Ricoh announce the GXR camera with a unique approach to interchangeability - interchangeable Lense and Sensor combinations-
Does this really sound like the future to you - to me it's a nice idea but will it catch on or could it be a repeat of the Betamax saga.....
CLICK (http://www.dpreview.com/previews/RicohGXR/) for details....
Very interesting idea but.......(and I won't be the only person to say this)....over a grand for a compact with fixed 50mm lens????
It may be amazing. But I could almost buy 2 X G11s for that. And I think Canon are being rather "robust" with their pricing.
I seriously can't see many people paying maybe 2K to kit their compact out with a nice zoom, a wide angle and maybe a decent flash.
I like Ricoh cameras. But I always thought they were hoping to get bought by a bigger firm that could run with their ideas.
betamax - something for Tomorrows World
Certainly a unique idea and format, but 18 months too late now that Oly and Panny have opened up the versatility of the Micro 4/3 CIL format - and the alternative Samsung CIL format can't be far away.
Quote from: picsfor on November 11, 2009, 03:17:42 PM
betamax - something for Tomorrows World
For those too young to remember the Betamax Video recording system came out at about the same time as VHS and was considered technically better, by many experts, but it just disappeared while VHS forged ahead
That's why I asked the question.....
I won't mention the even better Philips V2000 video then, Reversable tapes - each side being able to be write protected spearately - fast forward and rewind in play kept the video in colour and in sync.. I could go on.
But back to the point, I don't see this one catching on - as has been said, its too expensive and not even its name is going to help it!
Quote from: picsfor on November 11, 2009, 03:17:42 PM
betamax - something for Tomorrows World
Ah, now that was a 1970s programme that made the future of technology incredibly exciting. Hairdryers that floated in the air while you had a conversation with them, clothes that changed colour at the press of a button, eggs that fried themselves.
Well, maybe I exaggerate a bit, but I don't think you could have the same TV program now, as new technology is not nearly as imaginative in the same comic book style. It would all be about what software and peripherals you could get for your computer, or how many megapixels for your camera, or how the National Identity card implements biometrics.
So much of what is successful is now driven by marketing budgets. The big guns have the big budgets, and it ends up being rather unfair. I recall when I was younger, camera shops used to stock a much wider range of cameras. There was a period last year when Jessops seemed to only stock Canon, Nikon and Sony. And it was very much related to the merchandising stands that those manufacturers supplied to the shops. It will be hard for Ricoh to get a foot in the door unless they have the finance to do this sort of thing.
The article does make the point that smaller manufacturers do much of the innovation. I know that Canon and Nikon have driven the high ISO, high megapixel thing, but it's been left to other manufacturers for stuff such as:
-sensor dust removal
-live view
-sensor based shake reduction
And it's interesting that both Nikon and Canon have introduced sensor dust removal and live view but not sensor based image stabilisation!
I also wonder how long it takes to develope these things - or whether they have them already developed in the wings ready to release or whether they see something another Manu has and then develope it (After buying a competitors camera to reverse engineer it first!)
The recent anouncement of the 1DMkIV so quickly after the D3x with both having ISO102400 is either Canon knowing what Nikon are doing and developing their high ISO options, or whether Nikon released the D3x and Canon then did a quick test to see if they can do the same high ISO range and then say they can whilst still developing it.
I suspect that they know exactly what the competition is doing in advance and time the releases to maximise their products media time - afterall its the last one to come out that is often remembered!!
Quote from: anglefire on November 11, 2009, 11:46:16 PM
but not sensor based image stabilisation!
Yes I noticed that. ???
Quote from: anglefire on November 11, 2009, 11:46:16 PM
I suspect that they know exactly what the competition is doing
My wife previously worked for Ericsson when they were not attached to Sony. It was in the heydays when they single handedly built a whole new UK network from scratch for 'one to one' and then developing 3G technology.
She worked with some extremely high level people within the organisation with whom i used to talk to when popping in to pick her up from work or going on the functions etc, and i was always amazed that they knew exactly what Nokia and Motorola were doing.
Nothing was ever given away, but it was clear that non of the competitors had any secrets worth trying to find.
With that in mind - i have absolutely no doubt that Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus etc all know what each other are doing - either that or each company has it's own 'mini Alto Park' with people researching away to see what's possible and to have ready for release as and when it is needed.
with all things. including cameras, you surely reach a stage where everything that is truely useful has been developed. You then have to think up things that people don't know they want but you need to convince them they do. Like Canon and Nikon convince everyone that stabilised lenses are far better than in camera shake reduction 8)
Quote from: greypoint on November 12, 2009, 07:55:44 AM
with all things. including cameras, you surely reach a stage where everything that is truely useful has been developed. You then have to think up things that people don't know they want but you need to convince them they do. Like Canon and Nikon convince everyone that stabilised lenses are far better than in camera shake reduction 8)
But they are.
