M mount Black&White sensor

[Artur6]

Frankly, I think that the chances of Ricoh releasing a Monochrome M module are infinitesimal.
I'd be happy if they released an updated 'ordinary' color module; 24Mp FF would be perfect, but probably we'll have to settle for 16Mp APS-C.
What I fear is that with the Pentax merging and the subsequent restructuring, Ricoh cuts resources for the GXR system and the current A12- M module won't have any update at all.

 

[riccadonna]

A Fullframe would sell like HOTCAKES. For some reason they can't see that

If FF body sold for 2k it certainly would. But then I wonder, why such a serious makers like Canon and Nikon havn`t yet come with their FF rangefinders. Both have glorious past in RF, especially Nikon. Just imagine Nikon S3 digital.The FF RF would be wonderfull second body fitted with compact wide. Still they don`t do it. Why then? Probably because it involves designing the sensor with special offset microlenses and what`s more important, design of new wides adjusted for digital short backfocus arrangement. Or one could use m-mount for existing Leica lenses. But, can imagine Nikon or Canon would make their product with Leica mount? No well. So altoghether thanks God, Ricoh is free of such consideration and produced m-mount unit which is the most universl mount in the world. With the help of adapters you can use just any old and new lens ( with exception of designs without aperture control on the lens). Good work Ricoh. I can live with crop sensor, just keep on improving m-mount units. An A16 with better high ISO would be nice as well as B/W and Cine HD units. Me siento muy RICOh. Stanis

 

[silverbullet]

Last year I would have been happy to get this new b&w module from Ricoh. But after looking at the files from the M9M i'm healed......because these files don't touch me - deep.

Now I know what's for me is missing: the visible noise from a silver-based film with it's random placed particles around the frame. It feels like and old-school/fart statement from an anti-digitalo, but I'm not....... :roll:

Beside higher resolution, missing CAs and other advantages the M9M files look like MF format pics which are technically superb but don't have for me the same visual impact compare to a dirty and rough TRI-X frame. More or less I'm educated from the photographs of the 70 where high contrast and grain was a form of expression.

It might be possible that Ricoh has much more experience with how to treat files from a monochrome sensor but when the results are nearly the same as from Leica, I would walk away without buying.....
Beside this for Ricoh it would make much more sense to offer such and 'additional' M mount compare to Leica which is just a time- and gap filling item in front of the Photokina and it's new M10.....

 

[wok64]

Given Ricoh´s ability to think outside the box I wouldn´t be surprised to see a b&w module appearing. However, for Leica the Monochrom was a no-brainer and will be a huge success because a lot of Leica afficionados are purists willing to pay for it. Ricoh is aiming at another market segment and I´m not sure a b&w module will pay off r&d efforts.

wok

 

[Katsunami]

Why should one want a dedicated B&W module? There are quite some options in the GXR to create the B&W look one wants. Possibly combine it with it Lightroom profile or something for more adjustments, tweak as neccesary, and be done with it. I would pay €1000 for a full frame module, and €400 for a body if the only change they make to the current GXR is to integrate the viewfinder.

Personally, I wouldn't even want a B&W module for free.

 

[riccadonna]

Katsunami. Do you know about sensors? Look at Leica Monochrom. LeicaM9-basic ISO 160, Leica Monochrome basic ISO 360. It`s at least twice as sensitive without Beyer mosaic. Furthermore because of lack of color signal processing, the output of dedicated B/W in term of grain and sharpness is much more that double value. What you actually want is a Leica clone by Ricoh at sixth of price. That`s the price of NEX-7 or OLYMPUS MD with their not so FF sensors. Beside that you could get 3 B/W modules with bodies put three identikal lenses on, each with seperate filter, R-G-B and make color foto of better quality then M9. All that at half price. Finally, a century ago the photographers created superb shots using B/W. Should you want color in B/W there`s always one Jan Saudek to study and learn from.
p.s. should Ricoh ever give you one for free , accept it and pass it at once to me.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

So far Ricoh have not produced a FF camera unit for the GXR. If they did I would expect it to have a colour sensor and it would be more expensive than the current M mount unit. A B&W only unit would appeal to the dedicated B&W enthusiasts but are there enough of them to make the project viable?

Quite right Archie

If it were to happen it might be a bit premature to bring out an aps-c B&w only sensor even if such a sensor were commercially available in quantity to Ricoh.

Yes this would be exciting for those that might like this including myself but very much ho-hum for the vast majority of camera users demand colour and also seem to think that your camera might be deficient if it does not produce a colour image. It would convince the rest of the world that Rich cameras were only for mad photographers and that they should be steered clear of at any cost lest it prove infectious.

Therefore whilst Leica gets some sort of rarified response to its B&W only special it only needs to sell it in small numbers at that price to madmen with money to make it a profit centre. No way Ricoh could get away with such pricing or somehow they would find a b&w aps-c to fit into the A12 mount and it would be available real soon now.

