(FT2) Is that a real or fake Ricoh Micro Four Thirds module picture?

Share

An anonymous source (Thanks!) just sent me the following picture. That’s why I ask you (and my sources) if that picture is real or fake!
The Ricoh GXR system was announced 13 months ago and since there we have had many rumors about a possible Ricoh Micro Four Thirds module release.

UPDATE: The source is a user that wrote a comment on fotointern.ch. He says that this picture “was shown on a developer meeting last month“.

P.S.: The Ricoh GXR system is made by a main body and many separated moduls (Click here to see them on eBay)

Would such a module make the GXR system more attractive for you?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
Share
  • Fiona

    Are you seriously posting a fake photo that links to ebay just so you can collect hits? Wow.

    • would you prefer to pay for this from ur pocket?

    • admin

      Hi Fiona! Sorry that was a mistake. I have a wordpress plugin that puts links on camera names. I removed the link!!!
      Damn, I hate it when that happens…

  • Brian Ronald

    If it’s fake, it’s an old fake. This from last June:

    http://www.radiantlite.com/2010/06/ricoh-gxr-with-micro-four-thirds-mount.html

    • admin

      Thanks!

    • admin

      Hi Brian! But that is a new image!

      • One of them is fake because they do not match, hence i believe the second one is fake as well

  • Daywalker

    It’s not real, but we get this combination in the next year. 100%

  • I’m surprised at those m4/3-ers that say that it wouldn’t be of interest to them. They apparently haven’t actually used a Ricoh camera, let alone a GXR. In the next batch of compact reviews I’m doing the GXR is included. Had it had an m4/3 module available and that performed as expected, it would have been my preferred mirrorless camera. Superb build, very photographer-centric controls, and some very good other lens/sensor options. Expensive, yes. But sometimes you get what you pay for.

    • Chris

      How did you feel about the GXR’s off-center hot-shoe and tripod mount? I remember that you saw those as a flaw in your evaluation of the Fuji X100’s design. I’m not overly excited about the X100 myself; I would rather see a better system camera than a fixed-lens one.

      • Al M

        It would be interesting if they did a line of sensor/mount specific modules. An APS-C Sensor with an M42 screw mount would be fun too.

    • Parci

      Maybe they are all waiting for that modular Oly… 😉

      But you are right, such a module would indeed be very interesting, it would add a lot of possibilities for both worlds.

    • tmrgrs

      Thom, if there was a GXR module that allowed me to use my m4/3 lenses I’d definitely be interested. The only thing that might hold me back aside from the price are the reports in the reviews about the GXR’s sluggish AF speed. I’d want the body and module to be no more than say $1000 and I’d want it to AF at least as fast as the GF1. The excellent build quality and UI of the GXR would be a great upgrade for sure but I’m thinking that Olympus is the one who will give us that killer combination – compact body – built-in EVF – built-in flash – direct controls.

    • I’m not interested – and voted No – because there are plethora of good m43 bodies on the market.

      If there were any promise that GXR would deliver something that is not available in the already existing m43 bodies, then it would have been different story.

      And considering sparse m43 lens line up, I do not think that it makes sense for GXR to bother with the m43 module right now. Since you say the system costs premium, users ready to pay premium would expect premium lenses too – and those are yet to materialize.

      • The GXR delivers something that is not available in ANY body period, this is the ability to change the whole module and use an APS module when you need better high ISO and DR without the need to lug around another camera or use different controls or even a different SD card or battery.
        As much as I love my GF1 with the lenses I have for it, the 50mm A12 module for the GXR has better DR, better high ISo and a better lens than you can get for m4/3 but if I could use my existing lenses on the same camera with the fantastic Ricoh controls I would gladly get rid of my GF1.

