Gearhead kick-along

[Tom Caldwell]

Not much interest in "new gear" (for some unusual reason) and I also think that we are tired of acting as a design bureau for a camera that is unlikely ever to be made. But sometimes a bit of ranting and dreaming helps to pass the time... for those that are not otherwise busy of course.

A few weeks ago a Chinese site mentioned a new Ricoh patent which used the movement of the sensor based image stabiliser to take readings at points of oscillation and use the data to enact a form of phase detect auto focus. Bear in mind that as far back as a couple of years ago Rioch also re-patented the existing Pentax sensor based image stabilisation in what was very obviously a GXR module, but have not used it. Since then a Pentax dslr has been released with the image stabilisation also being usd as an anti-moire device.

We cannot add two and two together here and make fourteen as patents are often taken out as a defensive system and a source of future royalites (and possible suits for infringements). Some are merely good ideas and are simply left on the table for possible use at an undetermined future date.

The Chinese article had a GR series body as illustration, but maybe that was simply to illustrate that the Ricoh company did in fact make a camera. The technical diagram surrounding the patent looked more like a small sensor camera, not quite the Q, but there is no need to show that precise camera design(s) that the patent is likely, if ever, to be used in.

Hot on the heels of this article is the announcement of the Q-S1 but the little that is known about this camera offers no clue as to whether it contains a revolutionary phase-detect on an oscillating sensor. I think not as if so I would have thought there would be more drums banging and cymbals clashing.

So, might the new sensor phase detect be a Q-model further away still? Or something for the Pentax dslr line that might not really need it. Probably not for the GXR mount module - if ever there is another one. Image stabilising legacy MF lenses would be very useful but MF lenses are undountedly "MF". It could be used as a "third mode" for confirming focus or perhaps even as someone suggested the sensor itself might be moved to focus a MF lens?

In any case the boys down in the Ricoh R&D labs are obviously not going to sleep even if they are not designing cameras for production. One might even wonder if they are just accumulating some "killer" new ideas and might surprise us one day (but don't pine away in expectation).

Meanwhile enjoy what we have, buy whatever else takes your fancy, but don't write Ricoh off as they might just come back with a vengeance one day.

Tom

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Just another thought provoker:

The GRD is dead, long live the GRD-Q? At the Q7 Pentax uprated the sensor to the same size as the former GRDIV. It has image stabilising and the lenses are replaceable.

I have the original Q and the Q10 seems to have been much the same thing with a different body. The Q7 was the one with the larger sensor but the same body as the Q10 which is a "ducks and drakes" numbering sequence seemingly designed to confuse unknowing punters in the store more than anything else. Marketing theory runs even more wildly with the new Q-S1 being seemingly the Q-7 with only a few tweeks in a new body.

Seemingly making a discounted Q-7 run out great buying for the well informed as much as I was vey happy to pick up the discounted Q when the Q-10 appeared.

Where deeper thought is required is on just how Pentax might (eventually) position this camera - even at Q model Pentax backfilled it by including Ricoh Mode1 focus peaking - which does not work as well on the limited K460mp resolution lcd screen. A screen which incidentally still seems to feature on the Q-S1.

Also I am not sure if the crazy-good firmware of the GRDIV will ever be allowed to filter into the Q line. The Pentax firmware is not bad but could do with some melding of Ricoh DNA. In other words the Q could quite easily morph into a replaceable lensed camera on steriods despite its small sensor.

But Pentax has seemingly kept the twee side of the camera and the lower resoltion screen and despite its more consumer level front end and effects, its lower resolution screen and no evf possibility it is still a very capable small camera for those that wish to exercise it with some panache. Maybe if it sells so well in Japan they believe they are on a winner and just need to massage the market by changing the body style and making it a "new camera" from time to time?

The lower resolution screen might simply mean that the market it attracts does not demand anything better, or perhaps the battery is not capable enough of driving a higher resolution screen for long periods?

Some thoughts might be given on the subject of how the Q-Super might have been the GRDIV with exchangeable lenses - it is a wonder just why Ricoh did not pounce on the idea of a GRD with a Q-mount. Maybe it would simply have killed the Pentax Q market stone dead as too complicated? But surely there would be room for the Q and a GRD-Q-mount?

