What do you think of the new Ricoh GXR system?

[K1W1]

If you don't start at the beginning click here (http://www.dcresource.com/news/newsitem.php?id=4020) for info. :)

I like the idea that somebody is being innovative and thinking differently but I'm confused as to why you would couple a lens with an image sensor and uncouple both of those from a body. Every time a user buys a lens they also buy an imaging sensor. Obviously you negate dust issues and I guess you could argue that the lens and sensor could be optimised but I'm thinking that the pricing will mean that people just won't be likely to buy additional lens/sensor combos so all they will have is an expensive (I assume) P&S.

Strangely enough one of the Melbourne daily papers had a mini hands on review (written by Ricohs marketing dept I suspect) today so Ricoh are making attempts to publicise the product at least.

[Rooz]

i must admit, i just dont get it. limited and fugly. but i do agree, at least its some form of innovation

[herc182]

I personally think it wont last and will die out...Anyone who is new to photography wont get it because its ugly and fairly pricey, and anyone INTO photography will get the Panasonic or Olympus offerings...

[photowerkz]

It would be nice to have a modular camera, where you bought the parts seperatly, to put together the camera you need (i.e: not paying for idiotic things like video). I'd be happy as a clam if I could swap out the sensor in my D300 for a sensor from a D700 for instance, instead of having to buy a compleatly new camera.

[Cyberwlf]

I agree with these sentiments in general, but f'ck me, you seen the results from the Ricoh GXR with A12 module yet?

http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/ricohgxr_A12_preview/

I don't know if its just my opinion, but check out those ISO 1600 images on a camera with a body that size...

[Paradox]

A step in the right direction allowing sensors to be interchanged, but who decided they should be stuck to the lens? That just drives the cost up unnecessarily.

[herc182]

Also, what's the point of making the overall package (ie camera) small when you have to carry around some bigish "units" to change the lens?

I really don't know what audience it's appealing to. It's not pretty, it's not compact, it's not cheap, it's just different. That in my book is not enough...by a long shot.

[K1W1]

Having read the DPReview preview and thought about this a little more I must say that I'm warming to the concept if not the rather utilitarian implementation. Don't forget the Ricoh always have been a niche player and particularly their digital cameras have always been slightly different from the mainstream such as the fixed lens wide angle models from a couple of years ago. I doubt that their sales expectations are anything other than modest.
What this concept does is allow lenses to be optimised with sensors so for example you can have a specialist macro combo, or wide angle, or telephoto or even more specialist like HDR, infrared, b&w or dare I say it movie but there is one more possible benefit, interchangeable bodies. What would stop Ricoh producing a specialist studio or tripod body that for example had a 6" hi res screen, or a tiny body with no screen and a simple optical viewfinder.
Overall I'm pleased that somebody is trying something different I hope that the sales results at least meet their expectations and that they continue to think different.

[achuang]

I'd be interested to know how much it costs for these sensor-lens modules. It just sounds like a very expensive alternative to the panasonic and olympus offerings. If these modules aren't any more expensive than normal lenses then it won't be so bad. Still doesn't make any sense to me to be stuck with a tiny sensor with a standard zoom lens, and a larger APS-C sensor with a 50mm macro lens. Giving people the option to choose a worse sensor with the most commonly used focal length.

[Gopher]

I'm feeling very ignorant here. Maybe like the boy who can't see the Emperor's new cloths? But then; I was among those who thought the Internet had no future back in '92 - so passed on the early opportunity to buy sites like business.com.

There is a market for a handy little camera that delivers pro-level results; and even a market for people who just want a retro and discrete look. Is this it?

[shshsh]

I wonder what the point of that system is. Basically, you exchange most of what makes the camera a camera with that lens + sensor unit. So what's left? Just the display, the battery and a handful of buttons? Why bother?

If I go through that trouble, why not simply buy, say, a superzoom with a tiny sensor (and lousy ISO) but looong reach and something like the Panasonic LX-3 for wide angle and good IQ?

It's commendable for Ricoh to have the balls to come up with this kind of innovation, though. Even if it's a weird one. :)

[shshsh]

http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/ricohgxr_A12_preview/

I don't know if its just my opinion, but check out those ISO 1600 images on a camera with a body that size...

EXIF says that shot (like all others in that series) was taken with the 50mm + APS-C unit (12.9 MPix) here:

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/RicohGXR/page2.asp

So basically, this is the equivalent of a Nikon D5000 (APS-C sensor with 12.3 MPix) with a 50 mm lens. Wouldn't we expect that kind of high ISO performance from a recent camera of that class? Looks like Ricoh did their homework this time. ;)

The trouble with that system is, though, that you can ONLY expect that kind of high ISO performance with that particular lens + sensor unit; the 24-70 equiv. zoom unit only has a tiny 1/7" CCD (9.5 x 7.6 mm) - a far cry from an APS-C sensor.

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Camera_System/sensor_sizes_01.htm

Exchanging the sensor along with the lens - that's a troublesome aspect of that system for me. Sure, you can make lenses much more compact that way (and that's what they do for telephoto lenses), but you compromise IQ while you are doing that. Not good.

[fionndruinne]

I think lenses are already expensive enough without buying a sensor along with them. Color me confused and unimpressed.

[Cyberwlf]

Well its certainly turned into a year of and a bit of innovations galore from the not-full-dSLR-but-not-a-compact-and-kinda-like-a-rangefinder-but-digital(tm!) market!

It takes experimenting for people to develop something into a professional product but between Panasonic, Ricoh, Olympus (and maybe 1-2 others?) we've seen ideas the marketing departments were never brave enough to let loose onto the market before but given the potential money to be made in this crossover market you can see why every man and his dog is having a go at it (Nikon may release the EVIL...wat? Canon.. well they'll probably just release the G12 ;) ).

[Prospero]

I think the GXR system is a great concept.
While the recent micro 4/3rds cameras are compact, they are really only compact when you put one of their pancake prime lenses on it. With a zoom, they are not all that compact anymore.

This concept allows the user to have both the advantage of the smaller sensor compact cameras and those of a larger sensor camera. In essence you have a compact camera with quite some zoom that can take nice images as long as the light is good, but that can also take nice images when the light gets dim and you attach the prime and large sensor to the camera.

In addition you get the advantages of less sensor dust and the fact that the sensor and lens are optimized to get the best performance.

Somebody mentioned you might as well get both a superzoom and a dslr. I think the concept of the GXR system has some advantages over getting to cameras, because with this system you will need to get adjusted to only one camera and you shoot images on the same memory card which can make sorting afterwards easier.

Having said that, I doubt the system will become a succes.