Cartridge-based lens mount to become a reality?

Six months ago I wrote this:

Member said:

I really like the concept of interchangeable lenses in a pocket camera, but to ensure that the camera remains flat (when off) Ricoh will need to come up with something smarter then a front bayonet mount. A cartridge would make more sense. If you think about current lens assemblies of the GR-D2 and GX200, there's no reason why these can't be isolated into cartridges that slide in and out of the camera from below.

Click to expand...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1013&message=31626067

Searching previous post for "cartridge" and "mount" I discovered that Tom Caldwell thought of the idea a few years earlier:

Member said:

For a further trip into fantasy land: how about the GX100 type body with a removeable lens and IS on the body? Some sort of cartridge type mount to keep the dimensions compact with lens fitted.

Click to expand...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1013&message=22809608

Now this report says it's going to be a reality.

Member said:

"newest rumour which talks about the Ricoh will use an unique brand new "slide-in" interchangeable lens mount system, which is not a bayonet type!"

Click to expand...

http://ricehigh.blogspot.com/2009/10/new-ricoh-mirrorless-digital-system.html

Original post is here:
http://www.dchome.net/viewthread.php?tid=773891

Great minds think alike? ;-)

Prog.

Well, some Pentax engineers had also this idea a few years ago. At Photokina 2006 Pentax showed a a number of older prototypes: amongst them, the "SLR minus mirror" type of camera (Pentax Digital K from 1997) and a compact camera with interchangeable cartridges containing a lens and a sensor (Pentax X-Change from 2002).

Have you actually got an Iso Rivolta or is it just on your wish list?

Thanks for the credit Prog

I know I have been jawing away extensively based on picking up the apparent tip-off about the nearly 40 year old patent.

I am sure that whatever was in that patent would need to be considerably revised for a current-age digital compact camera.

However the idea of splitting the conventional lens into two components seems to be so space/weight/price sensible it seems also a reasonably good bet. It is also not necessarily anti-cartridge if you push a point of imagination.

In setting this new camera 'type' Ricoh are not constrained by having to work around any pre-existing lens mount system. Ricoh also have a wealth of experience in making compact high resolution optics through their photocopying division. In some ways the research on compact (cartridge?) type optics has a parallel in small camera formats.

However in days gone by there was a fair bit of inter-company co-operation between Ricoh and Pentax - Pentax patented an aperture system after Ricoh's patent of split lens and it did cite Ricoh's earlier patent. Ricoh did use Pentax's k-mount in its dlr cameras. If Ricoh had been working with Pentax over some features of its new mount system then we can understand earlier rumours of a k-mount being incorporated. However if anything it cannot be anything other than a special micro-k-mount if at all. Most likely Ricoh has been accessing some Pentax patents to make their new mount work.

I am still of the opinion that the new system will be split-lens. This would mean an aperture part of the lens fixed inside the camera body - as we all have our doubts on whether it is possible to focus a lens on an APS-C sensor in a conventional sense it might be a solution to incorporate a right-angle prism in the in-body aperture part of the lens and to have the sensor above or below the light path.

If this is cleverly done then it might be possible, in my dream - those with a better grasp of optics might differ.

The diagram on the original patent showed the lens-part of the split lens actually partly fitting inside the aperture part. If this can be called a cartridge mount then it would fit the latest rumour. Partially fitting inside would make it easier to connect the drive mechanism for the auto focus mechanism. That plus a lens-type sender might be the only mechanical connections necessary to the lens part of the split lens.

Therefore we could have a part-cartridge mount and a very slim camera.

I have also been banging on about the fact that such simple glass-only (well nearly) would be much cheaper to make.

I still have a Pentax 110 auto camera - substantially smaller than the GRD body it had an internal slr setup and replaceable lenses. Everything in the camera was auto and the lens bodies were made of plastic. Ricoh could not get away today with such a camera but I need to point out one thing. These lenses were tiny and utter simplicity (and worked). Just a body shell with focus ramp and manual focus - inside were the lenses alone.