Tom

 

[thelps]

Tom,your post has educated us on the Q range a bit more.
Its an interesting little machine, probably suffers some credibility for no other reason than its size.
Perhaps the colour range also doesn't help its more serious appeal.
They do deserve some study though. The Q7 may be the current bargain right now?

My brother has a requirement for a good IQ screen use only camera with high zoom and I am thinking the Q may be a good option.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Tim,

I did this amazing response to your post over half an hour at least ...

When I submitted it somehow it disappeared into cyberspace. I know that you will forgive me if I have other things to do ...

Tom

 

[Rog Tallbloke]

I've been having a lot of fun with my Q and various cheap old prime lenses. This is the main reason for my self imposed exile from the forum - I didn't want my 'Q enthusiasm' to grate on other members.

My lady now has her heart set on a Q7 plus nice Pentax Q system lenses.

I'm giving her a lot of encouragement. :lol:

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Rog

You can grate as much as you like with me. The Q is a remarkable camera and I think in many ways it could be a GR in drag for a replaceable lens variety of the GRDIV, more so than the GR. Of course the Q is chock full of Pentax dna and the camera does not talk Ricoh-speak. Whilst the firmware of the Q is very competent a good wave-over or melding in of Rioch firmware could only enhance the product. As far as I can see the only refugee from Ricoh-land in Q-land is the Mode1 focus peaking.

Furthermore the Q is pitched at a different audience of why change anything that sells pretty well (at least in Japan if I read it right). But whereas the GRD went through some massive changes to end up as the GR the Q must leave acolytes baffled. The Q10 was basically a Q in a new body. The Q7 was basically a Q10 with the (needed) larger sensor. The Q-S1 is basically a Q7 with yet another body.

I have the original Q, I would have liked the larger sensor, but arguably the first body is the best and even at Q-S1 Pentax is still running the same low(er) resolution lcd screen which I think is one of the few negative aspects of the camera. I presume this revolves around the fact that the battery would not cope with a better lcd. Not that the screen does not work usefully enough, more that it is an anachronism in such an otherwise fine little camera. The focus peaking gets very dotty indeed over 2x magnification, although it can still be used it is an acquired skill. A larger battery would probably kill the form factor that makes it so Qute.

I have mentioned that the Q camera body is very well built - the oem lenses work well excepting the toy ones which are joke-worthy. But the lenses in general feel placticky and seem quite expensive as such, but at the same time seem to last. But they don't actually radiate "family heirloom" status.

So if the Q is endearing I hate to poop at the party but the Panasonic GM1 is everything that the Q promised and failed with at the sensor coal face. A good size sensor, a very well thought out touch screen interface that gives Ricoh-levels of control with (reasonably) intuitive levels of use - but you have to suffer a bit first - and a good high resolution lcd. A stripped GX7 (in the GXR class) but all the technical goodies were kept (at least most of them) - here is a first line camera the body size fractionally smaller that the original Q that will be awkward for many simply because of what was left out to make it that size (like the Q of course).

I seriously see the GM1 as a type of prototype for a revamped GXRII which might be GR body sized to accept the GXR mount rails. But it will never happen. Meanwhile I enjoy my GM1 "prototype" to death. Where else can you fit a 85mm (equivalent) f1.2 IS AF portrait lens to a camera body the size of a pack of cards? So the sensor is only 4/3 - I can live with that.

Meanwhile my Q fitted with a 38mm f1.4 D mount lens is a little wonder 212mm (equivalent) f1.4 telephoto that I can almost wrap my hand around - take that GM1!

Tom

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Game changers:

The GRD showed that small cameras need not be only made for casual users.

The GXR showed that compact cameras could be made with multiple lens/sensor choices - much like the "ask" often made for more "GR" cameras each with a different fixed lens. The GXR offered that and was not really accepted on the market place. The GX offered a zoom-lensed GRD but also failed to set the market alight.

The GR moved the GRD into the larger sensor class - a small camera for serious users.

The Q showed that a small camera with exchangeable lenses was a serious possibility.

The Panasonic GM1 showed that the works of a quite serious mid-sized body could be squeezed into a tiny body and retain imaging capability by simply leaving out user conveniences. The GM1 body is actually smaller than the GR but as soon as you add a lens it is no longer the case. The GM1 is also bothered by a fiddly multi-function control and requires more effort to master than the GR. But that does not stop it being a game changer and heralding a completely new class of camera. A pack of cards body that includes a commercial size sensor. The Qute has a serious rival with a dagger between it's teeth - but add oem (only) lenses and the benefits of the smaller sensor in an overall package including lenses swing back towards the Q.