Most likely the big sales and demand would come for a FF Colour LM mount module, especially if it had a professional level capture buffer to speed up response. That would set the industry afire and gain respect and sales - especially if it were affordable.

Once wreathed in the aura of accomplishment a special run of FF mount modules with b&w only sensors at a hefty premium price will be "easy". Special badge and trim and it would almost be a Leica ....

Tom

 

[Katsunami]

Katsunami. Do you know about sensors?

I know enough about them to know that the M9-M will be a *very* specialised camera. You must be a complete B&W nut/afficcionado to want such a camera instead of just creating your own B&W pictures with camera presets or by RAW-conversion.

What you actually want is a Leica clone by Ricoh at sixth of price.

No, what I actually want, is an M-type EVIL camera. The GXR-M comes close, but I it's not completely there yet. The Fuji X-Pro1 also comes very close, but the GXR is better in some aspects. (When seeing reviews of the X-Pro1 with Leica/Zeiss/CV glass, the GXR-M seems to handle some lenses better.) If Ricoh would create a body such as the Fuji X-Pro1, and then put the GXR in there using a full frame sensor, for the same price the Fuji costs (€1699), that camera would destroy *anything else*. Everyone who ever wanted to use rangefinder lenses and camera's because of their size would be buying that camera.

 

[ayewing]

Most likely the big sales and demand would come for a FF Colour LM mount module, especially if it had a professional level capture buffer to speed up response. That would set the industry afire and gain respect and sales - especially if it were affordable.

Once wreathed in the aura of accomplishment a special run of FF mount modules with b&w only sensors at a hefty premium price will be "easy". Special badge and trim and it would almost be a Leica ....
Tom

The problem for Ricoh in producing a FF unit is that they require not only a FF sensor but one fitted with the correctly oriented microlenses to make it usable with rangefinder lenses. Presumably they could source such a sensor from the company that supplies Leica unless there were contractual or patent problems preventing the sale to other companies.

The physical problems of fitting a FF sensor plus beefed up buffer and faster electronics could be overcome. The A12 M Mount is already a little wider than the other camera units and could if necessary be made a little wider still. I still have doubts about the economics as the cost of a specialised FF sensor ordered in relatively small numbers compared to the mass market might be prohibitively expensive. The A12 M Mount cost £549 in the UK when released so I imagine a FF version would cost at least double that and probably a lot more.

Incidentally I have noticed that the price of the A12 M mount has dropped as low as £399 at a main Ricoh dealer - perhaps a new version is in the offing.

 

[wok64]

Don't forget that with the FF sensor even Leica doesn't rely on microlenses alone. There is also a lot of digital image processing involved within the camera for getting the corners free of color shifts. Not so easy for Ricoh to get their hands on all these lenses and create the required lens profiles.

 

[ayewing]

Thanks Wok64, these are good points. Ricoh made a pretty good job of the A12 M Mount but clearly the challenges of using a FF sensor are much greater.

I do not expect a FF upgrade anytime soon. If there is a new version soon it will probably be a 16Mpx APS-C sensor. There was a story that Ricoh would have to upgrade as manufacture of the current sensor may cease soon.

 

[Katsunami]

Don't forget that with the FF sensor even Leica doesn't rely on microlenses alone. There is also a lot of digital image processing involved within the camera for getting the corners free of color shifts. Not so easy for Ricoh to get their hands on all these lenses and create the required lens profiles.

Does the GXR-M do in-camera processing? As far as I know, it doesn't, if you don't set it specifically... And still every lens I tried it with performs great. It handily beats the hell out of the Epson R-D1, M8, most NEX-es, all MFT camera's, and reports about the Fuji X-Pro1 with wide angle lenses are not too good. Granted, those were tests without the latest firmware and a non-Fuji M-adapter. A full frame sensor is more difficult, but I think Ricoh stands a chance if they design it in the same way as this A12 one.

BTW... I won't upgrade to a 16MP module; only if it's full frame or, maybe, 1.33

 

[AlbertTRAL]

BTW... I won't upgrade to a 16MP module; only if it's full frame or, maybe, 1.33

What about an A16M with 5 axis VR getting 4 extra stops in low light...(like having iso 51200 from 3200... or from f/4 to f/1)
What about an A16M with a Foveon Merrill 46M sensor...
What about an A16M with ultrasound sensor cleaning...

I think there is some life before and after FF...although I agree FF will be nice...

 

[wok64]

...Does the GXR-M do in-camera processing? ...

It seems for APS-C and even APS-H the microlenses alone can do the job. Not so for full frame - at least not with the M9 sensor.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Out of my league I think, I will happily tag along with the FF sensor if ever it comes to market.

I am one of those sorts of people that say I want it then I will buy it if it is made as long as the price is not unreasonably out of my reach. I think many (not present company of course) will scream and holler a bit wishing a new product into existence but once it arrives reserve their right to examin it under a microscope, poke and prod a bit and then say it is too, expensive, or fit in the rear pocket their jeans ... ( ).