If the lenses are cheaper to produce then Ricoh have a very significant construction cost adavntage over say Panasonic glass. If everything including IS is on-camera the lenses are (relatively) quite simple - therefore good glass can be sold cheaper.

If they can deliver a number of great lenses for such a camera quite quickly the mounting cost of micro4/3 glass will make going micro4/3 not only a long wait but also an expensive exercise. Micro 4/3 is 'small dslr' system with all its attendiing logic and likely cost. Ricoh's (possible) split lens EVIL is a compact camera mauler and likely to be much more affordable long term.

--
Tom Caldwell

Glad to see someone else old enough to know what they were (smile)

--
Tom Caldwell

Santa (should you be hovering about the forum today) please take note for Chiristmas this year:

'67 Stingray coupé in metallic green
'68 De Tomaso Mangusta, champagne
'66 Jensen FF, burgundy
The aforementioned Rivolta, light metallic blue please

If you can't find them all, I might accept a GT40 or a V12 E-type soft top in lieu. Or one of those new-fangled Ricoh interchangeable lens things everyone's raging about if Rudolph is being too hedgehog.

Those Pentax cameras are something else, especially the one with the lens cartridges. Am I the only one who can't see how they actually fit in to the camera body? Where do they slide in?

Also, I'm wondering how robust a system like this would be. I just look at those things and think of the increased number of mechanical parts and other bits that have the potential to go 'snap' one day. I hope that thought is wrong.

Ricoh's entry into this field might be the one that draws me in to the interchangeable lens compact camera route. Given Ricoh's emphasis on still photography, it might not have the best movie mode, but we shall see.
--
Archiver - Recording the sights and sounds of life
http://www.flickr.com/photos/archiver/

Archiver said:

Those Pentax cameras are something else, especially the one with the lens cartridges. Am I the only one who can't see how they actually fit in to the camera body? Where do they slide in?

Click to expand...

I think it was intended that the central part containing the flash would slide up, making space for inserting the rectangular coupling at the back of the cartridge. Anyway, it must have been only a mockup, as it was not also shown with a lens on.

Archiver said:

Also, I'm wondering how robust a system like this would be. I just look at those things and think of the increased number of mechanical parts and other bits that have the potential to go 'snap' one day. I hope that thought is wrong.

Click to expand...

It might have the mechanical part of the coupling reduced to a minimum, as it's a digital system from the start, so no mechanical aperture actuator, auto focus drive etc. I also hope that the lenses will have integrated central shutters and that in the body there will be no focal plane mechanical shutter, which is fragile and has a limited lifespan. That way the flash sync shutter speed could be very high.

Archiver said:

Ricoh's entry into this field might be the one that draws me in to the interchangeable lens compact camera route. Given Ricoh's emphasis on still photography, it might not have the best movie mode, but we shall see.

Click to expand...

I think they had the time to design a good system, it's not a hasty decision based on the fact that the mirrorless systems are now in fashion. The rumor has started at least a year ago: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1013&message=29765618

will foreman said:

Santa (should you be hovering about the forum today) please take note for Chiristmas this year:

'67 Stingray coupé in metallic green
'68 De Tomaso Mangusta, champagne
'66 Jensen FF, burgundy
The aforementioned Rivolta, light metallic blue please

If you can't find them all, I might accept a GT40 or a V12 E-type soft top in lieu. Or one of those new-fangled Ricoh interchangeable lens things everyone's raging about if Rudolph is being too hedgehog.

Click to expand...

You have a tidy list there except the V12 E-type - a former employer bought one here new and with his mate who bought another they probably got a special deal. Went like crazy - his mate wrote his off but survived to party again. The aforesaid employer had no end of problems with his and eventually got sick of it. It was completely unreliable and hideously expensive to repair. I guess the ones still around might be sorted out by now but I run on the principle that problems when new are problems forever.