No question.
How do I know?
Well, I will tell you, I've worked in the control industry for years and getting variable volume systems to behave themselves is one of the hardest things to do. Not impossible, just hard. Must be the same as lenses, long lenses need a different set of parameters to a short one - just physics. Different resonance points, etc etc. If I tune a VV system, then I have a defined set of limits, not so the camera manufacturers - they have noidea what lens will be hung on the camera - so they woiuld have to tune it for the worst case - or average case, which means some lenses would be under damped and some over damped.
I rekon the next thing will be DSLR's with either built in email of internet access. Oh hang on, that can be done now. :)
Since everyone seems more interested in why Canikon don't use sensor stabilisation than the really cool stuff Ricoh are doing.........
Quotethey have noidea what lens will be hung on the camera
But they do. Check the exif. Each lens reports a unique id saying exactly what it is. There's no reason why the camera can't interpret that data and apply different damping to each lens (and I'm not certain that Sony's don't - it would seem an obvious thing to do). And a mischievous manufacture could purposely blur the image on a 3rd party lens. If they wanted to. Which of course they wouldn't :D.
What's more they report their serial number so it knows
exactly which lens is on the camera. The D3 (and others) use this for lens calibration - I could calibrate two 24-70s differently and even if I didn't know which one was on the camera the camera would. So you could tune the damping to the exact lens.
Also you could train the camera. Sony do this a little with their feedback on shakiness. But there's no reason I couldn't periodically point a particular lens at a test chart and have the camera work out how much I shake with that particular lens and compensate accordingly. I'm not sure there's a practical point to this but it would look cool on a spec sheet. Which is the way things are going ;)
Sorry, yes I should have qualified that - yes the camera dos know whats on the front as you say - but can you see the manufacturer, be it Canon or Nikon, tuning the algorithum for all the 2rd party lenses? No neither can I.
And yes self tuning does exist and does work quite well most of the time. And yes would look cool on a spec sheet. But as you say, I'm not sure of its true worth.
I don't really see this working, the zoom module that Ricoh have produced for the GXR has the same tiny 1/1.7 inch sensor while the 33mm macro has a APS-C sensor.
Also just to clarify, the sensor is not independent of the lens. If you want to upgrade the sensor in the future, you will need to buy a whole new lens and sensor camera module. Somehow it seem a dead end road to me but I may be wrong.
As to IS Olympus cameras and Zuiko lenses communicate with each other regarding IS, if it is a third party or manual lens that does not communicate with it you can manually dial in the focal lengh for the IS to work with it.
Quote from: Oly Paul on November 12, 2009, 04:36:26 PM
As to IS Olympus cameras and Zuiko lenses communicate with each other regarding IS, if it is a third party or manual lens that does not communicate with it you can manually dial in the focal lengh for the IS to work with it.
That's interesting, so they must be some form of tuning by focal length. Makes sense. :tup:
Quote from: ABERS on November 12, 2009, 07:25:52 AM
Quote from: anglefire on November 11, 2009, 11:46:16 PM
but not sensor based image stabilisation!
Yes I noticed that. ???
Simple. Nikon and Canon both make film cameras. You can't have in-camera stabilisation with film. Nikon (and I'm sure Canon) ensure that they support all equipment sold going back a decade or more.
On the DC mag site, I was always bitching about the Nikon lens compatibility thing (they've never managed to converge - AF-D, G and AF-S are still being sold, and there are still a couple of AI-S lenses being made!).
And then I bought some old film cameras. I have:
-Nikon FE
-Nikon FA
-Nikon F60
All of these have a decent range of lenses available (wide, prime, tele, zoom), which give full functionality. Not bad. Especially with the FE. Thirty years old.
Ken Rockwell has some shots of the very first Nikon F with the latest AF-S zoom mounted:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/compatibility.htm
Quote from: chris@seary.com on November 13, 2009, 10:03:10 PM
Quote from: ABERS on November 12, 2009, 07:25:52 AM
Quote from: anglefire on November 11, 2009, 11:46:16 PM
but not sensor based image stabilisation!
Yes I noticed that. ???
Simple. Nikon and Canon both make film cameras. You can't have in-camera stabilisation with film. Nikon (and I'm sure Canon) ensure that they support all equipment sold going back a decade or more.
On the DC mag site, I was always bitching about the Nikon lens compatibility thing (they've never managed to converge - AF-D, G and AF-S are still being sold, and there are still a couple of AI-S lenses being made!).
And then I bought some old film cameras. I have:
-Nikon FE
-Nikon FA
-Nikon F60
All of these have a decent range of lenses available (wide, prime, tele, zoom), which give full functionality. Not bad. Especially with the FE. Thirty years old.
Ken Rockwell has some shots of the very first Nikon F with the latest AF-S zoom mounted:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/compatibility.htm
That's why they don't use in-camera stabilisation......
I should have realised. :-[