    • I dont believe the GXR External Viewfinder VF-2 is as good as Oly’s, thats a Major for me

      • No, the VF-2 is better than the Olympus EVF, especially in low light it is way better because it does not get grainy and the refresh rate remains high.
        Sometimes it’s better to test than to believe 😉

    • CRB

      Thom, a better question would be if GXR users are interested in a m4/3 sensor with worse DR and high iso performance than the A12 modules they already using…as for Ricoh UI, i think is superb for photographers…used a GX200 and a GRD…

    • Voldenuit

      Voted yes myself. I imagine a lot of negative votes were from people who have never used a Ricoh camera. Ricoh has one of the best UIs on the market – the GRD-III is a strong testament of their skills in this department. I have a GX100 myself but it hasn’t held up over the years sensor-wise. I often wish my GF1 were as intuitive to use as the GX100, though.

      Being able to use Micro Four Third lenses on a Ricoh body with Ricoh controls? I’m there.

  • sporty883

    I’ve never liked the concept of the GXR. It’s just over the top. But the m43-standard is a obvious route for any manufacturer that wants to expand their market share. There is a healthy eco system already and with good camera’s and/or good lenses any manufacturer will be able to get some instant success.

    Ricoh, Sigma, Voigtländer, Contax/Zeiss, Casio, Pentax, you name it.

  • The picture may be fake – but is the real camera in the pipeline. I certainly hope so.

    I love my 4/3 SLR – and none of the current crop of m4/3 cameras have tempted me to stray yet. But this one might if it’s for real. My first 35mm SLR as a teenager was a Ricoh XR-S and I’ve always liked the brand – the GX8 was a very nice digital compact in it’s day.

    If it can focus as fast as the other mirrorless cameras then it’s a winner in my book.

  • Yep … fake … perspective looks wrong…

    • +1
      you can see that in the sensor looking to the “right”

  • Eric

    It would certainly make the GXR system more interesting to me. Steve Huff has already peaked my interest in the GXR with his recent review, but I want a module option with a lens mount before I will seriously consider it. That said, instead of a m4/3’s module I’d prefer a Leica-M module with either a 35mm or APS-H sensor.

    There’s no doubt I’d prefer to use the GXR body over any m4/3’s body or NEX body. It’s the right size, right build quality, and right controls. Olympus, Sony, and Panasonic should take notes, because Ricoh actually knows how to build a camera for photographers.

    • CRB

      Agreed…the downside for a Ricoh user is the m4/3 sensor…..

  • Miroslav

    Fake or not, I hope Ricoh joins m4/3. And ( as I’ve said before ) I hope Olympus modules have the same mount/connectors. But that’s too optimistic :).

    BTW, it’s possible both this and image shown couple of months ago are authentic. I suppose internal company documents do not need to have real photos in order to illustrate future plans.

  • gekopaca

    I love Ricoh camera (I’ve got a GR-D and still using it) and I think it will be a good thing if Ricoh join the MFT system, because it’s a great photographic brand – more credibility for the consortium, more users, better prosumers products…
    But I will probably not buy one of these, because I’m waiting now for a compact camera with built-in EVF.

  • I’m sure the GXR is great a camera, but with two or three lenses, it’s a fairly expensive system since you have to pay for a new sensor with every lens. Consequently I guess the GXR owners are more excited about the idea of a m43 module than the m43 camera owners.

    • tmrgrs

      I see no reason why m4/3 owners shouldn’t also be interested in a m4/3 module for the GXR. The build quality and UI ought to attract some who value those things. I’m not ready to jump ship as soon as something like this is available but I’d look long and hard at it and give it some serious consideration.

  • demian

    I hope Ricoh never join the MFT system. I don’t like that too small 4/3.

  • Pipou

    I don’t get it.
    The whole idea of gxr is to have a sensor per lens.
    That would be against the concept…

  • mochapaulo

    Simply reply…definitely no M4/3…as I know

  • PPL

    Fake, fake, fake…

  • Bo

    Reflections on the mount don’t match the light on the body. Besides why would they make a 43 mount.? the camera would not be a able to drive the lens as they don’t have a agreement, a M mount with manual lenses would make much more sense.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website, 43rumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.

Close