--
Tom Caldwell

will foreman said:

Santa (should you be hovering about the forum today) please take note for Chiristmas this year:

'67 Stingray coupé in metallic green
'68 De Tomaso Mangusta, champagne
'66 Jensen FF, burgundy
The aforementioned Rivolta, light metallic blue please

If you can't find them all, I might accept a GT40 or a V12 E-type soft top in lieu. Or one of those new-fangled Ricoh interchangeable lens things everyone's raging about if Rudolph is being too hedgehog.

Click to expand...

Was '67 the year of the slit window? My favorite.

will foreman said:

Have you actually got an Iso Rivolta or is it just on your wish list?

Click to expand...

In fact, I chose this nickname as it has the "Iso" particle in it and it could be translated as "ISO revolt" with some connotations to current photography. Of course ISO comes from the "International Organization for Standardization" arranged that way to form the Greek "iso" meaning "equal". The car manufacturer's prefix comes from Isothermos, because Rivolta has produced refrigerators before cars. I'm a car lover but I like more small mid-engined cars. So if it has to be Italian and classic, I would probably choose De Tomaso Vallelunga

While speaking of old things, the Pentina cameras from the early 60's came to my mind: these were small SLR's with interchangeable lenses and a leaf shutter in the body, in front of the mirror. http://www.praktica-collector.de/116_Pentina_FM.htm

Even Bayonet mount can had that feature, its in the lens not the mount .. even back in the 20's and 30's there are already collapsable lens ( think Leica Elmar ). Similar concpet can easily be employed ..

--

• Franka -

This all reminds me of the Kodak Retina - small rangefinder with split interchangeable lens system - all you did was change the front elements - the rest was built into the body
Very exciting times
Have a good day
Joe

Franka T.L. said:

Even Bayonet mount can had that feature, its in the lens not the mount .. even back in the 20's and 30's there are already collapsable lens ( think Leica Elmar ). Similar concpet can easily be employed ..

Click to expand...

The key here is not only in having the lens collapsible, but in not having anything protrude from the front of the camera when it's turned off (to maintain pocketability). With a bayonet mount, you'll need a significant part of lens barrel to always protrude in the front to be able to hold on to the lens when attaching or detaching. This can be avoided when using a sliding cartridge. Just press a button and slide the lens "box" in or out.



In fact, with a cartridge-based mount you won't even need this base barrel (pictured above) that the GR and GX series uses as a mount for converter lenses, as the camera would be able to use "proper" interchangeable lenses.

Prog.

Pretty though ain't they? There are still lots of XJS V12s about, so maybe they sorted something.

The split window had disappeared by 1965 I believe, but the '67 model was the last before the advent of the Mako's belated release in '68 meaning it was the best sorted. When I was a kid I had a model of a split-window coupé (in metallic green!) produced by Lone Star to race on their roll-up track. It looked much cooler (and I fancy went better) when I fitted a set of axles and wider wheels from a Hot Wheels write-off. A first taste of customising...

will foreman said:

Pretty though ain't they? There are still lots of XJS V12s about, so maybe they sorted something.

Click to expand...

yea, only sell to the very rich

They're not expensive to buy - you can get them for what you'd pay for the cheapest utility vehicle - but upkeep is the rub.

will foreman said:

They're not expensive to buy - you can get them for what you'd pay for the cheapest utility vehicle - but upkeep is the rub.

Click to expand...

any old English or even Italian car (actually any current European car is high upkeep).. Japanese cars seem to be the most affordable over time....but I do miss my old BMW 2002, before they were popular, when they were merely a cult favorite.

Joel Stern said:

Was '67 the year of the slit window? My favorite.

Click to expand...

That was the '63, and rear visibility stank. You want the '67 with the L88 427 big-block — that was a beast.

Either that or a 327 fuelie. Not as fast, but lighter and might've had a bit of a handling edge (my uncle had a '65 fuelie for a while).