I think I remember some discussion that Sony are making their own FF sensor, I doubt that Leica's supplier is not going to run off a special batch for Ricoh even though Ricoh's bulk purchase of sensors must always be a much larger quantity than Leica could ever offer. More than likely Leica has some essential input into the design that would preclude the sale to anyone else. It seems that Kodak made the sensors but that product has been hived off to another company now (but I am vague on this detail and only repeat half remembered information that I read).

Sony supply Ricoh with sensors already and therefore would obviously be a more logical supply source. If Sony do have a FF sensor and they have it capable of modification to the standards to compete directly with Leicas FF sensor then a Ricoh FF mount module might be possible.

There are hurdles - Sony would obviously want its own moments in the sun with the sensor before it sold them to any other company. Presumably the first umpteen batches will go right into "conventional" colour Sony FF cameras. Only when the first flush of production/sales euphoria dies and there is surplus product would they likely consider sales to other oem companies. At that point they might optimise a special batch to Ricoh requirements - it such a thing might even happen.

Therefore any FF sensor mount must be quite a long way down the track - if it ever happens at all.

Tom

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Don't forget that with the FF sensor even Leica doesn't rely on microlenses alone. There is also a lot of digital image processing involved within the camera for getting the corners free of color shifts. Not so easy for Ricoh to get their hands on all these lenses and create the required lens profiles.

I think the A12 mount has similar problems and Ricoh have put the tools for individual lens correction right into the firmware so that users can roll their own lens corrections. Not sure if anyone is actually building individual lens profiles for the A12 mount. If they are the rotten sods and keeping them very much to themselves. No posting of "hey this profile works a treat for {insert lens description}". My guess is that despite the talk of lens profiles being necessary most (like me) just run the lens the way it is just as it attaches to the camera.


Tom

 

[Katsunami]

I've never used lens profiles for any of my five lenses. The images just come out fine without any in-camera corrections.

I could dick around shooting test after test after test to see if I need "magenta +1" on the upper left corner and "green +1" on the upper right while setting "Illumination +2", but only when apertures are smaller than f/2.8... no thanks. All of my lenses, even the very wide Zeiss 21 and Voigtlander 15 are fine; and they cause many problems on many camera's. (The Zeiss 21mm f/4.5 being the worst, according to reviews.)

 

[Tom Caldwell]

That is two "confessions" already

The complete lack of discussion on the subject seems to indicate to me that whilst all users are very worried about getting the microlenses "just right" and chosing the "perfect" lens no one has explored just how to tune up any lens where the microlenses are not quite up to handling a lens that is not quite "perfect".

People who cannot understand the finer points of music are said to have a "tin-ear". I confess to a "tin-eye" - I must admit that a picture either looks good or does not to me - the finer points of just why, but I can determine "sharp". If I notice a bit of corner vignetting or colour cast I either fix it up in PP or simply ignore it.

The idea of a lens database in camera is an excellent one but the present implementation is a cumbersome one so I don't use it - without a lens database the individual lens tuning cannot realistically be done.

So who does individually set up lenses? Come on, share the knowledge, we all would like to know so that we could try them with our identical lens on our very own camera.

Three possible reasons - one, that no one does this either from lack of knowledge or from lack of rigour (like me). The other possibility is that it is easier to talk about the quality of lenses but harder to put your own adjustment routine settings up for the hard light of public scrutiny. Or thirdly, possibly the lenses in use are so perfect that they need no further tuning in-camera - all of them.

So now anyone who says "Lens X" is not as good as "Lens Y" for whatever reason might be able to say: "If you make such and such a correction in camera then Lens X outshoots Lens Y any day. We are all agog for such knowledge would save a lot of money in buying a copy of Lens Y just to get that little extra performance.

The reality is that we simply just like talking about the gear we own :shock:

However should Ricoh eventually come up with a larger more readily accessible lens data base then I undertake to give lens adjustments a whirl but I will have to get some help as my "tin-eyes" need a bit of co-operative assistance from others, I am sure not to get the complete answer on first try.

Tom

 

[wok64]

Main problem with lens correction may be that it depends on the aperture your're using. Leica M's make at least an educated guess on the aperture used, not so the Ricoh module to my knowledge (don't own it yet, so I may be off here). So even with in camera lens correction you still may need post processing depending on the aperture you're using. In that case it's simpler not to bother about in-camera processing at all and just do it in post every time.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Wok,

I have not used the lens set up recording for the GXR A12 mount simply because I have too many lenses. But when I have a look just in order to reply to your post I find that the settings you can make for a (limited) number of individual lenses are: Peripheral illumination (sliding scale); Distortion correction (three levels of strength for barrel and pincushion); Colour Shading Correcton (scales).

These can also be set generically and adjusted to any lens in present use on the camera.

Obviously different lenses have different charcateristics and the camera allows six lens characteristics together with name, focal length and f-stop to be recorded in-camera and a further six on the SD card - it might be possible to squeeze three more into the My Mode record but only temporarily.