Tom

 

[Rog Tallbloke]

Good observations Tom. The GM1 came under consideration but the minimalist lens size with internal shutter, (and ND filter in the 01 and 02) of the Q system won the day. My lady has taken the plunge with the Q7 set-up - Hoorah!

The bundle she bought (secondhand) includes the wide zoom, standard kit zoom, telezoom and the prime, all with matching hoods and filters. Extra batteries too. Nice! The wide zoom promises to be a blast for street shooting.

So I can sell my kit zoom and prime, and buy some more MF glass...

I like the sound of your 38mm f1:1.4. There's an old Sankyo of that spec on the 'bay right now for small money - I've just grabbed it.

So much fun to be had with the Q! :lol:

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Rog

I have a 38mm Elitar Soligor f1.9 in D mount which is a very good lens which I bought new old stock and which turned out to be a returned lens at is was by itself in the original case made for two. I found out why - the infinity focus was way out of whack - but I was able to adjust it. Now it is "perfect" and is a very compact little manual telephoto with no vignetting.

Then I bought a Yashinon 38mm f1.4 which is a physically much larger lens than the other but obviously nearly a stop faster in the process. Also a very well made lens of some ability. I have also tried some US made cine lenses but find them "tanks" compared to the Japanese lenses.

The Soligor is so sweet and tiny I am suddenly compelled to put it back on the camera and go use it a bit. Such innocent looking little telephoto dynamite ...

The C mount are ... well, "ok" but the D mount lenses are something like orphans and they are not all suitable being often for "cheap cine cameras" and many don't have a variable focus control relying on the stopping for dof only. However there are some good buying in D mount if you browse around. Must go and have another look. Now that I find 38mm a very good 212mm equivalent (which is about a reasonable compromise for range versus common sense) I don't know how ambitious I might get - wide lenses? - quite another story.

Tom

 

[Rog Tallbloke]

Hi Tom,
Thanks for the information. There's a Yashinon 38mm f1.4 D mount on the 'bay now for £60, is this a good price? Is it physically much larger than the soligor in terms of length as well as diameter? Also there is this item 181478100816 but I'm finding the description totally confusing. Is this really 150m focal length? If so, I want it!

I haven't had any luck with wide lenses so far, which is why I'm delighted my lady went for the comprehensive Q7 kit. I can't wait to try the wide zoom, which by all accounts is a great lens.

I have heard that stray light issues can be improved by matt-blacking the inside of adaptors. Also read that putting a black card circle with appropriately sized aperture in the back of lenses can help considerably.

Experiments are fun!

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Hi Tom,
Thanks for the information. There's a Yashinon 38mm f1.4 D mount on the 'bay now for £60, is this a good price? Is it physically much larger than the soligor in terms of length as well as diameter? Also there is this item 181478100816 but I'm finding the description totally confusing. Is this really 150m focal length? If so, I want it!

I haven't had any luck with wide lenses so far, which is why I'm delighted my lady went for the comprehensive Q7 kit. I can't wait to try the wide zoom, which by all accounts is a great lens.

I have heard that stray light issues can be improved by matt-blacking the inside of adaptors. Also read that putting a black card circle with appropriately sized aperture in the back of lenses can help considerably.

Experiments are fun!

I think it a good price - it is a well built lens with nice creamy focus movement - it is no cheapy as some of them are. Yes it is quite a bit larger than the Soligor but not huge 38mm / 26mm at lens cap and 64mm / 54mm from mount flange respectively.

For the old sensor Q the focal length multiplier is 5.6x - this makes 38mm D mount lenses 212.8mm equivalent to 35mm on the Q. I bought a few C and D mount lenses - some of them are clunkers I am afraid - if they are really cheap (as some are) be warned as many (most?) have no focus ring at all and I have been disappointed by some of the US makes who made brass versions which are quite heavy and old fashioned and not all that smooth to focus with. It seems that they might have been the last hurrah of the US lens making industry as I have found the Japanese D and C mount cine lenses just as well made as their 35mm format lenses that took the world by storm.

I have made a Pentax Q camera mount my home made VEfinder device which I now have working on the GXR as well.

Tom