New CX or?

The CX6 is down to ¥21,300.

That, and Ricohs 6 months R and CX production cycle indicates to me that they might come out with something new quite soon, a new CX, a different camera, something done with Pentax, or maybe something without the Ricoh name on it at all.
Any speculation?
--
Rube
http://www.flickr.com/photos/71881102@N00/

rube39 said:

The CX6 is down to ¥21,300.

That, and Ricohs 6 months R and CX production cycle indicates to me that they might come out with something new quite soon, a new CX, a different camera, something done with Pentax, or maybe something without the Ricoh name on it at all.
Any speculation?
--
Rube
http://www.flickr.com/photos/71881102@N00/

Click to expand...

By R, do you mean GRD? I didn't see and R series on their website.

rube39 said:

The CX6 is down to ¥21,300.

That, and Ricohs 6 months R and CX production cycle indicates to me that they might come out with something new quite soon, a new CX, a different camera, something done with Pentax, or maybe something without the Ricoh name on it at all.
Any speculation?
--
Rube
http://www.flickr.com/photos/71881102@N00/

Click to expand...

Dunno, after the CX1 I was tempted a bit by the CX2 but waited for the CX3, must have been concentrating on something else because it was up to the CX6 hardly before I could blink.

The CX6 is supposed to be pretty good. Now if Ricoh follows their half model revision followed by a bigger shake up every second model then the CX7 should be a bigger shake up version.

However the mixture with Pentax must muddy the water a fair bit. A while back Pentax introduced a model (I forget which one - there are sooo many ...) that seemed to have a lot of Ricoh dna in it.

So where could the CX possibly go? - it seems fairly complete for what is was designed to do. Forget the usual calls for full PASM control and RAW file capability. Ricoh could have done that eons ago should they have chosen to do so.

Maybe it could become "today's GX with a bigger zoom?".

Somewhere along the line the GRD, CX, Q and various other Pentax offerings must merge and part into a logical market model sequencing.

For example - are replaceable lensed mini-cameras such as the Q just a passing phase or will this become a class of it's own? Perhaps the GRD might don a Q mount and some fixed GR lenses for it suddenly appear? (40mm equivalent? - yeh man! Ed) The Q seems to have attracted a mini-maniac following to the bemusement of "proper photographers".

In any case there will always be a market for an all in one small powerful, simple zoom such as the CX, and making it more expensive by simply dropping the model and guiding customers to the Q makes little sense.

CX7. welcome, but I am not so sure what extra tricks can be dredged from the bottom of the patent file. "Maybe raw and PASM?" he says excitedly ....

--
Tom Caldwell

aman74 said:

rube39 said:

The CX6 is down to ¥21,300.

That, and Ricohs 6 months R and CX production cycle indicates to me that they might come out with something new quite soon, a new CX, a different camera, something done with Pentax, or maybe something without the Ricoh name on it at all.
Any speculation?
--
Rube
http://www.flickr.com/photos/71881102@N00/

Click to expand...

By R, do you mean GRD? I didn't see and R series on their website.

Click to expand...

The R series preceded the CX series (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R10 - then CX1, etc)

No R9

--
Tom Caldwell

I have the CX1 and it's my favorite camera, I actually bought the CX2 for herself a couple of months ago (it was on special offer don't you know) and I was quite surprised at the amount of difference between it and the CX1, apart from the lens which was it's obvious differentiating feature of course.

On that basis I'd say that there is probably a lot more in a CX upgrade than we tend to realize. I was waiting for the CX6 myself but skipped it when it did not include RAW, although they did add AP and SP. If the CX7 is the major upgrade Tom thinks it will be then it might do this and would be worth waiting for.

I gave up waiting myself and went for the Nikon P7100 as a travel replacement for my Pentax DSLR, there's just too much hassle for me carting a DSLR + lenses around, it's OK if you are at home and you can use the car boot as a gadget bag but toddling through foreign parts with all the gear - No.

And for those who might be wondering you can get the P7100 in a trouser pocket though it's much easier in a jacket one. The optical viewfinder works in bright sunlight but leaves a large greasy spludge on the screen from your nose - nothing is perfect.

And I didn't go for the GXR because I could see myself ending up with another boot full of lenses and in the same quandary as with the DSLR.
--
CD

Chris Dennehy said:

And I didn't go for the GXR because I could see myself ending up with another boot full of lenses and in the same quandary as with the DSLR.
--
CD

Click to expand...

Chris in the very early days of the GXR I wondered out aloud on whether there was any merit in seeing this camera + module as each a separate camera. However it can equally be treated as one camera + "lenses" that you cart about and change frequently.

However the P10 module is none other than a larger bodied maxi-CX with full PASM and raw capability that actually packs itself down fairly compactly for travel purposes. The extra features carried by the GXR back make it a powerful point'n'shoot indeed. My herself is taking it with her on an upcoming trip and I get to borrow the GXR back when it gets relegated to a drawer when not travelling. Seems great. One set of spare batteries and one charger serves all.

The GXR + P10 module seems to be currently selling in some places at about the cost of a bare camera back.

