Macintosh and Krell audio both make/sell/re-brand iPod docks. At a certain point it's not even a piece of legitimate apparatus, it's merely swag.
Dodi73: My son already uses my FM3A. It's 2 y.o. Well, I don't put film in it yet he can already basically operate it :) Look, reload and shoot :)
Look for yourself how bold he looks with the fm3a in his hands ! http://italy74.smugmug.com/ALLTHEREST/Family/Giugno-2013/i-VzhqmQc/0/X3/DSC_7352-X3.jpg
Too cute, indeed. My kid used my Nikormat as a hammer.
I imagine that making an ordinary phone call from this thing would make one look like Maxwell Smart with his shoe-phone. Leica iPhones are only a small step away into the abyss.
I seem to remember Saab pasted their name and fascias onto Chevrolet and Subaru during their death throws. People actually bought a few of them. Perhaps people didn't mind paying more for something that looks like what it isn't.
Well it is more panache than a Lumix. And that red Leica badge of honor. Weeoh!
Hasselblad Lunar anyone? There's also an exciting lineup of 2014 Maybach's about to hit the showroom floors any minute now too. Point is, that you can "tart up" just about anything and charge ridiculous sums of money for it if it has a name brand with some cachet graffitied on it. I'm still upset about my red Leica flip-flops that fell apart.
Seems there was at one time an "Area 51" Nikonos :http://gizmodo.com/5532611/the-secret-behind-the-mysterious-digital-nikonos-camera
For the serious underwater guys there are all sorts of housings for DSLR's and HD video equipment. They may be a better investment that that Hasselblad Lunar:http://www.aquatica.ca/
Personally I would like to see a prosumer level camera even if it didn't fit in my bathing suit pocket. Something like an underwater Canon G1X or Sony RX1 or NEX even a Fuji X Pro 1. If one of these were made, it would still be a $3.000 to $4,000 camera. Any takers?
Look up Fiat Multipla or Pontiac Aztek if you think you haven't seen hideous.
No hot shoe. Nope. VLF or ULF radio slave sync pulse perhaps? Think outside the bathtub!
A couple of photos taken with the WG-3:
jaygeephoto: I have recently purchased a WG-3 camera and am very impressed by it’s capabilities. Since I am a professional photographer and own some very bulky and expensive equipment, I thought this camera would be perfect for the many outdoor activities I enjoy.
I was equally surprised to find out however how few people know about this camera. I take every opportunity to show it off especially to my friends who are outdoor sports enthusiasts. Their reaction is almost always the same: “this is cool, -I didn’t even know they made this – where can I get one – I’ve never seen this in stores – does Pentax still make cameras?” After researching Pentax products further I feel that the entire line of very capable cameras is very much under-represented in the marketplace, especially in New England and the US in general.
Two of the big the camera companies have positioned themselves very well in the big-box stores and small retailers to make their presence known. Canon and Nikon specifically with a smattering of Olympus and Sony thrown in for good measure. It's unfortunate. Back in the days of film (that was shortly after the last ice age) we would call photographers and labs who only bought one brand of film and paper (the name escapes me right now, it came in a yellow box) "K---k Weenies".There is definitely a good market opportunity here since most smart phones are terrible swimmers no less be left out in the rain - for now.
I have recently purchased a WG-3 camera and am very impressed by it’s capabilities. Since I am a professional photographer and own some very bulky and expensive equipment, I thought this camera would be perfect for the many outdoor activities I enjoy.
rb59020: I'll forgive the slow lens and even the pathetic 1.9fps, but no articulated screen or EVF? Give me at least one of them! Next.....
As a former Nikonos owner I have to agree. That was one tough little camera! So if Nikon were to make digital version of James Bond's favorite camera (Thunderball, 1965, Sean Connery, United Artists) it should have a full frame or at least and APS-C sensor, some serious glass (interchangeable you said?!) and the ability to shoot RAW. That's not asking too much of them. I would guess something like that would fetch about $5,000 or so. Oh and the underwater LED for that is another...
ci-lee: How timely indeed! I'm in the market for an all-weather cam to complement the X20 & XP1. Hope your upcoming reviews (and subsequent comparison) include the Oly TG2, Pentax WG3 and Fuji XP200 (I assume the AW110 and TF5 will be incl. as well). I know on paper the Fuji is prob the dog of the underwater group but the specs seem surprisingly similar to the Nikon AW110 which has gotten good reviews on other sites. Plus it boasts WiFi which makes up for the lack of built-in GPS, has some versatile video capture rates and similar 'creative' modes as the other Fuji cameras. More importantly for me tho is the use of the same NP50 battery as the X20, of which I already have three spares :)
Anyway, keep up the great work and please hurry with these reviews, I'll be on two trips in August where neither X-cam will like the environment too much ;)
P.S. I agree with the previous poster who mentioned the lack of shutter/aperture priority for these "sports" cams...makes the TG2 quite appealing
I have a WG-3 and love it. If you have hands bigger than that of an average newt, you will also find it a pleasure to hold. I'm a working professional and am quite critical of image quality.
Roland Karlsson: This is one of the strangest design decisions ever made.
Then you need to look at the architecture of Frank Gehry. Then write back when you're feeling a bit less nauseous.
I think I saw this in Finding Nemo. The Pentax WG-3. Better camera all around and doesn't look like a tub toy (at least in black). Lets see that comparison! Canon makes some superb advances amateur and professional equipment; this stuff is beneath them. It's is as if Lexus made a skateboard.