Meanwhile back to the concept of multiple cameras - it will work when they are indeed multiple camera bodies + lens modules. But also the lens modules are cunningly designed so that they seem to group specific purposes - wide; normal+macro and now three zooms at your pleasure - each of which probably excludes the others. Seems hardly likely that someone might need all three.

Therefore there is a good chance that you only take one camera + suitable module when heading off. No need to take the car boot.

However the GXR + A12 mount module is something else. With the ideal setup you might just have a small collection of expensive RF lenses. Not too big a burden, just a small bag. On the other hand get a collection of M42 lenses as well and you end up switching lens and adapter, gets complicated, but I am working on it - I just get a bigger car boot - smile. So as an expedient more than one back and M mount and leave adapters fixed. Trying it anyway - if you don't hear from me I have gone quite mad ... (as many have already suspected).

--
Tom Caldwell

Well Tom, if I was going to buy a GXR it would be with the A16 24/85 module because that covers 90% of what I shoot, but herself is well aware of that would cost so I'm not committing suicide that way - yet.

It's relatively simple to smuggle in the odd m42 mount lens for the DSLR, it doesn't make that much of a stir on the VISA bill and I enjoy using them in the garden, not that I've taken anything to write home about yet.

I should mention that two of my daughters are accountants and I can't get anything past them, especially the one who uses my old office and is quite likely to intercept the post man with - "There's another package for you dad" - and I'm sunk again.
--
CD

Chris Dennehy said:

Well Tom, if I was going to buy a GXR it would be with the A16 24/85 module because that covers 90% of what I shoot, but herself is well aware of that would cost so I'm not committing suicide that way - yet.

It's relatively simple to smuggle in the odd m42 mount lens for the DSLR, it doesn't make that much of a stir on the VISA bill and I enjoy using them in the garden, not that I've taken anything to write home about yet.

I should mention that two of my daughters are accountants and I can't get anything past them, especially the one who uses my old office and is quite likely to intercept the post man with - "There's another package for you dad" - and I'm sunk again.
--
CD

Click to expand...

Damme, surrounded by accountants, and me from the same trade ... best surrender!

By the way the M42's will work fine on a GXR with A12 mount and an adapter, maybe you could dig a tunnel?

According to the movie I saw you just fill up old socks with tunnel earth and tie them around your waist and waddle with them out into the garden when you take your M42's for an airing ...

--
Tom Caldwell

Thanks

Haha Chris, love how recognisable your situation ius.

I'm selling my CX 3 as i just bought th eGXR +S10.

I waited for long time and wondered if i should do it or not, but now i have it i see the GXR has much more to offer than a typical PxS like the CX.

OK, the size is bigger, no doubt about that, i will have to buy a new small pouch to put it in, it still fits in my jacket.

The IQ of the S10 is better than the CX, the BOKEH is better (although both small sensors), the PASM is simply fantastic to use, especailly the aperture control is fantastic.

I got a used version, barely used, big discount.

Have it with me everyday, just as i did with the CX3.

The CX is lighter and smaller, it makes wonderfull pictures, the new scenes make it stick out of the bunch of PxS.

But the GXR is also very small, also not heavy and at used price it is worth the money.

Plus you have that possibility to someday buy a new lensor.

If a CX7 should appear, i think RAW is not needed, but aperture control would be nice.

The p10, correct me if i am wrong, is not using the same optics as the CX, it has 10.7 X, but i thought i red that it has a different lens set up, cant tell if it makes a difference in IQ.

I would never buy the latest CX anymore, if i where to buy a PxS. i would now go for the CX5; much cheaper than the CX6 and in the end, the improvements are minor.

And i would not buy any other PxS at all, the unique user manual of the Ricohs is simply addictive, i fear US FDA might prohibit them soon...

BG_CX3_DPREVIEW said:

If a CX7 should appear, i think RAW is not needed, but aperture control would be nice.

Click to expand...

What advantages do you see with aperture control with this type of camera? I'm very happy with my CX3, but so far have not taken a picture where the camera used anything but the maximum aperture for the focal length--in my case, F/4.3 at the 50mm equivalent focal length I use about 95% of the time (I think this might be one of those cameras that only has two apertures at any given focal length, or maybe it just uses an ND filter to simulate a smaller aperture if the scene is too bright). The maximum aperture is fine, of course, since it already has depth of field equivalent to a 35mm camera used at about F/22, and remaining at maximum reduces diffraction. Aperture-preferred control was appreciated on my FZ35 because in program mode that camera sometimes chose a smaller aperture than needed, and you could see the effects of diffraction in the results.

The P10 lens consits of two tube segments, all CX camera's have 3 segment lens tubes. The P10 might not have the CX' pivoting element which might explain the slightly better performance.

CX6 has both speed and aperture selection (marked A/S on the dail), although aperture selection is simply 'full open' or 'closed', meaning you can select F3.5 in wide angle op to something like F8 or F11. That's fine though, small steps in aperture are not visible in pictures made with small sensor camera's.

Hi Hansaldp,

i did not know the cx6 has this A/S control, that is indeed all it needs,

sometimes a macro with much DOF is needed, and my CX 3 has a shallow DOF at macro, so only min or max is good enough.

Bart